A very true and meaningful apology from me to Beestie for not having properly read his post. I posted inaccurately and have replied to Beestie in a response and tone that was totally inappropriate. What Griff wants is so evil that I did not properly read Besstie's post. My mistake completely.

I may have saved the life of a very close friend when suspicious of some household wiring. Wires simply twisted together by wire nuts and thrown back in the wall. In the end, I cut those wires off and told him we were rewiring that part of the house. There is absolutely no reasons for this kind of workmanship that even threatened the life of a very close friend. But these are the same people who complain about building code inspections. 13 died and hundreds hurt on Chicago porches because someone couldn't even bother to obtain building permits - and therefore did not get inspections. I am appalled - very strongly emotional - when others are wasted by such criminal negligence.

As a result, I did not properly read Beesties post and apologise for a completely inappropriate response.

Accepted and appreciated.

In a prior life, I have accompanied many an inspector around jobs I designed and have always appreciated them as a check against sloppy construction.

Even if things are designed properly (within code) and the blueprints are perfectly drawn, things still get built incorrectly - contractors are human and make the occasional mistake. Inspectors are an important additional safeguard in the construction process and also protect an unsuspecting public from unscrupulous owners/builders. You'll never hear me complain about them.

:)

tw supports homelessness and I support murder.

Some inspectors have a unique interpretation of code. For example, one wanted 2x4 blocks half way up any bearing wall so that a fire would less likely to take out that critical wall. Another wanted insulation pushed into all holes around wires and pipes so that a fire inside walls would be slow to move upstairs or get into the attic. Recently one demanded that all parts of a kitchen counter be no more than 2 feet from a wall receptacle since kitchen appliances generally don't have power cords longer than 2 feet.

None of these are really wrong. In fact I appreciate why every inspector wanted their little things. Simple trick is to ask questions in advance. They are more than willing to discuss these little things - their interpretation of the code. And if honest with them, well one very informed inspector stopped walking out in the mud since we always were straight with him. I remember one job where I told him straight out that we had not finished tarring the backside and then would then cover the drain tile. More than sufficient for him to approve a foundation backfill. Those who keep cheating get problematic inspectors.

Electrical guys were warned they had to wire for AGCI in all bedrooms as of 2002. They kept saying this was nonsense. Electrical inspector arrives. Ordered circuits be changed to AGFI breakers because that is new code - and desireable by all homeowners.

Those who appreciate the danger of christmas tree fires should also want these devices. What is the best source of new and better code? Those inspectors. They are the best source of 'attitude and knowledge' - things that define and create quality.

The reason tw and I cannot even have a conversation about this is that he's a "freedom from" guy and I'm a "freedom of" guy. None the less, I think I can express part of the issue in terms unrelated to my first principles.

I am assuming that a certificate of occupancy will be issued after the last inspection. The problem with that is that for an owner-builder to be successful he needs to live on-site sometimes for years. Most folks live out of a tent, camper, or shed until the shell of the house is complete. They then complete the utilities and finish work in order of value to them, setting up temporary services where necessary. For a working class or underemployed person this creates the opportunity of home ownership without debt. We often make laws intended to simplify one persons life at the expense of complicating anothers. In this case upper middle-class folks in the Southern part of PA are getting burned by shoddy construction practices. The owner-builder will pay the price because he will no longer exist. So if you want me to get all Ted Kennedy on you, it's a class problem where the middle class is shifting the burden of their problem, which could be addressed in other ways, to the poor and others who wish to be financially secure.

This assumes there is no owner-builder exemption. If there is, I'll shut up and let a builder pick up the arguement.

We also learned from West Warrick that inspectors are not always the most professional. We are creating another opportunity for corruption.

What is not an opportunity for corruption?
Sounds like the owner/builder's issues need to be communicated and pressured to the decisionmakers here. Have they been?

Last fall, in my neighborhood, 3 adults, of the 6 living there, died in an electrical fire in a shoddily modified single family home, remodeled into student "apartments", these were individuals, fresh out of high school, with low incomes. It sparked a fiesty inspection sweep, much to the grumbling of the slum lords.

What government mandate is not an opportunity for corruption? Like tw noted, inspectors have you over a barrel when it comes to interpretation. If tw were my inspector his contempt for folks who avoid paying specialists would no doubt impact his ability to be impartial.

We never believed it was really coming. It is so much the antithesis of the way we (I) think... I cannot fathom the need to control other peoples property and by extension their lives. I usually compartmentalize this, thinking its just the evil politicians but I guess I'm figuring out that my version of freedom is contemptable in the modern US. Owner-builders are an independent lot, I know of no organization containing any significant number. We are not good democrats, preferring to simply be left to our own devices. It just always suprises me that folks are constantly agitating for new laws to use against their neighbors. I know people are annoyed that a few of us built our own places and don't live with morgages over our heads but the spite...

I'm only concerned with private single family houses. I can understand the desire to regulate rental properties and commercial spaces and will leave that argument to Radar.

OK, well, you thought your rights would be preserved if you did nothing to assert them? Think of this as your opportunity, not your woe; if you take them to court properly you can prevent them from affecting not only you but your neighbors too. And you could even do it pro-actively if you wanted.

Ya, I know thats silly thinking on my part. Some folks get a charge out of the idea of putting on a tie and spending a few weeks making other people miserable, but life is too short for participation in government, I'm thinking this is more of a passive resistance moment. I'll try to keep everybody, including myself, building and ignoring, our government probably isn't going to last that much longer and as I learned on another thread that we don't have to follow unjust laws. :) I am such a crank sometimes.

"Building Inspector" has been a synonym for corruption for as long as I've been alive, and probably twice that.

You can't assert them in court unless you have a case RIGHT NOW. That is, you have to be stopped by the new process now. You can't sue to preserve your rights for later. And if you do get around to building later, and get stopped, you'll find it's too late -- the laws have been around long enough that even if the courts find them problematic, they're reluctant to overturn them.

I dealt with or did work for many such inspectors. I have nothing but amiration for everyone. Not only did they know the trade, but I watched some even help the builder or business owner solve a problematic regulation in both a timely and efficient manner. They have also been very educational. Most were also in continuing education courses. Rather sad that the few corrupt ones would be misrepresented for all inspectors.

I have a big problem with having to worry about how any individual inspector “interprets” the code.
That’s bullshit. If the code doesn’t say there has to be an outlet within 2 feet of any point on the counter, then it’s not needed. In this example, it’s also damn near impossible.
I don't care how good his intentions are, if it isn't specified, it's optional. I've met too many inspectors that feel they are to be obeyed regardless of the law.