New Home Inspections

[Terry M. Becker]

I do new homes and I tell the client up-front I don't do code inspections because that has been done by the AHJ. So what do they want? Most have told me they want to make sure all plumbing is good and working as designed, electrical outlets/fixtures grounded, GFCI's work, HVAC/AC is installed adequately and ductwork install is good, etc. In general, they want a "quality-control" inspection with me being their eyes to areas they aren't familiar with and that most AHJ's don't bother with in a final inspection. (nothing against AHJ inspectors, they are code, not quality-control inspectors)
JMHO

[jbreazeale]

Thanks for all the comments, men. Citing code can get you in big trouble real fast. Codes are our guidelines. Don't get caught in court with the word "code" anywhere in your report. Just state the facts. I was really curious to see how many of us bother with cosmetic issues, which I personally don't.

[Joseph Burkeson, CMI]

Originally Posted by tbecker

I do new homes and I tell the client up-front I don't do code inspections because that has been done by the AHJ. So what do they want? Most have told me they want to make sure all plumbing is good and working as designed, electrical outlets/fixtures grounded, GFCI's work, HVAC/AC is installed adequately and ductwork install is good, etc. In general, they want a "quality-control" inspection with me being their eyes to areas they aren't familiar with and that most AHJ's don't bother with in a final inspection. (nothing against AHJ inspectors, they are code, not quality-control inspectors)
JMHO

Since the builder is under no obligation to you whatsoever, what language do you use to report your findings of defects in new construction workmanship, if you don't use building codes?

You do yourself & your profession a disservice if when inspecting new construction you don't use building codes to describe the defect findings within your report.

Apart from the language of building codes it is very difficult to comprehensively explain new construction building defects that convey the message of quality-control that a builder would understand and act upon.

[David P. Valley]

I do new construction inspections all the time. My price remains the same as any other home. I always tell my clients that I will come up with a list, no matter what year the house was built.

There are some shoddy contractors out there that simply do not know how to build a home to code or simply build a home that is safe.

I've inspected newly constructed homes with many defects. Here are several that I can clearly recall...one with a main carrying beam bearing 1/4" on a poured foundation, sewer stack (incomplete) terminating in the attic, granite countertop notched around a low outlet, branch wiring bundled with tie wraps, improper grading around bulkheads and foundation and flashings installed improperly.

I can go on but I'm just trying to prove a point....No home is perfect.

[jbreazeale]

David, I see a lot of wire bundling in certain jurisdictions around here, too. Apparently the local AHJ lets it pass, or it wouldn't be so common. To me, it's just a cheap *** way to save a little time and a few boxes of staples. Raised quite a ruckus among a certain group. Apparently, the local compliance inspector takes it personally. I just asked him which version of the NEC he uses. Of course, they can pretty much do as they want, but I'll keep reporting it nontheless. It's a great feeling knowing that most of my business is now from my website, and I could care less what 'they' think. And in counties that have NO oversight at all, man, watch out! They will get away with whatever they can, generally. And plumbers around here are expert notchers!

[David P. Valley]

I don't see bundled wiring everyday, but when I do find it, it gets highlighted and circled on my report. Bundling more than three wires in a no-go in my book.

[William J. Decker]

Originally Posted by Brian A. MacNeish

HIs do NOT do code.

Then what are we doing inspecting new homes supposedly built to codes for public health and safety reasons????

Your statement assumes that the local municipality's building codes (which are rarely up-to-date or the same as the current national codes) are the highest standard. This assumption is false.

1) Local building codes are a bare minimum standard to which contractors must adhere.
2) Just because a house is inspected by the local code inspectors, that does not prove that the house is on compliance with the local codes.
3) Local code inspectors do not take any liability for failing to find local code violations. Home inspectors take liability for things, even if they are not required to according to standards of practice. Unfortunately, the question is not one of thoroughness, but of liability.

I know of plenty of houses that are in compliance with local codes, yet are still not safe or built to best practices.


If we do not know codes and proper, safe installation practices, what are we doing in any house.

I did not say that I do not know the local (as well as the current national) codes. What I said is that, at least in Illinois (according to state law) I do not use those local codes as the standard for the inspection.

Do your reports read like one I have in my possession from one of the largest franchisors that says "An air exchanger was noted". Good, boy, good!!!! But does it work, is it properly installed, is it ducted to areas it should be ducted to, is it adequately sized for the house, do the various controls (dehumidistat, timers, speed controls) work, has it been serviced, does it have a condensate drain, where does it drain to.....I can go on.

My reports meet and exceed the standards set by the state and by NACHI.

I can say that all the lights were working in a house but......what does that tell the buyers? The insurance company would like to know if the wiring is close to 100 year old knob & tube. They will not insure it here or charge such a high premium that it's cheaper to have the stuff replaced. Last year, I ran into 3 homes that had been inspected at 1-3 times over the years by some of the "best" inspectors in town. After my inspections, one house was marked down by $10,000 to cover the cost of replacing the 60% K&T in place; the other was hauled off the market to replace the K&T + unprotected surface wiring (some of it lamp cords stapled in place) at a cost of about $9,300; the third was a small job- rip out a wall to replace the K&T single circuit feed to the attic and upper bedrooms (it was overloaded with about 15-16 outlets).

And because of 'grandfathering' clauses in most local codes, this was complient with code. I would have called it out. K&T is not, in itself, unsafe. It is unsafe when not properly maintained or when it is modified and it is certainly unsafe when it is over loaded. How come the local codie didn't find this problem?

Just what are we inspecting for out there? Don't make a sham of this potentially great profession. Our customers truly need us as today they don't have a large family where most male siblings were in the trades and.....houses have gotten very complex today. I know- I have trained in some of the changing aspects......and also work in litigation against those who screw up.

I am inspecting to the standards of practice that the state and NACHI (whose standards exceed those of the state) requires me to.

RANT! RANT! RANT!

Points to remember:

- With almost any system or component, a builder can build to 'acceptable' standards or to 'best practice' standards. If I see something that is 'acceptable' (and complient with local codes) but not 'best practices', I note that im my report and what its implications are.

- Many local codes allow methods that are not 'best practice'. Downspouts draining directly on lower roof surfaces, "Chicago Style" chimney flashing, 2 or even three roof layers, venting bathroom and laundry exhausts into an attic or out the perferated metal soffit vents, no flashing inder limestone parapet wall cap stones.

- One local municipality, hungry for the tax revenue that would come from a recently built 500 unit townhouse development, granted the developer a variance that allowed the builder to not have to install AFCI or GFCI protection! Is this safe? NO! But it was "code".

- Local codes (at least around here) allow pull down attic steps to be secured with drywall screws. I have pointed this out, many times, to code inspectors. They just respond, "Hey, it's code." Yet the manufacturer clearly states that 16D nails must be used. I see sealed unit cat 4 furnaces with the combustion air taken from a solid door closet. OK with the codie, but the manufacturer says no and the installation causes problems and guess who the client will sue.

- I call out lack of AFCI protection in older houses. Code says it is OK, but the state requires that I call things out against current standards. I always get blasted by the seller and their Realtor for that, but I am hired to protect my client regardless of what local codes allow people to get away with.

This is a situation that has been brought up, again and again, on this board. Yet, some people keep insisting that local codes are the only standard that HIs should use. If this was the case, then there would be no need for HIs since the local codies would have already called it out, which as we all know, is not the case.

Hope this clarifies. Call me (see below) if you have any more questions.

[John McKenna]

Well said Mr Decker.

[Terry M. Becker]

Originally Posted by jburkeson1

Since the builder is under no obligation to you whatsoever, what language do you use to report your findings of defects in new construction workmanship, if you don't use building codes?

You do yourself & your profession a disservice if when inspecting new construction you don't use building codes to describe the defect findings within your report.

Apart from the language of building codes it is very difficult to comprehensively explain new construction building defects that convey the message of quality-control that a builder would understand and act upon.

I apologize if I conveyed that I IGNORE building codes. Codes are "minimal" requirements and in the case of one of the counties I work in, far behind the surrounding areas. I refer to codes within my findings, but stopping at "acceptable" practices and/or "built-to-code" in many cases is doing the client a disservice.