No Main Disconnect

[David P. Valley]

Originally Posted by rmaday

Client: Mr. Spector, I'm concerned that that skylight in my daughters room is not safe. I am concerned with debris falling from airplanes, sattelites and space, craching through there.

Mr. Spector: I undertsand your concern. I will put it in the report that the skylight is a safety hazard and should be removed.

That's suppose to be funny? I think not.

We are talking about electricity here, not space junk falling from the sky.

[Michael Larson]

Originally Posted by rmaday

Client: Mr. Spector, I'm concerned that that skylight in my daughters room is not safe. I am concerned with debris falling from airplanes, sattelites and space, craching through there.

Mr. Spector: I undertsand your concern. I will put it in the report that the skylight is a safety hazard and should be removed.

I think you meant to say that Ben will recommend that everyone in the home should were a Kevlar suit and a crash helmet at all times to be "safe"

Oh and steel toes shoes too

[rmaday]

Originally Posted by dvalley

That's suppose to be funny? I think not.

We are talking about electricity here, not space junk falling from the sky.

It has evolved into Ben stating that he considers his clients concers (real or perceived) in his reports.

I'm sure others, who aren't upset with me (for whatever reason), will get it.

[Ben J. Gromicko]

Originally Posted by rmaday

So if you were the alarm tech, you would have installed the sensors on my mothers upper windows?

Probably, but then not charge her for it.
As a home inspector, I'd certainly listen with understanding to her concerns, and judge whether or not to express those concerns in the report. In this case, I would not put her concerns in the report. It's not really a safety issue that would be brought up in a home inspection.

[Michael Larson]

Originally Posted by dvalley

That's suppose to be funny? I think not.

We are talking about electricity here, not space junk falling from the sky.

It's a little late for that.
Ben is trying to open the eyes of all HIs to report/recommend all manner of safety improvements.

[Ben J. Gromicko]

Originally Posted by rmaday

It has evolved into Ben stating that he considers his clients concers (real or perceived) in his reports.

I'm sure others, who aren't upset with me (for whatever reason), will get it.

For example: Reporting a bird bath in the back yard is beyond the scope, but if my client has a small child, I'll put that bird bath in my report with a photo.

[Michael Larson]

Originally Posted by bgromicko

Probably, but then not charge her for it.
As a home inspector, I'd certainly listen with understanding to her concerns, and judge whether or not to express those concerns in the report. In this case, I would not put her concerns in the report. It's not really a safety issue that would be brought up in a home inspection.

Are you changing your mind now?

[Michael Larson]

Originally Posted by bgromicko

For example: Reporting a bird bath in the back yard is beyond the scope, but if my client has a small child, I'll put that bird bath in my report with a photo.

[rmaday]

Originally Posted by mlarson

It's a little late for that.
Ben is trying to open the eyes of all HIs to report/recommend all manner of safety improvements.

Which are expressed by the client (don't forget that part)

[Ben J. Gromicko]

Originally Posted by mlarson

It's a little late for that.
Ben is trying to open the eyes of all HIs to report/recommend all manner of safety improvements.

You are absolutely right.
Maybe it's because I've got a 2-year old, 5-year old, and a 7-year old. All girls. God help me.

When it comes to safety in my house, I'm like a mean dog sniffin' it out and fixin' it.
WOOF!

got to go... Paul Ab's video needs some work...http://www.nachi.org/paul-abernathy

[Michael Larson]

Originally Posted by rmaday

Which are expressed by the client (don't forget that part)

Well he does a client inventory first to determine their real needs so he can serve them better.

Does Ben even inspect homes anymore?

[rmaday]

Ben,

Do you give recall info for all appliances/mechanicals in the home?

[Paul W. Abernathy]

Originally Posted by bgromicko

You are absolutely right.
Maybe it's because I've got a 2-year old, 5-year old, and a 7-year old. All girls. God help me.

When it comes to safety in my house, I'm like a mean dog sniffin' it out and fixin' it.
WOOF!

got to go... Paul Ab's video needs some work...http://www.nachi.org/paul-abernathy

Well Ben...I am the LAST person to make an "AB's" video...no washboard stomach here my friend...lol but I think a more serious concern for a 2 year old, 5 year old and 7 year old would be poor or improper equipment grounds within a dwelling used to aid in the operation of the dwellings overcurrent devices...lol...you see the disconnect issue is not a safety concern if under the guidelines of the qualified person. Now, their are some situations that HI's will run into that are NOT related to that exception and dealing with a multi-family building and would warrant being called out....this just happens to not be one of those cases....no harm..no foul in this OP's question.

[Paul W. Abernathy]

Originally Posted by mlarson

Well he does a client inventory first to determine their real needs so he can serve them better.

Does Ben even inspect homes anymore?

I don't believe he does anymore because he is way more valuable to our industry doing what he does. His job is to be cautious when providing publications or videos because he walks that thin blue line. I found him very intelligent and quite the family man when I spent a few days with him and he is sharp and loves a good debate like anyone else I am sure.

He and Nick both are a bit hung up on that shower switch issue......lol....but in reality and all joking aside even in the video we did he probably could have called out way more issues than me because I shoot from the hip and do not do take after take...I roll and dont stop running my mouth.....that has its goods and bads but even guys like me can say something wrong on camera before we even think about it....Ben is too professional for that as he would retake the shot until it is just right...me well...Im too impatient.

Ben is a good guy and has some wonderful kids and a sweetheart wife and to be honest I can see where a daddy would be cautious....just wait until the BOYS come knockin on his door...then you will see cautious.

In this case ( as with the shower switch ) I find him wrong....lol...but I think Ben knows that I find him wrong.....but i find him SO RIGHT for INACHI and he is best served doing exactly what he is doing.

[Paul W. Abernathy]

Ironically....I was linked here and did not take the time to read all these comments. However, as an electrical expert I will say I did get a kick out of all the recommendations and improper uses of the terms.

I see some saying it is ok because of the 6 throw rule...which FYI does not apply here since it is a condo and this is a remote distribution panel ( really hate the term SubPanel....honestly ). But actually I did not see the real issue for any "debate" as each inspector has a right to call out what they wish as they pay their own bills.

However, just so you know. The operation of an OCPD (Circuit Breakers in this case ) is going function as it needs to regardless of someone switching it off. The shear idea that it is safer with a main type breaker is well....not correct and again the 6 throw does not apply here. The device (OCPD) will do it's job we hope and the only reason someone would need to rush to turn something off is.....well I can't think of a reason because if a fault happens then it should clear....are you fast enough to get to that breaker and turn it off if your child is getting shocked for a circuit...I doubt it !

But again...if it makes someone feel safer in their report to recommend it then so be it but just remember I dont think anyone who is going to have to PAY for the enhancement will agree.

Again we cant FIX STUPID...we can only moderate it !