Bryant Panel and Gould Breakers

[Jeffrey R. Pope]

To continue with the drift. . .

As I stated, we've engaged in this topic before and neither of us (apparently) is going to change their position.

Whether I'm a licensed or journeyman tradesman, or a first year HI makes no difference.

If I see a double tapped breaker, I'm going to recommend correction, not evaluation.

If I see a reverse slope on a drain/waste line, I'm going to recommend correction, not evaluation.

If I see a B-vent in contact with with the roof framing, I'm going to recommend correction, not evaluation.

If I find indications or symtoms of a defect, I will recommend evaluation.

Back-drafting furnace, water/moisture stains, reduction in water flow, dimming lights, excessive voltage drop, tripping breakers, unlevel floors, truss uplift - these (and many other conditions) would warrant evaluation.

If you have evaluated it and know what the problem is, there's no point in recommending further evaluation.

If you have evaluated it and don't know what the problem is, by all means, recommend further evaluation.

Yes, of course we are generalists, however, we are professionals as well. If we are going to recommend evaluation of every defect we find, we're doing a disservice to our clients.

[jtedesco1]

Also, for additional information:

Panelboards are not allowed in clothes closets. This rule was first added to the NEC in the 1981 addition.

[jclark1]

I get where you're coming from now Jeff. I agree when something is, as Rumsfeld would say, "a known known" we should recomend the fix vs. further evaluation. Save the "further evaluation" recomendations for the "known unknowns".

[Jeffrey R. Pope]

Originally Posted by jclark1

Save the "further evaluation" recomendations for the "known unknowns".

That is my point. . .

[Paul W. Abernathy]

YEAH...besides...I hate the term Sparky anyway.....

[Russel Ray]

Originally Posted by jpope

Yes, of course we are generalists, however, we are professionals as well. If we are going to recommend evaluation of every defect we find, we're doing a disservice to our clients.

Unfortunately, we are professional generalists working in an industry here in California that has no licensing, and part of our work is working in industries that do have licensing. That's what creates the liability problem for us.

And as I stated earlier, I don't recommend evaluation of every defect I find. I only recommend "further evaluation by a licensed professional" in those industries which have licensing. Yes, I already have evaluated it, and I know that there is enough of a problem to recommend further evaluation by that licensed individual that California (and my E&O provider) says is more knowledgeable about that specific subject matter than am I. So be it.

So you recommend "correcting" a problem. Uh, how? Perhaps by further evaluating the problem to determine the best method of correcting it? Hmmmmmmm. That "best method" might be the easiest, or the cheapest, or the quickest, all depending on many variables. I'm not the one to determine which variables come into play; the only person who is qualified to do that, in my opinion, is the professional who holds a license in that industry. I hope that the licensed professionals that I recommend will further evaluate the problem and provide my Clients with several options and let my Client decide which option meets his needs/wants/desires.

[Jeffrey R. Pope]

If the "expert" decides that (s)he needs to "evaluate" it, prior to correcting it, so be it. As long as it gets corrected.

[Russel Ray]

Originally Posted by jpope

If the "expert" decides that (s)he needs to "evaluate" it, prior to correcting it, so be it. As long as it gets corrected.

And therein lies the problem. Sometimes it's not possible to "correct" it, or it is not practical, or it is not financially feasible. Old electric panels located in closets in multistory condominium buildings is a great example. But I'll let the licensed professional evaluate the situation much further than can I and then provide options: (1) it can be done, but it'll cost $10,000 (in other words, it ain't gonna get done by nobody); and/or (2) it can be done, and even though the seller has agreed to pay for it, the earliest we can do it is December 15 because it's a very extensive job; and/or (3) it can be done, but it's not practical; a better solution is to. . . . So I'm simply not the one to determine that it needs to be "corrected" or how to "correct" it. I'm only the one to say that if it were being built today, we wouldn't do it like that. "Recommend further evaluation by a licensed professional to determine your options and costs."

[Jeffrey R. Pope]

Knowing how absolutely imperative it is that you have the last word, I will leave you with this;

If everything needs to be evaluated further, there’s not much worth in your initial evaluation.

[Brian E. Kelly]

Originally Posted by jpope

To continue with the drift. . .

As I stated, we've engaged in this topic before and neither of us (apparently) is going to change their position.

Whether I'm a licensed or journeyman tradesman, or a first year HI makes no difference.

If I see a double tapped breaker, I'm going to recommend correction, not evaluation.

If I see a reverse slope on a drain/waste line, I'm going to recommend correction, not evaluation.

If I see a B-vent in contact with with the roof framing, I'm going to recommend correction, not evaluation.

If I find indications or symtoms of a defect, I will recommend evaluation.

Back-drafting furnace, water/moisture stains, reduction in water flow, dimming lights, excessive voltage drop, tripping breakers, unlevel floors, truss uplift - these (and many other conditions) would warrant evaluation.

If you have evaluated it and know what the problem is, there's no point in recommending further evaluation.

If you have evaluated it and don't know what the problem is, by all means, recommend further evaluation.

Yes, of course we are generalists, however, we are professionals as well. If we are going to recommend evaluation of every defect we find, we're doing a disservice to our clients.

I pretty much go with the way Jeff put it.
Unless I am dealing with pool cracks.

[Russel Ray]

Originally Posted by jpope

Knowing how absolutely imperative it is that you have the last word, I will leave you with this;

There's the pot calling the kettle black.

Originally Posted by jpope

If everything needs to be evaluated further, there’s not much worth in your initial evaluation.

I don't know why it's so difficult for you to understand that "everything" does not need to be evaluated further, just the stuff that requires a licensed professional. And I don't know why it's so difficult for you to understand the definition of "further evaluation," and even though you don't, I'm not like Jerry Peck in rehashing the same thing over and over and over again just using bigger letters, capitals, asterisks, etc. Of course, perhaps if I drew you a map using crayolas, that might work.

My thousands of Clients have found great worth in my initial evaluations, thank you very much.

Okay, you can have the last word now. Maybe. Depends on what you say.

[Russel Ray]

Originally Posted by bkelly2

I pretty much go with the way Jeff put it.
Unless I am dealing with pool cracks.

And that's fine.
There are many ways to do things.
Many people discuss their different ways of doing things on this message board. That's why. . . .

NACHI rocks, rolls, and rules!

And speaking of pool cracks, I've been invited to give a seminar on proper pool construction to prevent cracks at the Department of Engineering at the University of California at San Diego. We're trying to work out the date at the moment, but it will probably be the second week in May.

[Larry D. Kage]

Originally Posted by rray

And speaking of pool cracks, I've been invited to give a seminar on proper pool construction to prevent cracks at the Department of Engineering at the University of California at San Diego. We're trying to work out the date at the moment, but it will probably be the second week in May.

Very nice, Russel. Go get 'em!