What my Home Inspector apparently missed?

[Ray Yachtze]

I'll try to keep my story short and I am interested in hearing your opinions.

I just bought a single-detached home -- age 59 years. It has a fully finished basement with a suite (own kitchen, laundry).

The house had been purchased last year by a professional contractor who completely rennovated it. He gutted the interior right down to the insulation. You didn't have to be an expert to see that it was quality work.

However, the real estate market tanked and the contractor had to sell at a substantial loss. So, I did get a deal.

I hired my home inspector and was impressed by his knowledge and report. There was apparently very little wrong with the home.

Subsequently, I contacted my insurance company to arrange fire insurance. Of course, they grilled me for details on the home. At the end of the lengthy conversation with the insurance agent, I was kind of startled when she informed me that the home did not meet their criteria for an insurance policy due to insufficient amperage service.

When the home was renovated, the contractor brought a new power line from the outside to a new electrical panel with 125 amp service. From the new panel, there was a 60 amp feed to the old electrical panel (which is now a sub panel).

The insurance company maintains that this is insufficient for a home with a suite and presents a potential fire hazard.

They will offer me insurance only if I upgrade the electrical so that either the entire house has 200 amp service or there is at least 100 amp service to each of the two "units" (main floor and basement suite).

My questions:

--- Is the insurance company out to lunch on this? Is this situation really a fire hazard?
--- Why didn't the home inspector catch this and advise me? (Mind you, I would probably still have bought the home)

--- How much should this cost to fix, if it needs fixing?
--- What is the best solution? I feel it is probably upgrading the electrical so that the entire home has 200 amp service. But what about the sub panel with its 60 amp service feed? I believe the sub panel feeds some major appliances like a washer and dryer.

Some constructive feedback would be appreciated. Thanks.

[Larry D. Kage]

Originally Posted by Ray Yachtze

My questions:

--- Is the insurance company out to lunch on this?

You may want to check other insurance agencies and companies to see if their requirements are the same. Often they are not.

Originally Posted by Ray Yachtze

Is this situation really a fire hazard?

Hard to say with out seeing it. Ask what they base their fire hazard assertion on.

Originally Posted by Ray Yachtze

--- Why didn't the home inspector catch this and advise me? (Mind you, I would probably still have bought the home)

Catch what exactly? A visual non-invasive inspection is limited and knowing what an insurance company/agent may do is outside the scope of a home inspection. Also, knowing what all electical items are fed from where is typically not possible during the inspection

Originally Posted by Ray Yachtze

--- How much should this cost to fix, if it needs fixing?

Get pricing from a couple of local qualified electricians.

Originally Posted by Ray Yachtze

--- What is the best solution? I feel it is probably upgrading the electrical so that the entire home has 200 amp service. But what about the sub panel with its 60 amp service feed? I believe the sub panel feeds some major appliances like a washer and dryer.

Some constructive feedback would be appreciated. Thanks.

Verify what may need to be done, if anything, and then get pricing from qualified contractors.

Just some thoughts...

Good luck.

[Jim Port]

The Code minimum service size is 100 amps. You need to perform a demand load calculation to see what size service is needed.

BTW, a 125 amp is not a common size for a main breaker. Mains are commonly 100, 150 and 200.

[brian winkle]

There is a calculation that will determine if the service is sufficient, without that everything else is speculation.

Some insurance companies may have their own rules. As Larry said, shop around.

[Jeffrey R. Pope]

An undersized service is not (in itself) a fire hazard. . .

[Ray Yachtze]

Originally Posted by brian winkle

Some insurance companies may have their own rules. As Larry said, shop around.

Thanks all for the feedback.

It's like I suspected...need a proper assessment.

I mean, I could have said "no thanks" to the insurance company and shopped around....and probably could have found another company who wouldn't have taken issue with it.

However, in the back of my mind, there would always be some doubt as to a possible fire hazard. When you think about it, there is probably a good reason why my insurance company took issue --- bitter experience with previous claims?

And my home inspector just called me back and I ran it by him -- he thought it was odd and had in fact seen similar situations where the service was even less --- 100 amp service for the whole house with a suite.

[Michael Roberson]

What part of the woods are you from Ray?

I see many houses with less than 150 A service. If it is a large house with 100 A service, and electric Water Heater, Dryer, and Range, then I recommend an update post haste. I dont see why a service with a 120 A main breaker is a fire hazard.

[Jeffrey R. Pope]

Originally Posted by Jim Port

BTW, a 125 amp is not a common size for a main breaker. Mains are commonly 100, 150 and 200.

That really depends on the equipment date. 125 amp service breakers were very common in my area during the late '80's and early '90's.

I see 125 quite often, but I don't ever recall seeing a 150.

[James E. Braun, CMI]

You have to special order a 150 amp panel most of the time. A 125 amp is common and there is a lot of old 150 amp systems out there in my neck of the woods. Must be regional.

[Ray Yachtze]

Originally Posted by mroberson

What part of the woods are you from Ray?

I see many houses with less than 150 A service. If it is a large house with 100 A service, and electric Water Heater, Dryer, and Range, then I recommend an update post haste. I dont see why a service with a 120 A main breaker is a fire hazard.

I think you make an excellent point Michael. The one water heater in the house is gas-fired.

But I will have two sets of washers/dryers...both dryers of course running on electricity. And two electric ranges. Two microwaves. Two sets of "electrical accessories" in both bedrooms (....just kidding on the last one --- but you know the gist behind the humour)

In theory, we could be running our laundry, range and microwave at the same time as the tenant in the suite is running theirs....in conjunction with any other electrics such as lights etc.

Would all this draw in more than 125 amps?

[jhugenroth]

Originally Posted by jpope

That really depends on the equipment date. 125 amp service breakers were very common in my area during the late '80's and early '90's.

Ditto around here, too.

[Peter Doane]

Its possible that the insurance company is "thinking" that potential demand of the dwelling is greater then the service and the whole house is going to go *POOF* into a ball of flames if everything is on.... Obviously they do not understand the modern electrical system, let alone the basic workings of breakers and how they prevent wire over current load fires. Given their set of rules, we should see housed go up in flames every 10 minutes!

[Ray Yachtze]

Originally Posted by mroberson

What part of the woods are you from Ray?

Vancouver, BC

Although totally renovated, the home I bought is technically 59 years old.

My understanding is, in Canada, 125 amp service was the standard in older homes. Newer homes of course have 200 amp service.

And by the way, after getting feedback in this forum, and after consulting a certified inspector (over the phone), I am getting the drift that my insurance company is making an unreasonable demand.

I am therefore going to shop around. If I decide not to go with this particular insurance company, I am going to inform them that they have just lost some business as I deem it to be an unreasonable demand, and they may wish to consider revising their policy.

[Ray Yachtze]

And this may be viewed as "sour grapes"...but the name of the insurance company is "The Personal".

As a union employee of a certain federal government department, this is insurance offered by the union at preferred rates. As their website states:

"Thanks to The Personal and the CEIU (union), you have access to privileges not available to the general public"

Of course, there is a disclaimer that "certain conditions apply". (like having to spend a couple of thousand on an unnecessary upgrade to your electrical panel when you want fire insurance --- for example).

When I had condo insurance with them, I was certainly satisfied with the policy and my rate.

However, it is evident that they have developed the same bureaucratic mindset which is typical of my employer.

Never again.

Thanks to this forum for the practical and sane advice. And thanks to the moderator in advance if you allow me to vent my frustrations a little.

[Brian E. Kelly]

I see older 125 AMP service panels all the time here.