New re-wire by "licensed" electrician

[Joe Funderburk, CMI]

If the guy had a license, he must have been drunk when he did this job. The photos are just a small subset of the defects I found.

He also "approved" and K&T wiring in the attic, telling the homeowner, "a ground isn't required for lights." He left it in place although it was covered by insulation.

I summed up the electrical section of my report with this statement:

"The quality and condition of the electrical work that was recently performed in this house is among the worst we have ever encountered. It is difficult for us to imagine that this work was performed by a licensed electrician. We therefore recommend that a competent and licensed electrician perform a review of the entire house and make repairs as deemed necessary."

[Joe Funderburk, CMI]

And here's the K&T

[Bob Elliott]

Guess they grandfather everything.
Even if for some reason it was "inside" code,the guy would have been crazy or lazy not to sell a upgrade.

[Robert Meier]

Originally Posted by jfunderburk

"The quality and condition of the electrical work that was recently performed in this house is among the worst we have ever encountered. It is difficult for us to imagine that this work was performed by a licensed electrician. We therefore recommend that a competent and licensed electrician perform a review of the entire house and make repairs as deemed necessary."

You've summed it up rather nicely.

[Jeffrey R. Pope]

Originally Posted by Robert Meier

You've summed it up rather nicely.

I disagree. His statement is way too subjective and heavily "opinionated."

While the pictures may lend some support to your statement, it's best to stick with the facts.

[Robert Meier]

Originally Posted by jpope

I disagree. His statement is way too subjective and heavily "opinionated."

While the pictures may lend some support to your statement, it's best to stick with the facts.

For an HI report, I guess that I would agree with your statement even though what he said was likely true.

[Peter W. Bennett]

I agree with Jeff. The h/i's role should be objective and unbiased, and therefore the report should be congruent with his observation/evaluation.
PB

[Joe Funderburk, CMI]

Originally Posted by jpope

His statement is way too subjective and heavily "opinionated."

While the pictures may lend some support to your statement, it's best to stick with the facts.

I've never been so bold in saying, in effect, "the house wiring is horrible". I try to stick to the facts, and just the facts. However, I also have to keep in mind that South Carolina requires in its SOP that the home inspector, "Report the general condition of the residence and its maintenance." That somewhat vague statement actually requires the home inspector to give an overall 'opinion' regarding the condition of the home. Therefore, I don't think I was out of bounds by letting the buyer know that what I observed, for a new rewire, was WAY outside the limits of acceptability.

There were many other serious defects with this home. The buyer walked.

[Sean Fogarty]

For once in my life I would have to agree with Funderbunk. That is just piss poor, and its unfair to both parties, especialy to the one who wrote the check. I would say the time for sugar coating is over.

[Jeffrey R. Pope]

Who said anything about sugar coating? I have a pretty standard narrative that I use which covers this perfectly.

There are numerous and possibly latent defects in the electrical components that have been installed in the [attic, crawlspace, garage], which indicates that work was done without permits and was not performed by qualified professionals. We will not attempt to list all of the observed conditions and we may not have uncovered all of the defects that exist. For this reason, we cannot endorse the installed components and strongly suggest that a qualified electrician be contracted to evaluate and repair all of the electrical components within the [attic, crawlspace, garage]. Due to the inherent dangers associated with electrical defects and deficiencies, we also recommend that this be completed as soon as possible and before the close of escrow.

Personally, I feel your "description" was insulting and arrogant in nature, rather than descriptive or informative.

[Joe Funderburk, CMI]

Originally Posted by jpope

...Personally, I feel your "description" was insulting and arrogant in nature, rather than descriptive or informative.

We all appreciate the narrative you posted. I have one similar to it. I could have used it had I thought about it and it would have worked equally well in my report. We all make decisions, often made without the benefit of extended deliberation, in our report writing. My decision in this case was not wrong, just different from yours.

As far as my comment being insulting, while not intended, the "electrician" surely deserved it. You weren't there. I was. Among the defects from the incompetent 'electrician': failed to install AFCIs, the new exterior panel box had the exterior cover hinges modified so that it was no longer water tight, open splices galore, open junction boxes galore, dozens of improper terminations, dangling wires, knots tied in wires, left knob and tube energized, wires interfering with entry into the attic, missing Romex connectors, failure to use conduit where required, failure to install disconnects where required, failure to install enough outlets at kitchen counters, and open ground outlets.

We are each entitled to our opinions and I usually agree with and value yours. But I would have appreciated a more diplomatic response on a public forum.

[David A. Andersen]

Do your job...

Making statements like that are not what the state HI law is talking about.

"The quality and condition of the electrical work that was recently performed in this house is among the worst we have ever encountered. It is difficult for us to imagine that this work was performed by a licensed electrician. We therefore recommend that a competent and licensed electrician perform a review of the entire house and make repairs as deemed necessary."

I don't see a single issue listed as what is wrong!
Just a recommendation to have someone else do something about it!

I think I would sue you for requiring the entire house be inspected (not just the work performed). It's your job to inspect the rest of the house!

This is the kind of work you can expect to get whenever you defer issues to another contractor!
Now you want to defer it "again"!?

[Jeffrey R. Pope]

Just to clarify - I'm not calling you (Joe) arrogant or insulting. That was just my take on the opinion you included in your report. As an outsider, if I were to read this comment in a report, I would consider it to be offensive.

[Joe Funderburk, CMI]

Originally Posted by dandersen

Do your job...

Making statements like that are not what the state HI law is talking about.



I don't see a single issue listed as what is wrong!
Just a recommendation to have someone else do something about it!

I think I would sue you for requiring the entire house be inspected (not just the work performed). It's your job to inspect the rest of the house!

This is the kind of work you can expect to get whenever you defer issues to another contractor!
Now you want to defer it "again"!?

David, I'm sorry if I left the impression that I just called it horrible and deferred the whole mess. Actually, before I summarized it as a POS, I itemized about 20 things wrong with this house wiring.

Here's the Summary Report if anyone wants to view it. (Names and addresses changed to protect the client and seller.)

https://www.homegauge.com/report/1241457/

[Joe Funderburk, CMI]

After consideration, especially regarding Jeff's feedback, I think I'll be a little less "opinionated" the next time this happens and indifferently state that the house wiring was unprofessional.