Would you report this

[James H. Bushart]

Originally Posted by jfunderburk

I'm not convinced that is accurate. Getting a CO don't equate to every component of a house "meeting code" in my view. Please show me where it is defined as such.

Just because they don't cite it, doesn't mean it "meets code". A competent person can prove the AHJ didn't do his job in many cases. And lawsuits have been filed against AHJ's in some cases; some of which have been discussed on this board.

Again.....the balls of the home inspector who has "killed a deal" by reporting something that is "out of code" are in the vice of the seller who has a code official who disagrees, and especially when the work has already been officially passed.

Kill a deal over a "code" issue for a dwelling or condition that has already been approved by an AHJ and you are road kill.

What "meets code" is only to be determined by those who enforce it. No one else has been provided by the codes books themselves with that authority.

[Joe Funderburk, CMI]

So, James...I am left to assume that you don't report the following issues in a home that obtained a CO in the last 20 years because you don't want to blow the deal.

TPR drains that "don't meet code".

Ungrounded outlets. Outlets with reverse polarity. Open junction boxes. Open splices....

Guardrail pickets > 4" apart.

You don't report any tempered glass issues.

Missing guardrails are OK too.

Improper discharge from AC condensate drains.

Doors without landings. That's just dandy.

Stairs without railings. Hey...the code inspector said it was OK.

Missing GFCIs.

Garage doors that don't auto-reverse.


I'm not sure why you got on this topic, but I never said I'd say the "c*de" word in a report. But if the woman was berating me and said her house "met code", she's full of it and I wouldn't hesitate to tell her (in a nice way of course). Saying that passing a code inspection equates to having all aspects of a house "meet code" is just baloney.

[James H. Bushart]

Originally Posted by jfunderburk

So, James...I am left to assume that you don't report the following issues in a home that obtained a CO in the last 20 years because you don't want to blow the deal.

TPR drains that "don't meet code".

Ungrounded outlets. Outlets with reverse polarity. Open junction boxes. Open splices....

Guardrail pickets > 4" apart.

You don't report any tempered glass issues.

Missing guardrails are OK too.

Improper discharge from AC condensate drains.

Doors without landings. That's just dandy.

Stairs without railings. Hey...the code inspector said it was OK.

Missing GFCIs.

Garage doors that don't auto-reverse.


I'm not sure why you got on this topic, but I never said I'd say the "c*de" word in a report. But if the woman was berating me and said her house "met code", she's full of it and I wouldn't hesitate to tell her (in a nice way of course). Saying that passing a code inspection equates to having all aspects of a house "meet code" is just baloney.

I report all of those things....but I do not report that they "do not meet code".

If the woman who built the house...who met with the code inspector at the appropriate intervals and received his blessing before moving to the next step...said the house "met code" I would believe her and I would not argue with her.

I would simply state that the fact that it met the minimum basic requirements as interpreted by the particular inspector who looked at the house...it fails to meet what is considered to be the acceptable and established building practices for the industry and that is what will appear in my report. She can't sue for that.

Remember that a building can "meet code" and still be inferior.

I'll bet that you are not reporting a house without a sprinkler system as "defective". That has been in the code for ten months.

[Wayne B. Wilson]

Originally Posted by jfunderburk

Did you say anything about the pickets > 4" apart, even though there is a screen?

Yep i did

[Wayne B. Wilson]

I never mention code i recommend a qualfied contractor review and estimate repairs, she tried to get me to state it does not meet code statement i just told her it didn't meet standards and i was not a code keeper.

[Richard A. Hetzel]

I think many of the comments in this thread are right on the money. Inspectors are not code experts, even though most seem to try to be up-to-date on code requirements, and yes, it is true that a building can meet code and still be an inferior or even an unsafe building.

In my practice, not only was everything designed "to code", but also to conform to what I know as "good practice", and therefore exceeded code minimums when necessary. It is true that whenever someone imposes a minimum, it becomes a maximum for many builders and even some architects. Good practice should always govern, augmented but not dominated by code. How many times have you as inspectors and we as architects heard from builders, when questioned about a construction issue, "Hey, it passed a code inspection." The correct response to that is often "Yes, but IS IT RIGHT?"

[William J. Decker]

All good points!

When I see something that I know to be a local code violation (such as a dishwasher drained to the disposer) and the builder or sales agent says that it "passed code", I ask them:

1) Are you a code inspector? I am not. I am state licensed, not a mere municipal employee, and as such I have to comply with state law, not just mere local ordinances.
2) Please show me your documentation that this a) was code inspected and b) passed that inspection and c) the name of the inspector.
3) Did the code inspector, specifically, look at this particular item and approve it?

Shuts them up, every time.

And to Jim's point (not to disagree, just to provide my experience), I have had builders and builder's agents, many times, that if I "killed the deal" they would sue me, etc. But, it has never happened.

To my point, if they did sue me, then I would have the need to supena their work documents (code inspection sign offs) and to depose the particular code inspectors they had. Neither the builder or the city (at least in this area) wants that.

Just because the AHJ is the AHJ does not make them the be all and end all of authority, nor can they force my client to buy the house, nor can they force me to change my report to my client.

Hope this helps;