Although home inspectors do not check for code compliance, some of our work as home inspectors is based on standard codes, especially in the area of occupant safety (the space between railing spindles for example).
NACHI, with the help of an architectural firm and 2 in-NACHI-house architectural interns, is developing a set of international residential and commercial codes. These are all basic, universal post-construction codes (things one might check in the course of a home inspection on a property that is already constructed).
The project, inspired by a request from the Chinese Government, will be called GlobeCodes.
Anyone desiring to assist on a review committee for this project should contact me direct at nick.gromicko@nachi.org
I can try to help you develop your International Codes as I am a full-tim Code Official for my local City. I do Home Inspections on nights and week ends.
I have been doing code enforcement for 10 years, Home Inspections for 18 mos. I am a NACHI member in good standing, (Cert. #06071498).
The only problem I might have is to do this long-distance, e-mail etc.
First of all, I would suggest that NACHI broaden its base and utilize as resources experts in plumbing, electrical and HVAC in addition to those named.
Second, what you have described ---- “universal post-construction codes (things one might check in the course of a home inspection on a property that is already constructed)” ---- is more of an SOP than a code. A “code” by definition is something that can be enforced. “Things one might check” is totally different.
I’m not so sure it is an SOP thing. SOP’s describe what to inspect, but not what is correct or incorrect. For instance, our SOP talks about spacing between stair spindles but doesn’t say what exactly it should be. A Global Code would.
Humberto, so you agree with me that our SOP does not cover it? That our SOP tells us only WHAT to inspect, correct? It asks us to inspect stuff without telling us what is correct or incorrect. I’ll use the spindle spacing as an example again.
There’s a US organiziation that has made a pretty good impact doing just that…check out www.iccsafe.org and www.icc-foundation.org . …I wonder why those sites refer to the International Code Council? Why try to reinvent the wheel? See R312.1 for your example. I think NACHI will get laughed at and ridiculed for attempting something like this, but that’s just me.
As well it shouldn’t. I have state and city considerations I have to take into account in addition to the ICC codes. You want to throw another one in now? Makes no sense to me.
Let’s say I don’t disagree with that statement but certainly don’t think a trade organization SOP should go so far as to define the specific parameters.
So it appears that no one disagrees that our SOP (actually all inspection trade association SOPs) does not provide all that is needed. It only tells us WHAT we have to look at, but not how to interpret what we see. Again, I use spindle spacing as an example.
Our SOP tells us to inspect the spacing, but we require some other document or code to tell us whether the spacing is correct or incorrect.
Well, first off I think I’m the only one listening right now…but, no, I do not agree that the NACHI SOP does not provide all that is needed. In the context of this discussion I think it does. If there were no ICC then there would be a problem. However, there is an ICC.
Why, pray tell, would you not simply recommend the Chinese government embrace the ICC codes?
So if a client asks you WHY you are inspecting the spaces between rail spindles you point to our SOP. Fine. But what if the client asks you about the maximum distance allowed between spindles? What do you tell them? More importantly, from where did you draw your answer?
