A friend told me a story tonight about a friend of his.
He's remodeling a big old house that was too big to rent to one family, so he, or the owner before him, has broken it up into 4 or 5 apartments.
The building inspector, or perhaps a Section 8 inspector, came out today, and told him something he had done wrong, something about the number of rooms, and the friend of my friend said, "Okay, I'll fix that. Is there anything else I should change?" and the inspector said, "Well, it would be unethical to say."
This story must have lost something in transmission. Can any of you imagine what the inspector was talking about, what might be unethical?
Yes, and most times, inspectors are paid to check things and not make recommendations. They could get into trouble if the person followed what he thought the inspector told him and something happened.
Yes, and most times, inspectors are paid to check things and not make recommendations. They could get into trouble if the person followed what he thought the inspector told him and something happened.
-------
That could be, but the term "unethical" would be the wrong term. I guess that is why the guy is a building inspector.
Ouch. Right, hitting hand on side of head! And, English is my first language, too.
My main gripe is the 'new' ethics with NO sense of accountability that is rampant. The concept that it is ok to do anything as long as you don't get caught. It has become 'the getting cuaght' that renders the act unethical, not the act itself.
I read all the replies and think that's the best explanation.
About all they should really do is point out what does /not/ meet code and leave it it that.
OTOH: The inspector /might/ have been making a sarcastic comment in that when the owner asked what else they should change... the inspector might have been thinking "your face"!
you can have a good building code department and run it efficiently too. I don't know that ever happens though, give the nature of government featherbedding.
That's what my friend thought his friend met, and I'll bet that IS what he meant .
The house owner said "Okay, I'll fix that. Is there anything else I should change?" [anything else that is not up to code]
and the inspector said, "Well, it would be unethical to say."
PIco is right. He either used the wrong word, or I would add, he misunderstood the question.
It's like when you call Verizon and complain about something, they always end up asking, "Is there anything else I can help you with?" That question is as unnecessary as the property owner's "Is there anything else I should change." The customer is going to go on to his next request whether the Verizon-rep asks or not, and the building inspector is going to list all his complaints whether the house-owner asks or not.
So the inspector figures, at least subconsciously, that the question he heard must have been a different type of question than it really was, like asking for a loophole, and helping an owner find loopholes** like gf suggests, really is unethical
**As opposed to approving a house that might have failed were it not for an exception in the law, which just happened to apply, rather than the owner going out of his way to make it apply.
The closest example in my life is when my deck was rotting and I was tearing it down, and I notice that the 20 inches that were under the secon floor overhang were still good. So I cut off everything else, and put a fascia? board in front, a face board?. I measure the height and it was just low enough that i didn't need steps. Then the day I finished painting, I meaured again and somehow it had gotten higher. The inspector was coming as early as that day. I had no time or inclination to build steps. So since I couldn't lower the deck, I rasised the earth. I bought a bag of topsoil and spreat it in front of the deck. It got me another quarter or half inch. I don't know if he really measured or just eye-balled it, but the decklet passed.
Howeer if it was the inspector's idea for me to buy dirt, maybe that would be thought unethical to tell me.
Maybe I will build steps eventually, instead of having to jump down 30? inches, but I didn't have to do it that morning.
I would like to get more from the friend's friend, but the friend will be done working on this project in a day or two and I doubt he'll ask him. I'll probably never meet him.
I guess our local inspector is the exception. I helped a friend building a house and there were two situations in the plans not to code. The inspector took the time to offer suggestions
I agree that there is some unnecessary overhead in a lot of building departments but it tends to be at the top. Funny thing happened in the housing slowdown. They laid off all of the junior people, mostly inspectors and those guys who used to spend their days drinking coffee and going to meetings, hit the road. The rule was, the more licenses you held, the better your chance was to stay. First to go were "code enforcement" those people who write tickets for junk cars in the yard and uncut lawns, because they generally only hold a driver's license. Then they started working their way up through building inspectors who only had one license (electrical, plumbing or whatever) The senior people were the most likely to hold a full boat (Structural, Plumbing, Electrical and Mechanical) They still had to be willing to hit the road.
You are still more likely to get a reinspection card when they are busy than when they are slow. They are not willing to spend any time working with you, they gotta go.
I did not work for a municipality I worked for the state and things were usually slow for me. I would stay there and watch the guy fix a violation if he was ready to do it right then. Typically my travel time was more than the actual inspection (I covered 8 counties) so it was more efficient for me to make one trip out of it.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.