Permit for Suspended / Drop Ceiling?

Typically, is a permit required in order to install a suspended (aka drop) ceiling (i.e. in a basement)?

Thanks, Kevin

Reply to
kevharper
Loading thread data ...

Not where I am -- but it may be different where you are. Your best bet is to call the local building inspection authority and ask them. That's the only way you're going to get an answer you can rely on.

Reply to
Doug Miller

In my jurisdiction, a permit is required to "finish" a basement. Is your celing part of such a project?

Your best bet is to call your municipal building inspections department, and ask.

Reply to
Art Greenberg

Typically, a permit is not required for any activity you can't see from the outside. .

(that should bring on the flames)

Reply to
Steve Barker

I pay enough taxes without adding to it with permits.

Reply to
longshot

Why would anyone care? Why would anyone consider a permit for something like that?

OTOH, if you are concerned. send me your check for $25 , payable to Mr. CASH, and I'll send you an authentic permit.

Reply to
Edwin Pawlowski

Typically, some jurisdictions would require a permit while others typically would not.

Reply to
Larry W

My builder had to have it inspected and it was rejected until he added hangers to hold it in case of earthquake. This is in central NC. I don't believe there has ever been an earthquake here.

Reply to
Art

Only if you want your taxes raised. They don't need to know what your doing in your basement.

Reply to
J.A. Michel

Many areas will "require" a permit to hang a picture on the wall (tongue in cheek), but other than collect the fee and make you fill in some paperwork will do nothing other than issue the permit. They don't have the time or the inclination to inspect such minor work. I wouldn't bother but then I usually install or build to "better than code".

Reply to
EXT

The government will sell a permit to anyone for anything if you let them. It's pure profit for them. I believe in the "Dont Ask, Dont Tell" policy. They dont know everything that exists in every home in their city. Of course this all depends on where you live too. I live in a rural area and we only need permits for major consruction, such as a new home, large home additon, garage, barn, etc. We dont need them for a small deck or porch, small garden shed, and definately not to replace or change a ceiling. Now if you live in the "communist" state of CA, you better get a permit everytime you walk the dog or change a faucet washer..... Once you go to their office, they surely will see dollar signs flash in front of their face and will find some excuse to sell you a permit.

Reply to
unknown

Just think of the pain, suffering and deaths that would occur if those half pound (mostly styrofoam) tiles fell on you and others......

Reply to
unknown

finish your basement and see property taxes go up...........

Reply to
hallerb

Nonsense. What requires a permit and what does not is very well spelled out in the municipal building code.

And I find the notion of "profit" in a govermnent context quite amusing.

Great advice. Until the OP wants to sell that house.

Yes, they do. They have a record of every permit pulled, including those covering the original construction.

If an inspection is required before the house can be sold (as is the case in the rural community that I live in), what happens with changes and additions depends on just how through the inspector is and whether or not the work was obviously done after construction and would have required a permit.

The consequences could be as bad as a fine (that is probably many times more expensive than the original permit would have been) and an order that would prevent the sale of the house until the work was torn out.

I just don't see what's so difficult about ASKING the AHJ if a permit is required, and then following though accordingly.

Reply to
Art Greenberg

What city in Russia do you live in? I certainly don't ever want to move there.

Reply to
Edwin Pawlowski

I have sold three houses, and there were inspections by the AHJ in every case. These were in Hamilton Township, Mercer County and Clinton Township, Hunterdon County - both NJ.

You do know that a Certificate of Occupancy has to be issued to close a sale, don't you? The AHJ won't issue a CO without an inspection. At the time of inspection, the AHJ has the right and authority to look for unauthorized work. Seems perfectly reasonable to me. You wouldn't want to move into a house where some hack had done a bunch of electrical work, or gas plumbing, or something else that wasn't inspected and that had the potential to cause you harm, would you?

Reply to
Art Greenberg

I don't know what "AHJ" stands for???

A CO certainly isn't a requirement for a sale to close in many (I'd even venture most) jurisdictions.

There is a requirement in most (is it all now? I don't know) states for a disclosure form to be supplied by the seller to a prospective buyer, but for all jurisdictions I've been in, any actual inspection is a requirement placed by either the buyer or perhaps the lending institution, not something with any actual legal authority.

As for the rhetorical question, it's a mixed bag -- if I were buying a property w/ the intent of moving in and expecting to live in it w/ no upgrades/maintenance required, sure I'd want anything _significant_ found in an inspection taken care of. OTOH, maybe I'm looking for a "fixer-upper" or similar and I'd far prefer to take the house "as-is" and use sweat equity to fix it up rather than have to pay up front. And, that doesn't even begin to address the philosophical front of whether it's "big gov't's" role or that of the buyer. Many are more on the side of the latter than the former...

Reply to
dpb

Authority Having Jurisdiction. Shorthand for whatever government agency has its hand in this.

News to me, but then I've only sold and purchased homes in NJ.

I've had to move an electrical outlet (closer to a "shop light" flourescent fixture in the basement so as to eliminate an extension cord), repoint a masonry chimney, and repair an exterior railing to satisfy an AHJ in previous sales. All clearly code issues.

As the buyer, I do not interact with the AHJ, and I think (not certain) that any inspection I purchase will come after the AHJ has given approval. I do know that inspection reports I have received have not called out code issues.

Requirement for inspection by AHJ here is in addition to and separate from anything required by the buyer. Real estate disclosure is required here, and again is separate from government inspection; it includes all issues known to seller, including things that would not be covered by an inspection such as easements and deed restrictions. Real estate agents suggest that buyers order an inspection from an independent provider, but this is not mandatory.

I agree about a "fixer". I do not know what provision the law here makes for such a thing. I have seen real estate listings specify "structure as-is", essentially disclaiming suitability for occupancy. In such a case, I think buyer is buying the land, and no CO would be forthcoming. Just a guess, but I think a very small minority of buyers are looking for or would be willing to purchase a fixer.

It is my understanding that as a seller, I would NOT have the option to negotiate code issues, found by the AHJ, with the buyer.

Reply to
Art Greenberg

No, not here where I am in CT or where I was in PA. A CO is issued when the house if first built. Some work does require a permit of course. Some of our towns still do not have zoning or land use rules and the locals are adamantly against it.

I always figured it was up to me to decide if I want a house or not, to inspect it or not. Permits, codes, building inspections have a place.

Reply to
Edwin Pawlowski

I (obviously) don't know NJ law, but somehow I'm having a hard time believing there is force of law behind much of this as far as closing on a sale. I can believe local jurisdictions may have requirements for a CO prior to actually occupying a dwelling, but having a much harder time believing they can prevent a willing seller/buyer from consummating a transfer of title to a dwelling prior to it meeting all current code(s)...

That just "doesn't sound right". I could see where for a typical homeowner/buyer it might "look" like that, but there has to be a way for dilapidated properties, for example, to be bought/sold--otherwise, they never would be and I really don't think that's the case.

None of this is meant as a personal castigation, I'm just thinking the details of the law and how it may appear for "ordinary" transactions aren't totally in consonance...and, of course, I _could_ be wrong... :)

Something similar to this came up not too long ago and I did a web search for state laws in (I really want to say it was NJ) and came up w/ basically the same thing as other states -- the disclosure form was all that was actually in state law. Inspections were optional (although highly recommended to the buyer of course) and noted as possibly being required by lenders for example to qualify a loan, but not required by the force of law. That search, obviously, was at the state level and local jurisdictions can do more, but probably not too much more or they would have such a rebellion from property owners who couldn't divest that can't seem them being able to go that far...

IMO, ymmv, $0.02, etc, etc., etc., ... :)

Reply to
dpb

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.