3 ms·
I wouldn't mind building codes and inspections so much if they actually protected consumers from corner-cutting builders, and if the cities that charge exorbita
by innocentoldguy 10y ago
I wouldn't mind building codes and inspections so much if they actually protected consumers from corner-cutting builders, and if the cities that charge exorbitant fees for permits and inspections didn't automatically sign off on commercial builders' dismally flawed products over coffee and a pastry at the nearest Starbucks.
I've owned three homes so far and everyone of them has violated code in myriad ways, such as not having a speck of insulation in the roof, putting in little to no rebar in the foundation, not securing weight-bearing walls to the joists they're supporting, or finishing the shower surrounds with paint-on tar that breaks down and starts leaking in a couple of years; after the warranty on the home has expired, of course.
My dad was a builder when I was growing up, and the truth of the matter is that city inspectors become friends with builders, and they often times don't bother to actually inspect the homes they're signing off on, or don't inspect them frequently enough to catch when a builder is skimping on insulation, rebar, or nails.
Try to do something on your own though, and the city is there harassing you every step of the way. At least that has been my experience.
- maxxxxx 10y agoI have heard that too. One approach for solving it would be to have a pool of inspectors state wide and assign them randomly to inspections.
- mahyarm 10y agoCan you sue the city & the builder then for not actually inspecting properly and not building a house that was supposed to be built to code?
- innocentoldguy 10y agoI looked into it and I couldn't sue the city, but I could sue the builder. The only problem was that all of the builders who worked on the houses I've owned went bankrupt back when the housing market crashed, so there wasn't really anything I could do.