"Mike Dobony" wrote in message
. ..
Not necessarily. My son wanted to update his 100 amp service box with a
larger number of circuits. The city refused the permit unless he
totally
upgraded to 200 amp service. That was not necessary for me when I
simply
changed breaker boxes for a larger number of circuits. Check with the
city
zoning and permit office.

And the question is???

"S. Barker" wrote in message
...
ANOTHER good reason not to get the city involved. What the OP is
proposing is perfectly safe and doesn't need any governmental
intervention.


s


"Mike O." wrote in message
...
One consideration about not getting a permit (if they're required in
your
area) is that if there is a fire or similar problem later and the
insurance finds out you had replaced the panel without getting an
inspection, might they deny coverage? Even if the problem had
nothing to
do with the panel change, I'm wondering if they would use it as a
justification to avoid payment.

I'm not any kind of expert, and of course it's up to the homeowner, but
that was a concern I had when I did a panel upgrade several years ago.
My service could handle 200A, though, so the only extra cost was the
$30
permit/inspection fee.

Mike O.

S. Barker wrote:
Some people would say that can happen, but in reality, it's bs.

#1. The insurance co has no basis for knowing 'when' this change was
made.
#2. You say: "like that when i got here"
#3. done

s


You had better hope that the adjuster is an incompetent then. I have
worked in Fire & Rescue for thirty five years and I can assure you that
some adjusters do know their business. You say it was like that when
you got there but the panel was manufactured during the time you have
been their insured. I've been deposed in two cases were the insurance
company was denying a claim. Both insureds were financially ruined by
the decision in the carriers favor. I will be the first to admit that
the work in one case was so obviously slipshod that the matter was
rather plain. In the other case however it was a sharp adjuster that
spotted the galvanized piping used in a gas line. He knew that no gas
fitter would ever waste galvanized piping on gas lines. The insurance
adjuster demanded that the home owner provide the name of the gas
fitting contractor so they could recover the loss from the gas piping
contractor's liability insurer. When the homeowner could not provide
the name of the firm that did the work the claim was successfully denied.
--
Tom Horne

"This alternating current stuff is just a fad. It is much too dangerous
for general use." Thomas Alva Edison