"iwdplz" wrote in message
...
My brother is purchasing a home in Vermont and the following is holding up
the negotiations after home inspection; he's trying to decide if the
seller should pay for this (whether it's worth the risk in the negotiation
because my brother has already negotiated a rock bottom deal on the
house). The custom home was built in 1999. The general home inspector
says that since the main panel in the basement doesn't have a main
breaker, it is a code violation. Instead the main breaker is outside near
the pole which the home inspector is calling a "supplementary disconnect."
He says the main panel needs to be replaced which would cost thousands.
He didn't tell us what NEC code section was violated so we asked him but
it will take a few days for him to retrieve this info, but seller and
buyer are anxious to proceed sooner.

I reviewed relevant sections of the 2008 NEC and it says that it is fine
to have the main disconnect outside the house and the NEC chapter on the
disconnects didn't say that the disconnect has to be inside the main panel
which is attached to the home. I understand that in some installations
the main disconnect is placed separately outside so that firefighters can
get to it.

Is there a code violation that my brother should ask the seller to remedy?
I am not sure how the electrical inspector could miss something so basic
when the home was built in 1999. That makes me wonder if the general home
inspector is correct or not. Or was there an update to the NEC in the
past few years? What section/paragraph is not in compliance?

Keep in mind that house inspectors, are not by any stretch, electrical
inspectors. Nec 230.70 A (1) allows the service disconnect to be outside in
a "readily accessible location". It doesn't require it to be on the house or
structure. My guess would be that in 1999, the electrical inspector having
jurisdiction, found the current location acceptable. If the seller has a C/O
on the house, I would not be concerned