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?

"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?

where is the rule that says everything a home inspector says has to be
changed actually has to be changed?

your brother is the buyer. he can accept or deny anything that he wants from
the inspector report.

one would think that if it did not meet code when built, the inspection done
for the occupancy certificate would have been denied.

what did the code enforcement department of your town say when you called
them?

Is this a home inspector hired by the buyer or seller, or was he sent
by the bank?

I don't have my NEC book with me and I don't know the tchnical answer
to your question, but around here, it would be unusual to have a main
breaker inside the house. It is usually in a box attached to the
outside of the house. If it's easily accessable from the property,
from gound level, I fail to see why being away from the house is a bad
thing... (Bu, that doesn't mean it isn't against code.)

On Jun 16, 4:13�pm, "charlie" wrote:
"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?

where is the rule that says everything a home inspector says has to be
changed actually has to be changed?

your brother is the buyer. he can accept or deny anything that he wants from
the inspector report.

one would think that if it did not meet code when built, the inspection done
for the occupancy certificate would have been denied.

what did the code enforcement department of your town say when you called
them?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Home inspectors arent experts!!

Had 2 home buyers, first buyer backed out after home inspection.

First one wrote up no GFCI on sump pump in garage

So I upgraded but buyer backed out

Second home insoector wrote up GFCI, stating sump pump shouldnt be on
GFCI

I couldnt win

On 2009-06-16, iwdplz wrote:

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."

An important distinction to understand is that once the service
conductors from the utility hit the first disconnect and circuit
breaker, any conductors after that point are feeder conductors, not
service conductors. Outside feeders are covered by Article 225, not
Article 230 (Service conductors).

Another point to note is that generally if the main lug only panel has
no more than six breakers in it, it can count as a disconnect; it
doesn't need to have a main breaker.

The relevant part of the National Electric Code is Article 225 Part
II. From the 2008 version, here are 225.31 and 225.32:

225.31 Disconnecting Means. Means shall be provided for
disconnecting all ungrounded conductors that supply or pass through
the building or structure.

225.32 Location. The disconnecting means shall be installed either
inside or outside of the building or structure served or where the
conductors pass through the building or structure. The disconnecting
means shall be at a readily accessible location nearest the point of
entrance of the conductors. For the purposes of this section, the
requirements in 230.6 shall be utilized.

[230.6 defines when a conductor is considered outside a building.]

If the pole with the disconnect is right next to the house (some
jurisdictions use a standard of within 5 feet), then usually that is
interpreted to satisfy these requirements. Otherwise, you definitely
need a main disconnect at the house which should be outside or inside
"nearest the point of entrance of the conductors". This last phrase
is open to interpretation and varying by jurisdiction; some might
allow a maximum of 15 feet inside, others more like 15 inches.

I don't know the history of these requirements, but I expect they were
in force in 1999.

He says the main panel needs to be replaced which would cost
thousands.

Many panels can be field configured with a main breaker or as main
lugs only, so it is possible that a simple kit will add a main
breaker. Failing that, depending on the routing of the feeder from
the pole disconnect to the main-lug-only panel inside the house, you
might be able to install a stand-alone disconnect before the existing
panel, so you don't need to mess with the panel branch circuits at
all.

Cheers, Wayne

iwdplz wrote:
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?

My knowledge of NEC is kind of dated (1992).

The home inspector may be an idiot; this is not unusual. But it does
raise an issue about grounding. If the main disconnect is not in the
same panel as the breakers, the breaker panel becomes a subpanel. The
neutral should be bonded to earth at the disconnect and separate ground
and neutrals wires should be run to the house. Mobile homes are wired
this way.

Is the main disconnect a breaker, or at least fused?

Bob

"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

In article , "iwdplz" wrote:
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.

Unless there is a specific *local* code requiring that, the inspector is FOS.

Instead the main breaker is outside near the pole

That is *explicitly permitted* by the National Electrical Code: "The service
disconnecting means shall be installed at a readily accessible location either
outside of a building or structure or inside nearest the point of entrance of
the service conductors." [2008 NEC, Article 230.70(A)(1)]

which the home
inspector is calling a "supplementary disconnect."

Nonsense.

He says the main panel
needs to be replaced which would cost thousands.

Let me guess: this "inspector" is *also* a general contractor, right? And he's
probably already offered to make your brother a good price on the job, right?
Which, when you get competing bids, will turn out to not be such a good
priceafter all.

He didn't tell us what NEC
code section was violated so we asked him

This should be fun. g

but it will take a few days for
him to retrieve this info,

snort No doubt it will. I imagine that *if* he ever answers, he'll say
something along the lines of "I can't find the exact paragraph, but I know
it's a violation, just trust me on this, I have __ years in this business and
I know what I'm doing and blah blah blah blah".

but seller and buyer are anxious to proceed
sooner.

So ignore it, and close the sale. Even if the inspector were right -- which he
definitely is NOT -- it doesn't matter. Real estate contracts are nearly
always contingent on the home passing an inspection, but that's mostly so that
a buyer isn't committed to buying a house that has a previously unknown
(or undisclosed) serious flaw, with no way to back out of the contract. If the
buyer is aware of the flaw and wants to buy the house anyway, so what? *Any*
provision of *any* contract can be changed if all of the parties to the
contract agree to the change. Your brother can probably *unilaterally* waive
the inspection contingency clause; there's certainly no reason why the seller
should object, so even if both of them must agree to the waiver in writing,
obtaining the seller's signature should be only a formality.

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.

Exactly so.

Is there a code violation that my brother should ask the seller to remedy?

None that I can see.

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.

The electrical inspector didn't miss something. Like I said before, the home
inspector is FOS.

Or was there an update to the NEC in the past
few years?

It wouldn't matter even if there was. Electrical installations are required to
comply with the Code that is in effect at the time the work is done, not with
whatever Code changes might occur later.

What section/paragraph is not in compliance?

None.

iwdplz wrote:
....
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.
....
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?

No NEC violation; all NEC says is a device must be provided "at or near"
the point where the service wires enter the building to disconnect the
entire building from its source of supply. The other requirement is
that there be overcurrent protection for the entire installation. If
that outside disconnect is fused or a circuit breaker, that's done as
well. Inside/outside location of this service equipment isn't mentioned.

There could possibly be local restrictions in addition to those of the
NEC but it would seem unusual this one would be one.

As for the what to do question, as somebody else noted, check w/ the
local jurisdiction as to the actual requirements. All you really need
is the ability to get any required COO to close the deal safely; while
could just ignore it and go on wouldn't really want to do so until know
there won't be an issue in occupancy in areas that may require such a thing.

_IF_ (the proverbial "big if") the need to install an inside disconnect
were to actually arise, it would seem that the simplest would be to
simply add a disconnect in front of the existing panel, run the feed to
it and then to the panel. That could be a few hundreds, not thousands.
There is some convenience in the rare occasions that one does want to
shut power off for some maintenance activity perhaps, but if the above
requirements are met and meet any local code, you're good to go.

--

"zxcvbob" wrote in message
...
iwdplz wrote:
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?

My knowledge of NEC is kind of dated (1992).

The home inspector may be an idiot; this is not unusual. But it does
raise an issue about grounding. If the main disconnect is not in the same
panel as the breakers, the breaker panel becomes a subpanel. The neutral
should be bonded to earth at the disconnect and separate ground and
neutrals wires should be run to the house. Mobile homes are wired this
way.

Is the main disconnect a breaker, or at least fused?

Bob

You're correct, if the main disconnect isn't in the service panel, separate
neutral and ground conductors are run from the disconnect to the panel, but
now you're way over the capabilities of a home inspector

[My first attempt to post this didn't seem to go through; apologies if
this is a duplicate.]

On 2009-06-16, iwdplz wrote:

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."

An important distinction to understand is that once the service
conductors from the utility hit the first disconnect and circuit
breaker, any conductors after that point are feeder conductors, not
service conductors. Outside feeders are covered by Article 225, not
Article 230 (Service conductors).

Another point to note is that generally if the main lug only panel has
no more than six breakers in it, it can count as a disconnect; it
doesn't need to have a main breaker.

The relevant part of the National Electric Code is Article 225 Part
II. From the 2008 version, here are 225.31 and 225.32:

225.31 Disconnecting Means. Means shall be provided for
disconnecting all ungrounded conductors that supply or pass through
the building or structure.

225.32 Location. The disconnecting means shall be installed either
inside or outside of the building or structure served or where the
conductors pass through the building or structure. The disconnecting
means shall be at a readily accessible location nearest the point of
entrance of the conductors. For the purposes of this section, the
requirements in 230.6 shall be utilized.

[230.6 defines when a conductor is considered outside a building.]

If the pole with the disconnect is right next to the house (some
jurisdictions use a standard of within 5 feet), then usually that is
interpreted to satisfy these requirements. Otherwise, you definitely
need a main disconnect at the house which should be outside or inside
"nearest the point of entrance of the conductors". This last phrase
is open to interpretation and varying by jurisdiction; some might
allow a maximum of 15 feet inside, others more like 15 inches.

I don't know the history of these requirements, but I expect they were
in force in 1999.

He says the main panel needs to be replaced which would cost
thousands.

Many panels can be field configured with a main breaker or as main
lugs only, so it is possible that a simple kit will add a main
breaker. Failing that, depending on the routing of the feeder from
the pole disconnect to the main-lug-only panel inside the house, you
might be able to install a stand-alone disconnect before the existing
panel, so you don't need to mess with the panel branch circuits at
all.

Cheers, Wayne

"zxcvbob" wrote in message
Is the main disconnect a breaker, or at least fused?

Bob

great responses so far. The main disconnect is a breaker..

RBM wrote:
"zxcvbob" wrote in message
...
iwdplz wrote:
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?
My knowledge of NEC is kind of dated (1992).

The home inspector may be an idiot; this is not unusual. But it does
raise an issue about grounding. If the main disconnect is not in the same
panel as the breakers, the breaker panel becomes a subpanel. The neutral
should be bonded to earth at the disconnect and separate ground and
neutrals wires should be run to the house. Mobile homes are wired this
way.

Is the main disconnect a breaker, or at least fused?

Bob

You're correct, if the main disconnect isn't in the service panel, separate
neutral and ground conductors are run from the disconnect to the panel, but
now you're way over the capabilities of a home inspector



There are other implications for any 120/240 circuits (most clothes
dryers and ranges.) They can't use 3-conductor cables and NEMA 10
connectors. Have to be 4-conductor NEMA 14's.

Everything might be fine. But it's a red flag (or is it yellow?) that
is worth having a real electrician take a look.

Bob (I am not an electrician)

excellent info, thanks. The home is in the town of Middlebury if that makes
any difference. Do all homes in all states in the US comply with NEC, or do
the regulations of states and cities ever override anything in the NEC?

"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?

*Common sense says that it is better to have the wire from the distant meter
to the house protected by a fuse or circuit breaker. It is not an
electrical code violation and as other have pointed out home inspectors have
limited knowledge of everything. Keep pressuring that guy for a code
reference. Better still have your brother's lawyer keep calling him for the
reference.

I once was handed a report by a home inspector that said there were loose
electrical wires all over the attic and they were a hazard. The new owners
asked me to correct the problem. I went up in the attic and the only wires
visible and loose were cable TV wires.

"John Grabowski" wrote in message
...

"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?

*Common sense says that it is better to have the wire from the distant
meter to the house protected by a fuse or circuit breaker. It is not an
electrical code violation and as other have pointed out home inspectors
have limited knowledge of everything. Keep pressuring that guy for a code
reference. Better still have your brother's lawyer keep calling him for
the reference.

I once was handed a report by a home inspector that said there were loose
electrical wires all over the attic and they were a hazard. The new
owners asked me to correct the problem. I went up in the attic and the
only wires visible and loose were cable TV wires.

I'm not an electrician but I've seen HUNDREDS of homes and your set up is
pretty common on newer homes...

"iwdplz" wrote in message
...
excellent info, thanks. The home is in the town of Middlebury if that
makes any difference. Do all homes in all states in the US comply with
NEC, or do the regulations of states and cities ever override anything in
the NEC?

Some localities require more than the NEC. None will allow less that I'm
aware of.

On 2009-06-16, iwdplz wrote:

Instead the main breaker is outside near the pole which the home
inspector is calling a "supplementary disconnect."

How far is it from the disconnect to the house? Every structure is
required to have a disconnect (see my previous post). If the pole
disconnect is 50 feet away, then I agree an additional disconnect is
required on the house. If the pole disconnect is 3 feet away, then it
seems fine as is. The exact distance at which an additional
disconnect is required is subject to interpretation by the local
authority.

Cheers, Wayne

In article on Tue, 16 Jun
2009 15:52:59 -0700, iwdplz wrote:

excellent info, thanks. The home is in the town of Middlebury if that makes
any difference. Do all homes in all states in the US comply with NEC, or do
the regulations of states and cities ever override anything in the NEC?



The NEC is not, in itself, law. It is adapted, usually with some
(sometimes many) modifications by individual localities. Some places
don't use the NEC at all, preferring their own code. NYC had their own
code until a few years ago, and I think Chicago still has their own
code.

Vermont has their own electrical based on the 2008 NEC with a few
modifications. You can find it referenced on the Vermont state web
site:
http://www.dps.state.vt.us/fire/lice...Electrical.htm

Interestingly, there is a slight variance in the Vermont Electrical Code
about the location of the main disconnect. The VEC says:

"-delete and replace as follows - article
230.70 (A)(1)
(1) Location. The service disconnecting
means shall be installed at a readily
accessible location either outside of a
building or structure, or inside a building or
structure nearest the point of entrance of the
service conductors, not to exceed 10 feet of
conductor length from the point of entrance."

Note that this amendment *still* allows an outside disconnect.

It is possible that Middlebury has their own electrical code over and
above the VT code (if that's possible in VT). It's not mentioned on the
Middlebury town web site, under "Ordinances".

http://preview.tinyurl.com/mg8llz

You might want to call Middlebury city hall, just to confirm.

Like most of the other people have stated in this thread, I think the
inspector is wrong, and there's no problem here.

--
Seth Goodman

"iwdplz" wrote in message
...
excellent info, thanks. The home is in the town of Middlebury if that
makes any difference. Do all homes in all states in the US comply with
NEC, or do the regulations of states and cities ever override anything in
the NEC?

Most use the Nec as their basic electric code, and some make changes to fit
their specific demands. If they have supplemental codes, they have to be
documented and available for viewing, which is to say, they can't have an
inspector make it up as he sees fit. What state is Middlebury in?

In article , "iwdplz" wrote:
excellent info, thanks. The home is in the town of Middlebury if that makes
any difference. Do all homes in all states in the US comply with NEC, or do
the regulations of states and cities ever override anything in the NEC?

The NEC is a standard, not a law. It has no legal force whatever until a
particular jurisdiction adopts it in part or in toto as the electrical code
for that jurisdiction.

The disconnect is about 150 feet away. It sounds like the gray area is that
the NEC does not define the distance. I guess some electricians might
interpret that it's ok anywhere on the property, others say it has to be
attached right to the house wall. It is interesting that the NEC doesn't
define the distance. My brother is mostly worried that if he doesn't take
care of it now, then he might be required to remedy it if he tries to sell
the house later. He just doesn't know if it would cost thousands of dollars
to replace the main lug panel in case the electrician determines it's not
possible or too costly to add a main breaker in between (because of where
the conduit is buried etc). But also since this is a "gray area" in the NEC
one has to wonder if there's even any problem or if it's left up to the
imagination of whatever local inspector decides the arbitrary distance
should be.

On 2009-06-17, iwdplz wrote:

The disconnect is about 150 feet away.

If the disconnect is 150 feet away, there is no question that the NEC
requires an additional disconnect on the structure itself. IMO, it's
not a grey area. The citations are 225.31 and 225.32, which I quoted
in my original response.

Cheers, Wayne

"iwdplz" wrote in message
...
The disconnect is about 150 feet away. It sounds like the gray area is
that the NEC does not define the distance. I guess some electricians
might interpret that it's ok anywhere on the property, others say it has
to be attached right to the house wall. It is interesting that the NEC
doesn't define the distance. My brother is mostly worried that if he
doesn't take care of it now, then he might be required to remedy it if he
tries to sell the house later. He just doesn't know if it would cost
thousands of dollars to replace the main lug panel in case the electrician
determines it's not possible or too costly to add a main breaker in
between (because of where the conduit is buried etc). But also since this
is a "gray area" in the NEC one has to wonder if there's even any problem
or if it's left up to the imagination of whatever local inspector decides
the arbitrary distance should be.
As a point of reference, last week I replaced a 30 circuit panel with 200
amp main breaker, including about 24 circuit breakers for $750. It certainly
isn't going to cost thousands

Wayne Whitney wrote:
[My first attempt to post this didn't seem to go through; apologies if
this is a duplicate.]

On 2009-06-16, iwdplz wrote:

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."

An important distinction to understand is that once the service
conductors from the utility hit the first disconnect and circuit
breaker, any conductors after that point are feeder conductors, not
service conductors. Outside feeders are covered by Article 225, not
Article 230 (Service conductors).

Another point to note is that generally if the main lug only panel has
no more than six breakers in it, it can count as a disconnect; it
doesn't need to have a main breaker.

The relevant part of the National Electric Code is Article 225 Part
II. From the 2008 version, here are 225.31 and 225.32:

225.31 Disconnecting Means. Means shall be provided for
disconnecting all ungrounded conductors that supply or pass through
the building or structure.

225.32 Location. The disconnecting means shall be installed either
inside or outside of the building or structure served or where the
conductors pass through the building or structure. The disconnecting
means shall be at a readily accessible location nearest the point of
entrance of the conductors. For the purposes of this section, the
requirements in 230.6 shall be utilized.

[230.6 defines when a conductor is considered outside a building.]

If the pole with the disconnect is right next to the house (some
jurisdictions use a standard of within 5 feet), then usually that is
interpreted to satisfy these requirements. Otherwise, you definitely
need a main disconnect at the house which should be outside or inside
"nearest the point of entrance of the conductors". This last phrase
is open to interpretation and varying by jurisdiction; some might
allow a maximum of 15 feet inside, others more like 15 inches.

I don't know the history of these requirements, but I expect they were
in force in 1999.

He says the main panel needs to be replaced which would cost
thousands.

Many panels can be field configured with a main breaker or as main
lugs only, so it is possible that a simple kit will add a main
breaker. Failing that, depending on the routing of the feeder from
the pole disconnect to the main-lug-only panel inside the house, you
might be able to install a stand-alone disconnect before the existing
panel, so you don't need to mess with the panel branch circuits at
all.

Cheers, Wayne

1966 house my father built in Indiana had meter base (buried service) on
outside of the carport storage cabinets, with the main disconnect inside
the cabinets. It went from there through conduit under carport slab, to
the service panel in the basement. From the houses I saw being built in
the area through mid 1970s, that was a pretty common arrangement. Only
downside to an outside disconnect is that kids can easily put you in the
dark.


--
aem sends...

In article , "iwdplz" wrote:
The disconnect is about 150 feet away. It sounds like the gray area is that
the NEC does not define the distance. I guess some electricians might
interpret that it's ok anywhere on the property, others say it has to be
attached right to the house wall. It is interesting that the NEC doesn't
define the distance. My brother is mostly worried that if he doesn't take
care of it now, then he might be required to remedy it if he tries to sell
the house later.

Why would he be required to do that? If it met Code when it was installed,
that's all that's needed.

On Jun 16, 9:10*pm, "iwdplz" wrote:
The disconnect is about 150 feet away. *It sounds like the gray area is that
the NEC does not define the distance. *I guess some electricians might
interpret that it's ok anywhere on the property, others say it has to be
attached right to the house wall. *It is interesting that the NEC doesn't
define the distance. *My brother is mostly worried that if he doesn't take
care of it now, then he might be required to remedy it if he tries to sell
the house later. *He just doesn't know if it would cost thousands of dollars
to replace the main lug panel in case the electrician determines it's not
possible or too costly to add a main breaker in between (because of where
the conduit is buried etc). *But also since this is a "gray area" in the NEC
one has to wonder if there's even any problem or if it's left up to the
imagination of whatever local inspector decides the arbitrary distance
should be.

Is it 150 feet from the house or 150 feet from the breaker box? If it
is 150 feet from the house, then yes it sounds like a violation
according to what Seth G. dug up. If your brother is handy at all, he
could fix it himself after he owns a home. A new breaker panel isn't
that much money. Most of the expense is from labor, since it can be
time consuming to re- wire it, but it should be pretty simple. You
just have to keep all of the wires straight when you switch everything
out.

"RBM" wrote in message
As a point of reference, last week I replaced a 30 circuit panel with 200
amp main breaker, including about 24 circuit breakers for $750. It
certainly isn't going to cost thousands


I had my service upgraded to 100A, new panel and breakers, added two
receptacles and an outside light (I furnished the fixture) for $200
including labor and material.

RBM wrote:
"iwdplz" wrote in message
...
The disconnect is about 150 feet away. It sounds like the gray area is
that the NEC does not define the distance. I guess some electricians
might interpret that it's ok anywhere on the property, others say it has
to be attached right to the house wall. It is interesting that the NEC
doesn't define the distance. My brother is mostly worried that if he
doesn't take care of it now, then he might be required to remedy it if he
tries to sell the house later. He just doesn't know if it would cost
thousands of dollars to replace the main lug panel in case the electrician
determines it's not possible or too costly to add a main breaker in
between (because of where the conduit is buried etc). But also since this
is a "gray area" in the NEC one has to wonder if there's even any problem
or if it's left up to the imagination of whatever local inspector decides
the arbitrary distance should be.
As a point of reference, last week I replaced a 30 circuit panel with 200
amp main breaker, including about 24 circuit breakers for $750. It certainly
isn't going to cost thousands


THat the price for parts and labor?
What part of the country?

Lou

"-delete and replace as follows - article
230.70 (A)(1)
(1) Location. The service disconnecting
means shall be installed at a readily
accessible location either outside of a
building or structure, or inside a building or
structure nearest the point of entrance of the
service conductors, not to exceed 10 feet of
conductor length from the point of entrance."

Depending on how one reads this it is at least a little unclear
whether the 10 foot limit applies outside, or only to inside
installations... The requirement would certainly make sense for
inside. But then 150 feet is a ways to run while the ceiling fan that
just came loose is showering sparks on the carpet, so I can see where
it could be an issue.

Where is your meter? It it at the pole or by the house?

"Larry The Snake Guy" wrote in message
Depending on how one reads this it is at least a little unclear
whether the 10 foot limit applies outside, or only to inside
installations... The requirement would certainly make sense for
inside. But then 150 feet is a ways to run while the ceiling fan that
just came loose is showering sparks on the carpet, so I can see where
it could be an issue.

Where is your meter? It it at the pole or by the house?

I was wondering what the "safety" issue is regarding the distance. Sounds
like if there is a faulty major appliance, the main breaker provides a quick
convenient shutoff. Couldn't he also just shut off -all- the individual
circuit breakers in the basement instead? Maybe this would take 10 seconds
longer than flipping one breaker. I am not sure where the meter is. Based
on the info my brother has told me so far I am painting a picture in my mind
(mostly a guess) that electrical service was at the pole with a meter before
the house was built, possibly as part of the vacant land deal, and that's
the reason why the meter/disconnect is not attached right on the house.
Vermont gets heavy snowfall so it could be hard to go outside in the winter
sometimes. But couldn't one simply just shut off all individual breakers if
the faulty circuit is not known?

On Jun 16, 3:46*pm, "iwdplz" wrote:
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?

This is in occordance with the NEC but possibly does not agree with
local code. Even the electtrical inspectors are sometimes wrong. As of
1990 all the house built where I lived were suppose to have the
breaker panel on the outside of the house. My house was built in '89
and had the panel inside. WHen I remodeled which resulteed in me
moving my current grandfathered in panel 48 inches the local inspector
wanted me to relocate it to the outside of the house telling me that
this was local code. I requested a copy of the reg and found this was
not the case, only the main brreaker had to be external. This saved me
a lot of money and I dispise having an external breaker panel as many
of my neighbors do.
Check the local code, read it yourself. I like having the exteral
disconnect, now if I have to go into the box I can do it know it is
abosolutely dead inside of it and I dont have to work about coming in
contact with the main feed.




Jimmie

"LouB" wrote in message
...
RBM wrote:
"iwdplz" wrote in message
...
The disconnect is about 150 feet away. It sounds like the gray area is
that the NEC does not define the distance. I guess some electricians
might interpret that it's ok anywhere on the property, others say it has
to be attached right to the house wall. It is interesting that the NEC
doesn't define the distance. My brother is mostly worried that if he
doesn't take care of it now, then he might be required to remedy it if
he tries to sell the house later. He just doesn't know if it would cost
thousands of dollars to replace the main lug panel in case the
electrician determines it's not possible or too costly to add a main
breaker in between (because of where the conduit is buried etc). But
also since this is a "gray area" in the NEC one has to wonder if there's
even any problem or if it's left up to the imagination of whatever local
inspector decides the arbitrary distance should be.
As a point of reference, last week I replaced a 30 circuit panel with 200
amp main breaker, including about 24 circuit breakers for $750. It
certainly isn't going to cost thousands
THat the price for parts and labor?
What part of the country?

Lou

Most of my work is in Bill and Hillary Clinton's neighborhood. The price was
for materials and labor

"Doug Miller" wrote in message
...
In article , "iwdplz"
wrote:
The disconnect is about 150 feet away. It sounds like the gray area is
that
the NEC does not define the distance. I guess some electricians might
interpret that it's ok anywhere on the property, others say it has to be
attached right to the house wall. It is interesting that the NEC doesn't
define the distance. My brother is mostly worried that if he doesn't take
care of it now, then he might be required to remedy it if he tries to sell
the house later.

Why would he be required to do that? If it met Code when it was installed,
that's all that's needed.

I agree, this house was built in 1999. If the house didn't meet codes at
that time, a certificate of occupancy wouldn't have been issued. Even if the
location of the disconnect doesn't meet their current codes, Grandfather
laws would keep it in compliance, until such time when the service is
upgraded, and would have to comply with any new code changes.

On Jun 16, 10:10*pm, "iwdplz" wrote:
The disconnect is about 150 feet away. *It sounds like the gray area is that
the NEC does not define the distance. *I guess some electricians might
interpret that it's ok anywhere on the property, others say it has to be
attached right to the house wall. *It is interesting that the NEC doesn't
define the distance. *My brother is mostly worried that if he doesn't take
care of it now, then he might be required to remedy it if he tries to sell
the house later. *He just doesn't know if it would cost thousands of dollars
to replace the main lug panel in case the electrician determines it's not
possible or too costly to add a main breaker in between (because of where
the conduit is buried etc). *But also since this is a "gray area" in the NEC
one has to wonder if there's even any problem or if it's left up to the
imagination of whatever local inspector decides the arbitrary distance
should be.

It looks like the home inspector did a heads up job on this one.
There does need to be a Disconnecting Means for the building. As
someone already pointed out the first thing to check is if the
lighting & appliance panel board inside the home can be converted from
main lug to main breaker. If that is not possible then adding a
disconnect ahead of the main lugs is the next cheapest alternative.
In 1999 a four conductor feed from the service disconnecting means to
the house was not required. If it were installed today it would be
required. There is a possibility that no one has mentioned so far.
If the homes lighting and appliance panel board is of the split buss
type and it is listed for use as service equipment the present
installation would be code compliant. A split buss panel has a
section with twelve or fewer slots in it that will accommodate six
double pole breakers. One or two of those breakers control the
current to the rest of the panel. The six or fewer double pole
breakers in the main lug portion of the panel meat the requirements of
225.33 Maximum Number of Disconnects. The feeder supply breaker at
the meter meets the requirements of section 408.16 Exception 1.

"225.33 Maximum Number of Disconnects.
(A) General. The disconnecting means for each supply permitted by
225.30 shall consist of not more than six switches or six circuit
breakers mounted in a single enclosure, in a group of separate
enclosures, or in or on a switchboard. There shall be no more than six
disconnects per supply grouped in any one location."

"408.16 Overcurrent Protection.
(A) Lighting and Appliance Branch-Circuit Panelboard Individually
Protected. Each lighting and appliance branch-circuit panelboard shall
be individually protected on the supply side by not more than two main
circuit breakers or two sets of fuses having a combined rating not
greater than that of the panelboard.
Exception No. 1: Individual protection for a lighting and appliance
panelboard shall not be required if the panelboard feeder has
overcurrent protection not greater than the rating of the
panelboard."

If the panel in the house is neither split buss nor convertible to
main breaker then the only remaining remedy, short of replacing it
with a main breaker panel, is to install a separate enclosed switch or
circuit breaker at the house end of the feeder to control the current
to the house's Lighting and Appliance Branch-Circuit Panelboard. The
enclosed switch or circuit breaker would have to be listed for use as
service equipment in order to satisfy the requirement of Section
225.36 Suitable for Service Equipment.

225.36 Suitable for Service Equipment.
The disconnecting means specified in 225.31 shall be suitable for use
as service equipment.
--
Tom Horne

On Jun 17, 3:21*am, "iwdplz" wrote:
"Larry The Snake Guy" wrote in message

Depending on how one reads this it is at least a little unclear
whether the 10 foot limit applies outside, or only to inside
installations... The requirement would certainly make sense for
inside. But then 150 feet is a ways to run while the ceiling fan that
just came loose is showering sparks on the carpet, so I can see where
it could be an issue.

Where is your meter? It it at the pole or by the house?

I was wondering what the "safety" issue is regarding the distance. *Sounds
like if there is a faulty major appliance, the main breaker provides a quick
convenient shutoff. *Couldn't he also just shut off -all- the individual
circuit breakers in the basement instead? *Maybe this would take 10 seconds
longer than flipping one breaker. *I am not sure where the meter is. *Based
on the info my brother has told me so far I am painting a picture in my mind
(mostly a guess) that electrical service was at the pole with a meter before
the house was built, possibly as part of the vacant land deal, and that's
the reason why the meter/disconnect is not attached right on the house.
Vermont gets heavy snowfall so it could be hard to go outside in the winter
sometimes. *But couldn't one simply just shut off all individual breakers if
the faulty circuit is not known?

As I have pointed out in a previous post the buildings disconnecting
means must consist of six or fewer switches, breaker handles, or fuse
pull outs.
--
Tom Horne

iwdplz wrote:
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?


I don't know about the code, (the answer to your question) BUT i can
tell you replacing the panel should not be over about $400 to replace
with a main breaker panel.

s

You could rewire the entire house for "thousands".

On Tuesday, June 16, 2009 at 3:35:44 PM UTC-5, bob haller wrote:
On Jun 16, 4:13�pm, "charlie" wrote:
"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?

where is the rule that says everything a home inspector says has to be
changed actually has to be changed?

your brother is the buyer. he can accept or deny anything that he wants from
the inspector report.

one would think that if it did not meet code when built, the inspection done
for the occupancy certificate would have been denied.

what did the code enforcement department of your town say when you called
them?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Home inspectors arent experts!!

Had 2 home buyers, first buyer backed out after home inspection.

First one wrote up no GFCI on sump pump in garage

So I upgraded but buyer backed out

Second home insoector wrote up GFCI, stating sump pump shouldnt be on
GFCI

I couldnt win


Did you get paid both times? If you did, I think you need to thank the inspector for work paid. Just Saying, some contractor get upset but if you can do the right thing and get paid, so why not get paid with no complaint, because the inspector has done most of the selling you as a contractor just need to set the price right.

In Vermont anything goes, especially if it's between brother and sister.

On Wednesday, May 27, 2015 at 9:05:51 AM UTC-5, wrote:
On Tuesday, June 16, 2009 at 3:35:44 PM UTC-5, bob haller wrote:
On Jun 16, 4:13�pm, "charlie" wrote:
"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?

where is the rule that says everything a home inspector says has to be
changed actually has to be changed?

your brother is the buyer. he can accept or deny anything that he wants from
the inspector report.

one would think that if it did not meet code when built, the inspection done
for the occupancy certificate would have been denied.

what did the code enforcement department of your town say when you called
them?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Home inspectors arent experts!!

Had 2 home buyers, first buyer backed out after home inspection.

First one wrote up no GFCI on sump pump in garage

So I upgraded but buyer backed out

Second home insoector wrote up GFCI, stating sump pump shouldnt be on
GFCI

I couldnt win


Did you get paid both times? If you did, I think you need to thank the inspector for work paid. Just Saying, some contractor get upset but if you can do the right thing and get paid, so why not get paid with no complaint, because the inspector has done most of the selling you as a contractor just need to set the price right.

The house was repossessed by the bank 2 years ago then torn down. 8-)

[8~{} Uncle Time Travel Monster