Home : Blogs : Dana Bostick : Dana's Blog

"The City Inspector Said It Was Okay!"

If I had a dollar for every time I've heard this comment, I would be living in the Bahamas right now!

First, let me set the scene; I'm a retired General Contractor with sub-licenses in HVAC, Plumbing and Electrical. I've paid my dues arguing with City Inspectors for many years. I'm not saying all City inspectors are lazy, crooked, or lax in their duties. There are some that are, just like in any other profession. Most are hard working professionals doing the best they can under the circumstances.

The biggest issue is lack of funding, under staffing and heavy workload. Most are expected to do 15-25 inspections a day! And on residential, they are "All-Trade" inspectors, making the call on 12 or more trades. No one can know everything about everything. They pick their battles and let the rest slide, many times they are given the "fault de jour" to look for by the higher ups. (I think they pick them with a dart board)

Realtors! Listen up! The City Inspector is far too busy to catch everything. As a Home Inspector (for the last 6 years with over 2500 inspections), I spend 2-4 hours going over a house I'm inspecting. The City Inspector spends 15-20 minutes if you are lucky because he/she has 20 more to do today. The shifty contractors are very good at dissembling and miss-directing to avoid getting caught out. There are lots of little "tricks-of-the-trade" that can be used. Little things like making an obvious glaring mistake that the inspector will be sure to find and then using up all his time on site "discussing" a fix for it that he will pass. Now he/she just signs off the rest, often with out further investigation because he's waaaaay behind.

He never catches all the "cheats" that are usually there but gets waylaid by the phony defect placed there for his benefit. Believe me, THERE ARE LOTS OF THEM! We find them all the time because we have the time to look.

Another issue is that the City operates under the shield of "In the Public good" and this basically means THEY ARE NOT RESPONSIBLE for misses. If they were held responsible for mistakes, the City would be sued every other day and they could never do the job. Construction would grind to a halt! Talk about a pissed off public! The houses would get build one at a time and take 6-9 months each. Every City inspection would take all day for each phase and there would need to be specialists for each trade.

So, the next time the Home Inspector says something is wrong, please don't say "the city inspector said.........". You might just get a knuckle sandwich! LOL Just kidding! I usually just say 'that's nice, but it's still wrong and not safe". "You DO care about the safety of your clients, right?" Not to mention the safety of your bank account and E & O insurance deductible.

Posted by Dana Bostick on 06/13/2009 07:15 AM

Comments (32)

Home Inspections in the Training Channel

Post is included in group: Property Inspection Discussion
Post is included in group: Professional Home Inspectors
Post is included in group: Independent Thinking Inspectors

32 Comments on "The City Inspector Said It Was Okay!"

JUN

The City Inspector Said It Was Okay is like getting a D grade on an exam.

Do you want to live with a D grade, when you are expecting an A grade.

Good point...

JUN

I would be happy with the "D"....at least that passes the test.

I suppose there is a fine line between looking after the buyer's safety and being too much of an alarmist.

And there's so much to be said in the delivery, not just the statement itself.

City inspectors are there to raise money for government and nothing more! If they really were there to protect the public as they claim, like you they would be at each inspection 3 or 4 hours and would guarantee the house was good. (They certainly will never do that!)

In new subdivisions, the inspector may inspect only a small sample of the houses been built. Thus, each house has not been inspected by the city.

City inspectors are there to ascertain the bare minimum -- not bring out the microscope like home inspectors.

A homebuyer is always best off with their own expert.

In Metro Detroit we have electrical inspectors, mechanical inspectors, and general inspectors for each city. A little better off I think

Yeah, I have seen hundreds of building code violations over the years, probably thousands. You are very right my friend!

Very very good perspective on this issue. I have a construction background as well and I agree with you about the purpose and limitations of city inspectors. Conversely, there are subcode installations that are perfectly safe and functional as well, even if they don't comply. In the end, we rely on an inspection to help our clients sift through the structural, system and safety issues. If our clients are informed, they can choose to accept or decline any condition, regardless of who said what.

Nice article and congrats on your feature :)

Dana...

Thanks for this perspective from someone "in the know!" I will use this the next time I hear that the county inspector "didn't say anything!"

Dana--I agree with you 100% as just because it wasn't caught or noticed to be incorrect at the time of inspection doesn't mean the city inspector approved....Kind of like being found not guilty doesn't always mean the person is innocent. ;)

City inspectors do have their job in the bureaucratic system. They are the first layer of many layers to derail a project. Great post thanks

No one is perfect, it is just a question of degree. When a city inspector permits the foundation on a new house, he has no way to measure the psi of the concrete. he is there to see that basic code is met. I enjoyed your post, but in 20 years I have never heard "the city inspector says it was okay" as a argument not to correct something. Maybe it is a California thing. FYI, I make sure that buyers of new homes get inspections. Afterall, all homes are man made, and as I said, no one is perfect.

Most codes only require mimimal standards.. I am not at all impresed when I hear that the city inspector passed the house. Often they get lazy and are in and out of the house in less than 15 minutes. I have seen that happen many times...

I kind of wonder if "the city inspector" says it was OK is more CA like Joe. I do think buyers in my market will sometimes forgo inspections on newer homes believing the home was thoroughly inspected by the municipality. When that buyer becomes a seller 5 years later and something been wrong since the house was built.... like builder did not insulate part of the house... seller says " I can't believe it was not inspected more thoroughly.

Thanks all! Great comments too.

Note: Home Inspectors are NOT Code Inspectors. Most SoPs specifically state that fact. I never say "this is not to Code", I simply state it is not right or it doesn't meet acceptable construction practices and is likely to cause problems if not handled.

I'm active on several Inspector Forums and I don't think this is just a "California thing". Due to the economy, budgets are tight and staffing is down in most cities. This results in a significant work load for all the inspectors. It has been this way for a while. I have turned down nice cushy City Inspector positions after talking to a few here in LA. Not so cushy after all. The pay is pretty good but they all have that "hunted" look in their eye. LOL The City is pushing for more production because the construction is bringing in revenue but there is a limit to what one man/woman can do in a day and still keep up with the massive paperwork requirements as well.

I'm NOT slamming the City Inspectors, just the system that creates the situation.

#3 Karen; you must work for the government! LOL

#4 Ralph; I agree. Alarmist is not my style. I'm in pretty high demand by agents for first time buyers because I can deliver the bad news if there is some in a way that puts it in perspective with out blowing up the deal. Sometimes, the house just commits Suicide!

I Re-Blogged this and would love feedback from our local inspectors (but certainly won't hold my breath) whether they hear ""The City Inspector Said It Was Okay!" ... and who they would hear that from.

Who are you hearing "The City Inspector Said It Was Okay!" from?

The buyer?

The buyer's agent?

The listing agent?

The seller?

I would think the buyer in most cases would not think about what a city inspector said... although they might assume the city inspector said it was OK.

"So, the next time the Home Inspector says something is wrong, please don't say "the city inspector said.........". You might just get a knuckle sandwich! LOL Just kidding! I usually just say 'that's nice, but it's still wrong and not safe". "You DO care about the safety of your clients, right?" Not to mention the safety of your bank account and E & O insurance deductible."

bank account = buyer? or agent? E&O insurance would be one of the agents.

Like most things through the city/government, often they take a cursory look and go no further.

Patricia Aulson/ Portsmouth NH Real Estate

I'm assuming you're talking about "new construction" exclusively. You don't mention why the city inspector would be out. They have to grant a license. That's what they do. At the end, if all the permits were pulled properly by the contractors, and the city inspectors have looked at the wiring, and it's not duct taped into the circuit breaker, they'll issue the fnal permit, the "occupancy" permit. And thankfully, we do live in a country that has city inspectors. I've been to countries that do not.

I also encourage my clients, even with new construction, to get the home inspected by a home inspector. Similiar to the apprasier, the home inspector looks at different things. If the home buyer wants to be cheap, and rely on the city inspector -- who is only looking to see that the construction meets building code -- and could care less if there is a whole in the new fiberglass bathtub, or sheet rock got into the plumbing (they're not there to flush the toilets or run the water) -- then they get what they pay for.

It's up to us, in the real estate industry to advice our clients correctly. Explain what a city inspector does, what a home inspector does, what an appraiser does . . . it's as if someone makes a comparison that a piano and an organ are the same instrument.

Dana I am glad to read this post today. I've thought for years that the city inspectors were doing the bare bones......now way is there money to cover more than that.....if that these days. On new builds we always have an inspector go thru the house. Builders don't like that much....but we know who our clients are.

Would you suggest paying a "real" inspector after the city inspector comes through for any project? This would allow you to make the contractor fix their mistakes before moving on!

I have had so many inspectors come to a build in suite and dress shoes not even bringing the hard head to an active job site and when you tell them they have to wear one they refuse until we tell them our insurance will not allow anyone on the job without proper safety gear and when they would like to talk to them I be glad to make the call to their office.....

There are a few who really try very hard, and thoses are the once I ask for to inspect our jobs.....

That is exactly the reason why I recommend an inspection always be done - even on new construction!

A while back I was checking the furnace on a new construction when the city inspector arrived. He came down to the basement and signed off on the furnace without even looking at it. Really he was there long enough to walk up to the furnace, sign it, and walk away.

On his way upstairs he turned around and said, "I'm sure it's alright!" Unfortunately the blower motor was not properly attached to the cabinet and had a brick holding it up. Makes you wonder how many systems he's approved that were in need of service.

It's one thing to perform a "bare bones" city inspection but at least put in some effort.

For #18, Maureen

This comment is usually from the listing agent (and sometimes the selling agent) during a debrief when I'm telling my client what I have found and going over the report I will send them. Not always on new construction either. Permits and inspections are required on upgrades and additions as well.

It's the Realtor's E & O I was referring to. If they blow it off and it turns out to be a bigger problem, they might be held liable for advising the client to ignore my findings.

Most agents are really looking out for their clients but there are a few that only want the deal to close and don't want me making waves by pointing out defects. They play the lawyer game of trying to put my findings in question by saying the city official though it was okay so I, as the inspector should just not even mention it.

If that's the case, why am I even there? The house has a C of O so everything is just perfect, right? The point of the article was to point out the fallacy of thinking that way.

Great post, and this concept is not well understood by potential buyers, but should be drilled into their heads.

JUN

Dana, I have heard that line many times myself. It comes from different sources, but it most definitely gets used...repeatedly.

For anyone who believes the city inspectors approval is gold, spend some time with a good home inspector. I think you will begin to see city inspections are mostly cursory.

I agree. Often times a city inspector is in a rush and only spends a few minutes inspecting a new addition.

AUG

Dana, Good post. I think we probably all hear this from time to time. I take exception with your commenter who said that the city inspectors are only for revenue. The permits are for revenue. The cities, in my experience, maintain inspectors at a level that keeps them understaffed. During boom times they hire some, but not enough. During lean times, they lay off too many.

SEP

This topic also touches off thoughts in my mind about the (municipal) building inspectors that are often too busy to inspect each and every home. In my area, in busy times a random sampling of 1 in 10 homes may be checked as an example in a subdivision.

Code inspections do not guarantee that the construction meets code any more than a home inspector would be willing to guarantee that they will find every defect in a home.

Remember that at best a house/building built to code really means a legally acceptable house/building built to meet the minimum building standard. It does not guarantee workmanship or level of quality.

The reality - saying it is OK may be fine - but ask for it to be put in writing. Your likely to see that it's not always going to be Okay.

Cheers, Claude In Canada (Code course facilitator)

Claude,

Most people just assume that since the city inspector has signed off that everything is perfect. They don't really have a clue about the process unless they have gone though it on a project of their own.

As you mentioned, they may not have even looked at this actual house!

It does not take long for the less than ethical contractors to see the game and take advantage of it. They get away with murder and then try to hide behind the city sign off.

We all lament the litigious nature of the Real Estate field but this sort of thing is what fuels the fire. The buyer has no recourse but to sue everyone in sight when the Sh** hits the fan. LOL

Leave a response…

Name:

Email:
(optional)

Comment:

What does the graphic say?