What should a (town) fire inspector check?
- Thread starter Jay H
- Start date
-
Active since 1995, Hearth.com is THE place on the internet for free information and advice about wood stoves, pellet stoves and other energy saving equipment.
We strive to provide opinions, articles, discussions and history related to Hearth Products and in a more general sense, energy issues.
We promote the EFFICIENT, RESPONSIBLE, CLEAN and SAFE use of all fuels, whether renewable or fossil. -
Super Cedar firestarters 30% discount Use code Hearth2024 Click here
- Status
Jay H said:I'm wondering because my town's fire inspector literally spent like 5 minutes to walk into my home, I pointed out the wood stove, he looked at the flue and I signed the papers
Just curious what my $110 permit fee was supposed to pay for?
Jay
The car he drove to your place + Gass and his salary. Just a guess though.
Well, I think everybody but the main building inspector is a voluntary position, so the money I paid was to my town's coffers at the office. I don't believe the individual inspectors make anything but I could be wrong. He came in with a clipboard, and probably spent 3 of those 5 minutes filling out the form!
Jay
Jay
- Nov 18, 2005
- 701
It probably goes to the same place money from speeding tickets goes. Ever notice how much work a police officer does to get that money? One fills out the paperwork to say you are breaking the law, the other fills out the paperwork to say you aren't.
He's not paid. that's your problem right there.
Sadly, pretty often, no pay = no service.
When I had my Pellet insert inspected, the guy measured all the clearances & checked the manual.
Sadly, pretty often, no pay = no service.
When I had my Pellet insert inspected, the guy measured all the clearances & checked the manual.
frequently, up here, the Inspector makes 50% of the permit fee......if its $100, he gets $50. And its actually the building inspecotr up here who inspects solid fuel appliances....fire inspects liquid fuel, like oil burners.
Big Eric said:
I asked you nicely not to diss my profession a week or two back But I see you are at it again
Do you want me to expose the fact you never read your manual again. The fact you are not qualified to pass jugdement on inpections, because you never pulled a permit.
I can end it here or go on and expose every code pertaining to your own installation. Is that what you want?
I try to help people here care to tell me how your statement helps anyone?
I am a Town Meeting Rep, and the subject of permit fees has come up a few times, and we are told that the fees are a significant source of income to the town. Not the taxes from the property improvement values, but specifically the money paid by homeowners as fees.
I think this is seriously WRONG. The gov't may have an interest in having "safe" construction practices, (I'd argue that it isn't a proper function of gov't) but I don't think that the fee's should be a "profit center" for the community. Approximate cost recovery I can accept, but the gov't isn't supposed to be a profit making enterprise, so if the fee exceeds the costs, it should be called what it reall is - a TAX!
Note that the way the system works right now, there is no real incentive for the inspector to do a good job, or for anyone to make him do one. I'm sure there are inspectors like Elk out there who do their best because they care about safety, but there are others that have different motivations.
Note that while you can sue a negligent doctor or contractor, there is *NO* legal liability for a gov't inspector that signs off something he shouldn't have. You can't sue the inspector because he is a gov't employee, and you can't sue the gov't because of soverign immunity. (OTOH, there are private inspection services that CAN be sued for negligence) No motivation there.
OTOH, I have heard many tales, from sources I consider credible, but don't have personal experience to verify, that there are inspectors who operate from motives that are questionable at best. There are communities where certain contractors seem to have less trouble getting work approved than others that aren't buddies of the inspector, or where the inspector will go to great lengths to deter DIYers from doing their own work, but just do walkthroughs on contractors. If you are stuck with such a 'problem' inspector, you have very limited recourse - how do you prove it? The key problem is that the gov't inspections are a monopoly business. You MUST do business with them, at the price they specify, and there is no competition.
I used to work in the electronics industry, our products had to pass a great many standards tests, many of them much more stringent than the gov't standards. There was a great deal of competition for the job of certifying our products. There are multiple testing labs to choose from, all testing to the same standards. They compete on the basis of service, price, consulting on how to resolve difficulties encountered in the test, etc. They are tough (I know from baby sitting some of our products being tested) as they have to be if they want to keep their certifications and reputations. They are very thorough, again they have a reputation to uphold. But they also know that if they don't give good service, and treat us fairly, we can take our business elsewhere.
But you have no choice about your gov't inspector....
Gooserider
I think this is seriously WRONG. The gov't may have an interest in having "safe" construction practices, (I'd argue that it isn't a proper function of gov't) but I don't think that the fee's should be a "profit center" for the community. Approximate cost recovery I can accept, but the gov't isn't supposed to be a profit making enterprise, so if the fee exceeds the costs, it should be called what it reall is - a TAX!
Note that the way the system works right now, there is no real incentive for the inspector to do a good job, or for anyone to make him do one. I'm sure there are inspectors like Elk out there who do their best because they care about safety, but there are others that have different motivations.
Note that while you can sue a negligent doctor or contractor, there is *NO* legal liability for a gov't inspector that signs off something he shouldn't have. You can't sue the inspector because he is a gov't employee, and you can't sue the gov't because of soverign immunity. (OTOH, there are private inspection services that CAN be sued for negligence) No motivation there.
OTOH, I have heard many tales, from sources I consider credible, but don't have personal experience to verify, that there are inspectors who operate from motives that are questionable at best. There are communities where certain contractors seem to have less trouble getting work approved than others that aren't buddies of the inspector, or where the inspector will go to great lengths to deter DIYers from doing their own work, but just do walkthroughs on contractors. If you are stuck with such a 'problem' inspector, you have very limited recourse - how do you prove it? The key problem is that the gov't inspections are a monopoly business. You MUST do business with them, at the price they specify, and there is no competition.
I used to work in the electronics industry, our products had to pass a great many standards tests, many of them much more stringent than the gov't standards. There was a great deal of competition for the job of certifying our products. There are multiple testing labs to choose from, all testing to the same standards. They compete on the basis of service, price, consulting on how to resolve difficulties encountered in the test, etc. They are tough (I know from baby sitting some of our products being tested) as they have to be if they want to keep their certifications and reputations. They are very thorough, again they have a reputation to uphold. But they also know that if they don't give good service, and treat us fairly, we can take our business elsewhere.
But you have no choice about your gov't inspector....
Gooserider
First of all I get $30 per inspection and that includes driving my own vechicle Iam appointed by the very persons you elect, our slectmen If they can prove just cause they can remove me
The building inspectors do not set the fees. You elected officials slectmen approve them. We may make recomendations ,but they have the final say and approval. No tax payers are comming down to our office to see if they can do anything when our budget gets cut every year. One can only trim so much from fixed cost without cutting service but 7
The building inspectors do not set the fees. You elected officials slectmen approve them. We may make recomendations ,but they have the final say and approval. No tax payers are comming down to our office to see if they can do anything when our budget gets cut every year. One can only trim so much from fixed cost without cutting service but 7
The whole code argument is useless here at Hearth IMO. First of all, it irritates Elk and is disrespectful towards him.
Like it or not, codes are a part of life. If you don't like them, go live in a country where you can build whatever you want.
Second, if you choose to skirt the law, then so be it. I'm sure Elk and other inspectors are not ignorant to the fact the homeowners build things, install things, etc. without pulling a permit. But know that there are also consequences to your actions. Your home owners insurance may not cover un-permitted additions. Also, if an inspector chooses to come in and poke around, he/she has the option of performing a construction evaluation which can mean at the very least you have to take apart what you have built for the inspector to make sure things are sound. And finally, you can be fined for actions that require a permit. Those fines I'm sure will be far greater than the cost of any permit you may have required in the first place.
-Kevin
Like it or not, codes are a part of life. If you don't like them, go live in a country where you can build whatever you want.
Second, if you choose to skirt the law, then so be it. I'm sure Elk and other inspectors are not ignorant to the fact the homeowners build things, install things, etc. without pulling a permit. But know that there are also consequences to your actions. Your home owners insurance may not cover un-permitted additions. Also, if an inspector chooses to come in and poke around, he/she has the option of performing a construction evaluation which can mean at the very least you have to take apart what you have built for the inspector to make sure things are sound. And finally, you can be fined for actions that require a permit. Those fines I'm sure will be far greater than the cost of any permit you may have required in the first place.
-Kevin
As too dissing the profession. I don't see it as dissing the profession but rather as honoring it...
If an inspection like the one recieved and posted about here was expected and normal there probably wouldn't have been a negative comment. I believe that as an inspector who obviously cares very much about the quality of the work you do. This seems to be evident by your posts Elk. Then as you seem to be dilegent and caring, you should also be happy to see others upset and casting negative comments upon those who do not honor their profession and do not hold it in as high an esteem as yourself.
As a former inspector (OK, I finally admitted it) I was discusted at the shoddy work some inspectors did. As the ordinances did not allow me to inspect my own work, I found other inspectors, knowing my workmanship, would want to just pass my work without carefully checking it. I objected and insisted on a thorough inspection. I felt this would protect me as I am not perfect. I also had to deal with unknowledgable, dishonest (wanting kickbacks), and just plain lusy inspectors. I feel that by welcoming constructive critisism and open discussion about the trade we benefit all those honest, good inspectors. CYA for others in the field would never fly with me. Self policing in the industry is a good thing.
If an inspection like the one recieved and posted about here was expected and normal there probably wouldn't have been a negative comment. I believe that as an inspector who obviously cares very much about the quality of the work you do. This seems to be evident by your posts Elk. Then as you seem to be dilegent and caring, you should also be happy to see others upset and casting negative comments upon those who do not honor their profession and do not hold it in as high an esteem as yourself.
As a former inspector (OK, I finally admitted it) I was discusted at the shoddy work some inspectors did. As the ordinances did not allow me to inspect my own work, I found other inspectors, knowing my workmanship, would want to just pass my work without carefully checking it. I objected and insisted on a thorough inspection. I felt this would protect me as I am not perfect. I also had to deal with unknowledgable, dishonest (wanting kickbacks), and just plain lusy inspectors. I feel that by welcoming constructive critisism and open discussion about the trade we benefit all those honest, good inspectors. CYA for others in the field would never fly with me. Self policing in the industry is a good thing.
Coldinnj, you need to read the previous thread concerning BigErics install. This, I believe, is why Elk felt he was "being dissed". BigEric, don't add fuel to the fire. I'm normally not one to voice my opinion on these matters. And certainly Elk doesn't need any help defending himself, or his profession. But your comment BigEric, was indeed directed in a harmful way. What little I know of Elk is that at the very least he does not deserve such a comment. Frankly, it disgusts me BigEric, that you cannot honor a simple request in the name of goodwill.
Coldinnj, I do understand that there are certainly poor inspectors, and probably those who are unqualified to perform the job. I think this is the case in every profession. I don't see how bitching about the code or having to pay for permits helps anyone. I certainly see very little relevant "discussion" on the subject here. Perhaps Jay H had a bad inspector. And I feel he was looking for an honest answer concerning what a proper inspection should entail. Unfortunately, the discussion then meandered into gripeing about code, and paying the fees, etc. What is the point in that?
Coldinnj, I do understand that there are certainly poor inspectors, and probably those who are unqualified to perform the job. I think this is the case in every profession. I don't see how bitching about the code or having to pay for permits helps anyone. I certainly see very little relevant "discussion" on the subject here. Perhaps Jay H had a bad inspector. And I feel he was looking for an honest answer concerning what a proper inspection should entail. Unfortunately, the discussion then meandered into gripeing about code, and paying the fees, etc. What is the point in that?
I did not read the previous thread. I agree that inspections are a good idea. Most codes (not all) are good. Read some of my previous posts on that. Pulling permits is good in concept however when the information gathered is used for ulterior motives that is not good. However that does not make permits bad, just the way some use the info.
I'm sure that Elk can defend himself just fine without me.
Him and I have had discussions where I do not agree with him, that does not mean that I do not respect him nor that I doubt the accuracy of his statements. Just therw in my 2 cents worth.
Glad to debate with you anytime Elk. We may not always agree but I still respect what you have to say.
Lets not diss inspectors...
Lets dis scientists, engineers and anyone else who in their dastardly ways have informed us of the wrongful ways we do things, the dangers we create and the damage to our environment we do.
Why oh why did they take the blinders off of us. Curse them all
I'm sure that Elk can defend himself just fine without me.
Him and I have had discussions where I do not agree with him, that does not mean that I do not respect him nor that I doubt the accuracy of his statements. Just therw in my 2 cents worth.
Glad to debate with you anytime Elk. We may not always agree but I still respect what you have to say.
Lets not diss inspectors...
Lets dis scientists, engineers and anyone else who in their dastardly ways have informed us of the wrongful ways we do things, the dangers we create and the damage to our environment we do.
Why oh why did they take the blinders off of us. Curse them all
Maybe more states need to adopt the inspection process we have in Massachusetts?
I had to go get my permit, from the building inspector AND had to tell him how I was going to install the stove.
Diagram and materials in the hearthpad, he wasnt keen on Micore until I handed him the spec sheet
I wasnt home when he came for the inspection but I remember him telling me to wait until he came out to start using the stove.
He came the Monday after I finished the job (finished it on a Sunday) and spent some time outside and then some inside before signing off on the install.
I did start a small break-in fire that Sunday evening and he asked the wife as he was leaving "so, how you like the full view of the fire on that stove"
Again, if not for sets of codes and an inspection process we would have a bunch of cement heads burning down their houses asking everyone standing there watching it burn "I dont get it, why'd this happen"
I had to go get my permit, from the building inspector AND had to tell him how I was going to install the stove.
Diagram and materials in the hearthpad, he wasnt keen on Micore until I handed him the spec sheet
I wasnt home when he came for the inspection but I remember him telling me to wait until he came out to start using the stove.
He came the Monday after I finished the job (finished it on a Sunday) and spent some time outside and then some inside before signing off on the install.
I did start a small break-in fire that Sunday evening and he asked the wife as he was leaving "so, how you like the full view of the fire on that stove"
Again, if not for sets of codes and an inspection process we would have a bunch of cement heads burning down their houses asking everyone standing there watching it burn "I dont get it, why'd this happen"
Hi folks, found it strange to log in this morning and see my thread bloom to 2 pages.
I read the manual before I had my stove professionally installed and I watched the installers install it, so I checked the clearances and made sure the stove was installed as per the mfgr's clearances. I would of done the install myself as I am fairly handy, but for $450 delivery and installation, I figured it's worth it. No way I can lift that sucka by myself and I'm single, living alone. So for me, the fire inspection was kind of more for my home owner's insurance purposes. Wrenchmonster is true that those installing wood stoves by themselves, should really check their HO policy on wood stoves. I believe most professional installers will require a town inspection, unless it isn't required or perhaps they are a little shady. My installer actually gave me a little sheet on the whole process too, which was nice. I called my HO policymaker (allstate) and asked them about the wood stove and from what the lady told me, they consider the wood stove a "space heater" with no amendments or anything to my policy. It is best to check your own town for their laws and also your HO policy because if you do have a catastrophic fire, they can try to deny coverage if it is not reported but required by them. YMMV.
I started this thread as a curiosity, not as an attack on any inspector here or otherwise. I had my inspection done back in July when I had the stove installed in late June, and was just curious as to others experiences. It sure was expensive for a 5 minute operation though besides the fact that the building office in my town is only open on certain weekdays from 8-12 noon.
Jay
I read the manual before I had my stove professionally installed and I watched the installers install it, so I checked the clearances and made sure the stove was installed as per the mfgr's clearances. I would of done the install myself as I am fairly handy, but for $450 delivery and installation, I figured it's worth it. No way I can lift that sucka by myself and I'm single, living alone. So for me, the fire inspection was kind of more for my home owner's insurance purposes. Wrenchmonster is true that those installing wood stoves by themselves, should really check their HO policy on wood stoves. I believe most professional installers will require a town inspection, unless it isn't required or perhaps they are a little shady. My installer actually gave me a little sheet on the whole process too, which was nice. I called my HO policymaker (allstate) and asked them about the wood stove and from what the lady told me, they consider the wood stove a "space heater" with no amendments or anything to my policy. It is best to check your own town for their laws and also your HO policy because if you do have a catastrophic fire, they can try to deny coverage if it is not reported but required by them. YMMV.
I started this thread as a curiosity, not as an attack on any inspector here or otherwise. I had my inspection done back in July when I had the stove installed in late June, and was just curious as to others experiences. It sure was expensive for a 5 minute operation though besides the fact that the building office in my town is only open on certain weekdays from 8-12 noon.
Jay
Jay part of my post got lost but last week there was a heated post between the poster I responded to and he dissed my profession I know there are inspectors too lazy to get of their duff and do things right. but to group us all and generalize is wrong, especially when he is inviolation of all known codes and manufactures specs
To that I take exception I honestly feel I do my job to make people safer and try to prevent accidents from happening. On the HVAC end of it I look to add effeciency in whr way heat or cooling is distributed. I use my own time trying to promote good safe installations here. I have never done a drive by inspection. I have to see it before I sign..
I was staying out of this thread till the profession was being mocked
To that I take exception I honestly feel I do my job to make people safer and try to prevent accidents from happening. On the HVAC end of it I look to add effeciency in whr way heat or cooling is distributed. I use my own time trying to promote good safe installations here. I have never done a drive by inspection. I have to see it before I sign..
I was staying out of this thread till the profession was being mocked
I was very nervous waiting for the inspection, checked and measured everything more times than i can count. I was kind of shocked when the fire department inspector and the building inspector both spent less than 3 minutes in my house. They didn't even turn off there vehicles. Came in, said that looks nice, signed the permit and left.
The inspector where I live is tough, but he's fair. I find it hard to believe that if he comes out and does an inspection on something you install and passes it and then your house burns down, that you wouldn't be able to sue him or the borough. But back to my original point. When you do anything yourself, when he shows up he asks you to tell him what the codes are for what you did. Then he does the inspection. If he sees something wrong or just not exactly right, he tells you how to fix it. In my experience, he has always been fair.
pfmg said:
I imagine that is how I might be. I personally would like to get my moneys worth out of an inspection. If I have to pay the $68 mechanical permit fee, then please correct anything I have done wrong/missed/overlooked/forgot. I would want the inspection to help me protect my family and house.
I remember when my previous house was being inspected (I was just the buyer, built buy a cheap homebuilder). I was citing NEC (NFPA 70) with the electrical inspector, meanwhile the construciton supervisor was getting mad he had to bring the house "into code", trying to tell me to be quiet.
So, what should an inspector check?
- Status
Similar threads
