larry4406
Well-known member
I think I would install all of the necessary rough-ins or make it easy to alter later, get the final inspection, then put it in afterwards.
Consequences of unpermitted work
- Thread starter polar8
- Start date
Hilltopmasonry
Well-known member
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2015
- Messages
- 2,167
The reason why they pass or restrict something like that is because They don’t want too many people living in the residence. Obviously if you have a full shower and bath that would accommodate more people living on the property, which they are trying to restrict. That’s why there is that wording in the code restricting how many fixtures are permitted
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
ard
Well-known member
I'm not sure we disagree...too much.
The problem for me is as follows:
1. There should be no legal reason for a governmental agency to declare a home unfit and non-compliant simply due to the passage of time. A job that met code in 1970 should not be declared 'unsafe' in 2017 simply becuase code has changed. It is 'safe' if it remains unsold, yet 'unsafe' if you want to sell it? I wonder if this would survive a serious legal challenge.
2. I have zero problem with an inspection that looks for (a) unsafe issues that have degraded following installation and (b) things that were done without permit
3. Anything done with permits and in compliance with the code at the time MUST be grandfathered.
Here in California there is a regular garden industry of real estate disclosures and inspections. I'm not sure having city/county inspectors doing this would be better (or worse).
In CA, you need to fill out a disclosure. "Are you aware of XYZ" and "was any work done without a permit". Lie on these and you are opening youself to litigation. Then add an inspection by the buyer, the inspector likewise being subject to legal performance requirements. Contrast that with a county inspector who is 100% insulated agaisnt any mstakes or faults. Who's criteria is this odd 'safety' inspection and not any kind of 'was work done without permit' or 'does it meet XYZ building codes'. (Although don't get me wrong, some of the CA inspection stuff is nonsense too. Inspectors doing **** jobs; not knowing what is code for a specific build; winding up realtors and buyers... But at least you can close on a home knowing that work needs to get done, and not be forced to do so to close.)
On that last point, let's say I want to buy a fixer, plan is to tear out the kitchen, redo what I can over time- in a year or two I have my sweat equity firmly in place. Not if I only have 60 days to do it all, with the program we are discussing.,
Finally, I have seen many crappy county inspectors- missing stuff, not entering a crawl space or attic. (The old HVAC inspection with a flashlight shined up or down the hatch.). Forcing people to pay for this work, with little legal recourse, and what appears (based on my read of the statute) to be very imprecise criteria on what is 'safe' seems a recipe for a sham process.
So I agree that making sure people don't buy a disaster is a good idea. I just don't know if thses "30-45 minute" inspections by city employees will do that.
OT I know, but food for thought.
I get and understand .... said so above. The question is would it do what you are saying in an unsafe manner. It's a blanket restriction -- this is what occurs today. It has nothing to do with the size of the property or the size of the main house. Safety -- the restrict what you wish to do with your property.
You can't put a shower in your garage because it would be a problem -- but the neighbor next to you can build a bigger house housing twice as many people with the same size lot and same sewer connections.
Instead of going after the main problem -- illegal rental units and triplexes .. unlawful students ... they go after it another way by restricting property rights.
Hilltopmasonry
Well-known member
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2015
- Messages
- 2,167
we are on the same page, however these inspections are not too crazy. For example they do not require you to upgrade an old electrical system to The new code where a ground wire is required which would be expensive. They do require a simple GFI upgrade which to me is common sense.
A house that was built in 1910 never had smoke detectors. We all know requiring smoke and carbon monoxide detectors in all residence is a really good idea even though the house originally did not have them. Sure people lived in those houses for many years without detectors but I really don’t think it is a bad idea to require all homeowners to install smoke detectors even if the house never originally had them
We have a very large population of undocumented immigrants here in Chicago and the towns and areas that they primarily live then will have like 20 people living in a single-family home. So a lot of towns will have codes and requirements to prevent people from turning the basement and attic into another full living space and a walk-through inspection will confirm that it is not set up as it’s own apartments. One fire killed seven people that were living in an attic that was not meant as living space, of course the electric system in the house could not handle the demand and they had a bunch of extension cords running up there in the winter time with space heaters to keep warm. that was a recipe for disaster and a fire started and they could not get out because of the ladder access was blocked and they were stuck in the attic and they all died. So I do not think building codes and regulations are all that bad. We all know there is more than enough stupid people in this world.
In my example above a lot of people do not pull permits to finish out basements. Obviously they don’t want a paper trail which will increase their taxes but they will add a bedroom down in the basement that does not have a required egress exit. When you go to sell the residence obviously that will be caught with a walk-through inspection.
Back to the OP question personally I would have no issues in doing what I wanted with that bathroom, I was bringing up a point that in the event he was interested in selling the property anytime soon he might have to convert it back to its original condition
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Last edited:
Zeke
Well-known member
Many of the comments here about combined fixtures are missing the point. Yes, the code is saying 2 fixtures — pick any 2. But the gist of it is that if it fits the description of a half bath, it won't fly.
I'd rough in for the toilet and the shower and see what they say. Adding a sink later would be the easiest of the 3. Just make sure a "cleanout" is located in a strategic location.
I'd rough in for the toilet and the shower and see what they say. Adding a sink later would be the easiest of the 3. Just make sure a "cleanout" is located in a strategic location.
BADSIX
Well-known member
Most of these types of questions go to my building inspector... except this one
So far, I have followed the permitting procedure 100% for my garage build. Building, planning, electrical are all by the book. But when it comes to plumbing, there's I might need to break the rules to do what I want.
I want a full bathroom in my garage because it's a 2-story building with a bedroom upstairs. The idea is that it would be for guests. But my city (San Jose CA) will only allow 2 plumbing fixtures in the building. 3 or more (e.g. sink+shower+toilet) makes it a "secondary dwelling" which means I also need to get it permitted as such. But due to my small lot size, a secondary dwelling is not allowed.
I've had 2 plumbers come over and they both said the same thing. Rough in a connection for the shower, and as soon as the inspectors leave, open up the wall and install the shower.
That sounds like a great workaround but I'm wondering what the consequences might be for an illegal shower. Trouble with the insurance company if there's some kind of plumbing issue that results in water damage, and they find out about the illegal shower? Problems when it comes time to sell the house?
The whole thing seems really low-risk overall. But I'm just trying to figure out what the possible consequences might be, if any.
I would install the shower and toilet ruff in for the sink then after all inspections are done install the sink, and live happily ever after.
Jay D.
DGersic
Well-known member
The OP is trying to get around zoning restrictions by doing unpermitted work. That’s possible, of course, but could end badly for him, or somebody after him.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
I have been denied a loan on two properties because of unpermitted work in the last month.
denis4x4
Well-known member
Building inspectors can be your friend! Example: Ordered a prefab barn and had to submit the plans along with an engineering OK for a 90 pound snow load. Barn components were loaded with another barn for Scottsdale AZ. Inspector caught the fact that we did not have the components for the 90 pound snow load. Company had the correct stuff and a crew on site within a week to correct the problem. BTW, the permit for an ag building was $5.
If there's ever a blizzard in Scottsdale, at least one guy has a barn that will survive!
If there's ever a blizzard in Scottsdale, at least one guy has a barn that will survive!
6768rogues
Banned
In NY, a house has to comply with the code that was in effect when the permit was issued. In the case of renovation or additions, the part remodeled or added has to be in compliance with the code at the time the permit was issued for that work. When adding space, sometimes there is something in the original part of the house that becomes non compliant by the addition and those things can be looked at. For example, there is a requirement for natural light in occupied spaces. If the addition takes out the required windows, the original space would be non compliant and would have to be made compliant. Changes or additions cannot make an existing space non compliant or if it is already non compliant but preexisting, it cannot become more non compliant.
If the code changes after the permit is issued but before completion of the work, the new provisions do not apply to the work.
The only retroactive provisions in the code pertain to smoke and CO detectors.
What you want to do is so minor and easily removed, so I would just do it and keep quiet about it.
If the code changes after the permit is issued but before completion of the work, the new provisions do not apply to the work.
The only retroactive provisions in the code pertain to smoke and CO detectors.
What you want to do is so minor and easily removed, so I would just do it and keep quiet about it.
Last edited:
ard
Well-known member
Someone change a GFCI without pulling a permit? Or more extensive than that??
PassnThru
Well-known member
I suggested a combo fixture because the OP stated he can have two fixtures. He never said he can't have a shower. I guess one would have to ask the AHJ, exactly what is and isn't permitted.
georgiadave
Well-known member
http://dolingerlaw.com/land-use/cal...tting-requirements-restrictions-granny-units/
California recently passed a law which is binding on local governments that allow Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU) in existing housing. I believe you may have a way to make your changes legally.
California recently passed a law which is binding on local governments that allow Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU) in existing housing. I believe you may have a way to make your changes legally.
BADSIX
Well-known member
i'm doing a remodel on a 4 bedroom 2 bath house. my local inspectors have been great, there really going out of there way to work with me and show me how to do things so they will pass inspection. 10 years ago this would not happen they were strict by the book a-holes.
Jay D.
apollo11
Banned
^^^ this
don't worry about inspectors. Once your building is done, they will never be back
Specs
Well-known member
Useless suggestion of the day:
Run pipes from the site to sewer, install cistern on side of the building, install electric water heater.
During dry spells fill cistern with garden hose water.... the main thing is since thats a remote system, :stewie griffin high pitch voice: maybe different rules apply... maybe a loophole... maybe an idea others will follow? Whole neighborhood hosing cisterns?
Nah i got nothing
Run pipes from the site to sewer, install cistern on side of the building, install electric water heater.
During dry spells fill cistern with garden hose water.... the main thing is since thats a remote system, :stewie griffin high pitch voice: maybe different rules apply... maybe a loophole... maybe an idea others will follow? Whole neighborhood hosing cisterns?
Nah i got nothing
minytrker
Well-known member
Im so glad I live out in the country in Texas. I completly remodeled my house and built a shop and only needed a permit for my septic system to get redone.
I would rough it in, pass inspection and then finished it if it were me.
I would rough it in, pass inspection and then finished it if it were me.
steveo1o9
Well-known member
I would absolutely rough in the shower and install a small stall shower after inspection. Hell you could frame it up and just tell them it is going to be a linen closet. If a future sale could be an issue just take out the shower and actually make it a closet. As long as you have a plumbing permit for the allowed work it would take a good amount of digging to figure out the shower isn't technically allowed. As long as it won't be rented there is no way it will be caught.
sberry
Banned
Just do it.
6768rogues
Banned
I was a county inspector in a past life. There are two kinds of inspectors:
The type that considers himself a public servant who is on the job to assist people in meeting the minimum standards prescribed by the code.
The type who thinks he is a code cop and just wants to bust everyone for anything possibly deviating from the code. Usually these inspectors have a chip on their shoulder and crave power.
The first type has an easy rewarding life. He can run into a client in the supermarket and have a pleasant conversation. The second type is hated by everyone and usually gets fired after ******* off a friend of his supervisor. One of these guys was in an adjacent jurisdiction. One day he dropped dead and I was amazed how many people commented that they would piss on his grave.
The type that considers himself a public servant who is on the job to assist people in meeting the minimum standards prescribed by the code.
The type who thinks he is a code cop and just wants to bust everyone for anything possibly deviating from the code. Usually these inspectors have a chip on their shoulder and crave power.
The first type has an easy rewarding life. He can run into a client in the supermarket and have a pleasant conversation. The second type is hated by everyone and usually gets fired after ******* off a friend of his supervisor. One of these guys was in an adjacent jurisdiction. One day he dropped dead and I was amazed how many people commented that they would piss on his grave.
Last edited:
CJ7VFR
Well-known member
I agree with this 100 percent!
The inspector I used for our current house was the first type like yourself. He was great to deal with, for both myself and the homeowner of the place we bought. He went thru the entire house and came up with a three page report, which looked like a lot but it was broken down into three sections.
The first section included things that were actual violations of building, plumbing and electrical codes that needed to be addressed for safety, such as grounds missing at some receptacles and things like that.
The second section included things that, depending on the interpretation of the codes by any particular inspector, may or may not have been completely up to code, but they were not safety concerns, and the work was done up to the minimum standards of the industry (building, plumbing, electrical). It was these items that he said where not going to burn the house down, and were not anything that needed to be addressed via a code violation like section one. We could, if we wanted to, bring these up to the owner to be addressed if we wanted to. We chose not to bring these up.
The third section included things that the owner did that were above and beyond what any code said, and he said these were the things that made the house a great buy. Some things included extra receptacles in all the rooms, extra outdoor receptacles, extra outdoor lighting, extra insulation in the attic, and so on.
He was a great person to deal with, and best of all when he met me at the house to do the inspection he made sure to wear little booties over his shoes inside the house (the owner liked that), anything he moved to inspect an area he put back in the exact same spot, and he actually replaced two worn out receptacles that were in the garage because he had a few in his truck. Even the owner thought that was great.
So I agree that the right inspector can either be helpful and go above and beyond for his clients, or he can be a real jackass who seems to be pissed off that people asked him to do his job and pay him.
Jim
I have never heard of a public code official going to a pre inspection .. and producing a report.
ScottsGT
Well-known member
larry4406
Well-known member
I think there is some confusion here regarding public code official versus private home inspector.....
ard
Well-known member
yeah.
WhiskeyRanger
Well-known member
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2015
- Messages
- 398
I'm currently unfucking a house that was done in an area with no ordinances and no code enforcement. What a joy that is.
On the bright side, I may actually get everything fixed before it burns down!
CJ7VFR
Well-known member
He was a private inspector. He is a retired Mechanical Engineer from a large aerospace company.
His background as an engineer, and the thorough inspection he told me about when I first contacted him to get an estimate of how much he would charge for my inspection, was the reason I went with him.
He was not cheap by any means, but he was very, very thorough. He made me walk around the entire house with him as he inspected everything, except when he went up onto the roof to inspect the shingles, the chimney, the gutters, the attachment of the power lines to the house and the roof structure as a whole. He said I had to wait on the ground until he was done.
He even told me things to do every year like exercise valve handles to keep them from seizing from non-use and getting stuck, putting a small bucket under the water heater spigot and draining out some water to help remove deposits, and stuff like that.
He was telling me he constantly was going to classes to keep all of his certifications up to date, and to learn about all the updates to building, plumbing and electrical codes so he could be a better inspector.
Jim
Last edited:
CJ7VFR
Well-known member
And replacing bad outlets! Kudos to him!!
He said the most common thing that fails in a home inspection is a receptacle either not being wired correctly, not working at all, or the contacts being too loose to hold plugs. So he keeps a bunch of simple items in his truck to help homeowners who are buying a house.
His fee was not cheap, but he was extremely thorough and honest. I guess he keeps some wiggle room in his fee to be able to keep a stock of simple items in his inventory.
He even had several colors of receptacles and switches so that if any were bad he could replace them for you with ones that matched what he removed.
Jim
Last edited:
Sharpest
Well-known member
6768rogues
Banned
I bought my house at auction. It needed work and there was no way it would pass an inspection. It was sold as is, where is, no contingencies. I was the high bidder and it was mine, the whole process took about 20 minutes.
