2005 House Bill 4507 (Establish discipline board for building inspectors )

[Comments on this legislation] [Post new comment] [Text and Analysis] [Add to Watch List]
[Previous] [Next]

Introduced by Rep. Rick Baxter (R) on March 16, 2005, to establish a state building inspector and mechanical trades inspector disciplinary board to review and rule on complaints of negligence, incompetence, and improper conduct by inspectors, and to authorize penalties ranging from censure to jail, restitution and a $10,000 civil fine on violators. The bill also imposes stricter standards on inspectors, and provides more explicit definitions that would limit the ability of inspectors to impose expansive interpretations of regulations.
- Referred to the House Commerce Committee on March 16, 2005.

Most Recent Comments

1) Building code is junk [by Anonymous Citizen on July 24, 2005]
A house built up to "code" is really no house at all but a assemblage of cheap absconded materials. Capitolism rules the roost, the builders buy the cheapest bunch crap for the money and then charge like it was built by master free masons. Let the buyer beware! If someone says to you "your house was built to code" is in a sence saying your buying junk and the builders liability is absolved. Builder makes the buck.
Bottom line is you need to find and pay for a good builder- you get what you pay for and the building inpector could care less. The building code is worthless-if you want something done right do it yourself as the saying goes.
Reply

Line

2) Building Inspection Repeal [by Anonymous Citizen on July 23, 2005]
Building inspections are a complete waste of time, as the story above illustrates. Half of the building inspectors are incompetent and lazy. The other half are overworked. The net result is home remodeling & construction is much more expensive and time-consuming. The only reason for having building inspection, "the protection of the public" doesn't happen anyway.
If you really want to protect yourself, buy insurance against incompetent builders, or hire your own inspector who will work for you, instead of using the county's guy who doesn't really inspect the work of his friends and is over-critical of out-of-county builders.
Throw out the whole useless concept.
Reply

Line

3) Building Inspector Penalties [by kolby on July 21, 2005]
I purchased a home that had an addition being built when I originally viewed it. In the sale, I required the then-owner to get a final inspection from the county. After I moved in, we found no less than 20 building code violations, including no insulation, improper and missing fire stops, faulty wiring, and that the space required seperate heating.

The building inspectors excuse? "I am only one person, I was busy that day, they told me everything was ok...."

$8,750 later, I was able to use the space. The countys answer? "Sorry, we have no responsibility to the individuals, only the public as a whole."

Do I think there should be penalties for this type of conduct? You bet! And, the county should insure (likely through the purchase of an insurance policy) that they can stand behind the assertations of quality made by their inspectors.

"Too busy" to look for insulation? "They told me" they were going to hang the 18 sheets of drywall? These excuses can not be tolerated, and the legislature should prevent them.
Reply

Line

View Full Conversation