DIY Home Improvement Forum banner

Building code violation

6K views 18 replies 9 participants last post by  fetzo 
#1 ·
Hi Everyone,


I have a question regarding building codes.

I am in the process of buying a house. When I did the home inspection, I found out that the bathroom does not have an adequate vapor barrier---the house is not built to code. The home was built after the vapor barrier code was in effect

Now the current owner and their realtor claim that it is not an defect, as the inspector can not confirm that it is a defect. The current owner does not feel that she should have to lower the price or fix the problem with the lack of a vapor barrier.

Do I have any legal ground to stand on, if I were to void the agreement?
 
#5 ·
Hi Everyone,


I have a question regarding building codes.

I am in the process of buying a house. When I did the home inspection, I found out that the bathroom does not have an adequate vapor barrier---the house is not built to code. The home was built after the vapor barrier code was in effect

Now the current owner and their realtor claim that it is not an defect, as the inspector can not confirm that it is a defect. The current owner does not feel that she should have to lower the price or fix the problem with the lack of a vapor barrier.

Do I have any legal ground to stand on, if I were to void the agreement?
Just because a home inspector finds something wrong doesn't mean the seller has to act on that information.

Some buyers get the idea in their head that every negative connotation on a report means the price is going down.
 
#2 ·
I would think if it were not built to code then someone is responsible for the fine due to it or for bringing it up to code. That would be them now or you after you've bought it potentially right?
If you tell the City permit folks that it is not up to code,won't they simply come out and write the owners or builders a fine?
I'm curious of this myself,having bought a new house that I have a feeling might be sub-par in a couple departments or at least not as advertised.
 
#4 ·
I would think if it were not built to code then someone is responsible for the fine due to it or for bringing it up to code. That would be them now or you after you've bought it potentially right?
If you tell the City permit folks that it is not up to code,won't they simply come out and write the owners or builders a fine?
How? Based on a home inspector's report and the cries of a homebuyer who got cold feet?

I'm curious of this myself,having bought a new house that I have a feeling might be sub-par in a couple departments or at least not as advertised.
 
#3 ·
A home inspection is not a code inspection since who knows when the works done and what the code was then.

A home inspections for structure, safety (carbon monoxide, falls, tripping, steps, etc.), functionability (do things work during a short test if they can be operated) and to identify major upcoming cost expenditures (roofs, furnaces, etc.). In some ways a home inspection is more severe than the current building code and in some ways items not meeting current code cannot be noted.

The question of the price is between you and the seller. If he will not make some adjustment, you can walk away.
 
#6 · (Edited)
There are many, many older homes that are not built to current code requirements. As time goes on, there are more and more revisions (as technology advances) with building practices and in the codes themselves. This could "effectively" label, more and more homes as being non-code compliant. The fact of the matter is, they are not labeled as such.

The codes allows older homes (like the one mentioned with no "bathroom vapor barrier")to be in a live-able/inhabitable condition. It is not like there is an issue with dangerous material (i.e. - Lead paint, asbestos, mold, etc).

....The home was built after the vapor barrier code was in effect.
That makes the home code compliant to it's time period. That is allowed. It is not a "code-violation".

....
Now the current owner and their realtor claim that it is not an defect, as the inspector can not confirm that it is a defect. The current owner does not feel that she should have to lower the price or fix the problem with the lack of a vapor barrier.
It is not a defect that would be considered "code-enforcable".....just as old drafty windows, in an older home, cannot be considered a "code violation".

....
Do I have any legal ground to stand on, if I were to void the agreement?
Sorry to break the news to you, but, you don't have legal ground, nor a legal leg (or even a legal toe) to stand on ... in terms of a code violation for an older home.
 
#8 ·
Currently, there is no specific code required for vapor barriers in bathroom walls. There are codes regarding exterior walls, insulation, and thermal envelopes.

N1102.5 MOISTURE CONTROL. The building design shall not create conditions of accelerated deterioration from moisture condensation. Above-grade frame walls, floors and ceilings not ventilated to allow moisture to escape shall be provided with an approved vapor retarder. The vapor retarder shall be installed on the warm-in-winter side of the thermal insulation.

Bathroom walls do not rot, unless they experience direct water and moisture intrusion (like a shower or tub area with leaks).

There are codes regarding bathroom ventilation, to remove airborne moisture.

Bathroom Mechanical Ventilation Code:
M1507 - MECHANICAL VENTILATION.
Minimum requirement for one and two family dwellings.
Table M1507.3
Bathroom -Toilet Room
Mechanical exaust capicity of 50 cfm intermittent or 20 cfm continuous.

That's it.
 
#9 ·
Do I have any legal ground to stand on, if I were to void the agreement?

disclaimer - not an real estate agent/ broker.

First, it sounds like you are asking if it's ok to walk from the deal, not leagally force the seller to fix it, correct?

We have bought/sold 5 houses and last one we did w/o agents. In CA, my understanding of a typical contract (if there is such a thing) is there is an inspection contigency. A contract would specify a reasonable time frame for the buyer to get inspections and lift the contingency. The goal being the buyer checks out the house and is aware of what is being purchased. It is to protect the buyer. If the report has something "bad",the buyer doesn't lift the contingency by the stated time, and the contract terms are not met.

I do not believe the intent of this contigency is to give a buyer an easy way out for getting cold feet. Such an inspection is also not meant to be a punch list for the seller to fix. Sure it's worth a discussion on covering costs to see if the parties could come to an agreement.

You would have to consult a real estate attorney to know for sure. If it really bothers you that much, I would walk. If it is something petty and you're trying to get out, the seller might (legally) be able to enforce the contract, but that's not too realistic. Getting a deposit back is another matter. If I were the seller in my area where real estate is still moving, even with the current situation, I would hold the door for you as you walked.
 
#10 ·
Often a home inspection is the purchaser's best/only chance to evaluate a home.

The purchaser has no history beyond what the owner chooses to offer in a "disclosure". The purchaser's only exposure is a few hours when the home is "dressed-up" and looking its temporary best - especially in the days of the TV "staging", "pimping" and fooling with cheap temporary fixes and hiding tactics.

The owner knows or should know all the problems and he will not divulge any more than necessary and is told to hide by the "Realtor".

I have conducted pre-sale home inspections for sellers and the problems I found were pointed out to the owner and listing "Realtor". One common comment was cover it up so the buyer cannot see it and makes sure the pre-purchase inspector has to move something to see the problem, which a home inspector is not allowed to do in a home without the owners permission (who is not there by instruction). - That is the reason you need a good, certified home inspector that knows the ropes of finding what is not visable during during "visual inspection". A good inspector can "sense" what does not look right - like the junk in the basement piled against one wall or big tapestries and furniture hiding wall cracks.
 
#11 ·
AWB,

I think you read the post backwards. He said the bath was buildt AFTER, not BEFORE the requirement. so it should apply. IF he wants to push it, he should go to the building department and see if a permit and inspection were performed. IF it was, and he can't prove newer construction or remodel after that fact, then he is stuck. If it wasn't or there can be show to be non-permitted work, then just turn them into the building dept.

The rules vary from city to city, so you need to check local codes and history.
 
#13 ·
AWB,

I think you read the post backwards. He said the bath was buildt AFTER, not BEFORE the requirement. so it should apply.....
That's not what I got from the original post. Did I miss something? (I do, from time to time...)

.....I found out that the bathroom does not have an adequate vapor barrier---the house is not built to code. The home was built after the vapor barrier code was in effect.....
 
#17 ·
Hi everyone

Ok, to clarify the background and your questions..

I gave a bid on a house built 2001 and the only contingency I had was the home inspection. The inspector found a bulge on the exterior outside wall together with icicles.


Pics can be found here:

http://virginlake.bravehost.com/content/DSC_3713_large.html


http://virginlake.bravehost.com/content/DSC_3915_large.html



When inspecting inside the house this was found

http://virginlake.bravehost.com/content/DSC_3875_large.html


Picture taken from the opening of the jacuzzi and obviously no vapor barrier to the external wall.


There is a code that is in place since 1999

http://www.legis.state.wi.us/rsb/code/comm/comm022.pdf


Comm 22.22 Vapor retarders
(2) Framed Assemblies. In all framed walls,floors and ceilings, the vapor retarder shall be installed on the warm side of the thermal insulation. The vapor retarder shall cover the exposed insulation and the interior face of studs, joists and rafters. No vapor retarder is required in the box sill.




Also the inspector found that the radon level was 15,9 pCi/L, shall be less then 4.0
The inspector wrote up the radon level and the bulge/icicles as a defect.


The seller had the builder of the house to come and see the bulge.

This is his report:


"XX contacted me a few weeks ago stating that there was an issues on a house he was selling that I had built, and be asked if I would check it out.

I contacted the owner and headed over the next day. I was told the inspector had found a bulge in the wall behind tbe whirlpool tub and there wasn't any vapor barrier behind the tub and the inspector thought that the bulge resulted from moisture coming from that area around the tub from the lack of vapor barrier. I explained to xx that it is very conmmon to find whirlpool tubs with no vapor barrier behind them because they are in it self a vapor barrier.
Build a house goes as following but not from the start; Foundation, framing, roofing, heating, plumbing, electrical. insulation, vapor barrier.

The plumbers install the tubs prior to the insulatoin so the plumbers actually install the insulation behind the tubs they install. My plumber that works for numerous other builders doesn't not install vapor barrier. Once the tub is installed and the door is fastened the tub creates its own vapor barier because the tub is made out of fiberglass and is waterproof.
Prior to installing the insulation, the builder needs to call for a rough inspections which does include all the plumbers work. After this inspection the insulator are brought in to install the insulation and install the vapor barrier. The inspector signed off and passed all work at xx.


Findings on the roof
Once I jumped on the roof I noticed that the bulge was at least 4 feet away to the south of were the tub was placed in the house and there was also a closet that separated the two concerns .
I started pulling of the siding from above the truss line and instantly noticed what I thought the problem was. With the record snow and weather we are having snow had
built blown up through the siding and had built up behind the siding in the area in question right above the peak of the garage. The snow was melting and dripping onto the wall sheeting/OBS. the one sheet that was wet had expanded. I popped the siding off in the area that bad been affected and let it dry over the warm weekend we had two weeks ago. I also cut a relief in it centered on a stud and nailed and screwed it back in place, and re fastened all the sidings the bulge is now gone.
In my professional options I feel that the issue was from the snow, not the area under the
bot tub, and to be honest, I can't believe the inspector even thought that was the case.,

yy"



I was notified by the seller that everything now was ok. As I don't think that snow could cause the bulge and the icicles I said that I didn't believe that the fix was adequate and would like to have an independant inspection. After some discussions with the attorneys that now was involved I got the ok to do a non invasive inspection, which I had to pay for.


 
#18 ·
Here is the independent inspectors report
"
The subject of this report will be named the ‘ice event’
Reason for the inspection and the report:
1. Attempt to verify that the work performed by the seller was done right.
2. The cause of the ‘ice event’ needed to be determined so corrective action can be taken if necessary so it doesn’t happen again.
About the ‘type’ of inspection:
The inspection was limited to non-invasive techniques. I used a thermal imaging device to look for temperature differences on the surface of the drywall that might indicate water within the wall, and I used visual inspection.
What was found:
Thermal imaging did not detect any temperature differences of the interior surface of the drywall that might be interpreted as water in the drywall or water in the wall cavity.
Visual inspection of the attic floor, near the exit of the dryer vent, showed evidence that a little water had been there (ponding), but the majority of the current wetting was on the gable sheathing.
Visual inspection of the surface of the wall sheathing, (the OSB) near where the ‘ice event’ happened, visible from the garage attic, showed no evidence of water. Visual inspection found a broken dryer vent in the attic. The aluminum duct of the dryer vent was detached from the plastic flapper assembly.
Results of the inspection:
Encouraging, but not conclusive.
1. Only invasive inspection of the area can be conclusive to determine whether or not there
is moisture in the wall cavity(s).
2. I am fairly confident of my conclusion as to the cause of the ‘ice event’, but conditions to
duplicate the event will not happen again until next winter.
2
Inspectors conclusions:
All clues indicate the cause of the ‘ice event’ is a faulty (broken and detached) dryer vent.
Why did the dryer vent break?
1. Lack of maintenance due to inaccessibility, and
2. Buildup of ice due to lack of maintenance
Here’s how this happens:
When the temperature outside is colder than the temperature inside, small quantities of warm moist (relatively) air exit the building due to the ‘stack’ effect. One location where this will occur is through the second floor clothes dryer duct/vent, due to it’s location high in the structure. Think of the second floor dryer vent ductwork as a little chimney.
As this trickle of warm air leaving the building, via the ‘little chimney’, reaches the cold surface of the vent flappers on the exterior wall, the moisture (water vapor) in the air will condense. If it is cold enough, the condensation will freeze. As more air passes, ice will continue to build until the hole allowing the air to pass is closed. So long as the little flappers are shut, the quantity of ice will be small, because it won’t take very much ice to freeze the flappers shut. Once the vent is frozen shut, the air will cease to flow out and the build-up of ice will stop.
Now, however, let’s say one or more of the little flappers is stuck open because of lint, particularly the upper flapper. The lint is there because you can’t easily get to the vent to clean it, and because the vent is clearly out of sight and out of mind. The build-up of ice would be quite significant. Inches of ice could build in an effort to close the 4” diameter hole as air continued to flow across the top of the ice. This much ice would be significant enough to break things due to expansion, or hold the duct frozen in place while the plastic vent expanded from warmth when the sun hit it. This much ice would be significant enough to pour considerable amounts water down the siding when the dryer was turned on and the warm air from the dryer melted the ice.
It must be assumed the dryer vent was not broken when it was installed, because contractors don’t build broken houses, so how did it break?
The only plausible explanation is contributing factors due to the build-up of ice.
If the dryer vent is repaired to it’s original design configuration, it must be assumed the same thing will happen again because:
1. It is still not in a readily accessible area to perform maintenance, and
2. It is still in a location that is very far out of sight and out of mind until something bad happens.
There is one other factor in the equation. Air pressure in the duct created due to a vent that is frozen shut. Pressure would certainly build, but I do not think the air pressure created by the dryer fan alone would be enough to ‘blow apart’ the dryer vent. However, the air pressure wouldn’t help the situation either, and it cannot be ruled out as a contributing factor."
At this point I didn't wanna pursue buying the house, how would I know that there are no issues with the attic? My insurance company will not pay for any mold issues as the house does not have a vapor barier, in this cause not caused by this, but I'm sure they will blame on it when it comes to pay out money.
I hope this gives you a better understanding of what's going on.

Thanks
Erik
 
#19 ·
Here is the independent inspectors report

"The subject of this report will be named the ‘ice event’
Reason for the inspection and the report:

1. Attempt to verify that the work performed by the seller was done right
2. The cause of the ‘ice event’ needed to be determined so corrective
action can be taken if necessary so it doesn’t happen again.


About the ‘type’ of inspection:

The inspection was limited to non-invasive techniques. I used a thermal imaging device to look for temperature differences on the surface of the drywall that might indicate water within the wall, and I used visual inspection.

What was found:
Thermal imaging did not detect any temperature differences of the interior surface of the drywall that might be interpreted as water in the drywall or water in the wall cavity.

Visual inspection of the attic floor, near the exit of the dryer vent, showed evidence that a little water had been there (ponding), but the majority of the current wetting was on the gable sheathing.

Visual inspection of the surface of the wall sheathing, (the OSB) near where the ‘ice event’ happened, visible from the garage attic, showed no evidence of water. Visual inspection found a broken dryer vent in the attic. The aluminum duct of the dryer vent was detached from the plastic flapper assembly.

Results of the inspection:

Encouraging, but not conclusive.

1. Only invasive inspection of the area can be conclusive to determine whether or not there is moisture in the wall cavity(s).

2. I am fairly confident of my conclusion as to the cause of the ‘ice event’, but conditions to duplicate the event will not happen again until next winter. Inspectors conclusions:

All clues indicate the cause of the ‘ice event’ is a faulty (broken and detached) dryer vent.
Why did the dryer vent break?
1. Lack of maintenance due to inaccessibility, and
2. Buildup of ice due to lack of maintenance

Here’s how this happens:

When the temperature outside is colder than the temperature inside, small
quantities of warm moist (relatively) air exit the building due to the ‘stack’ effect. One location where this will occur is through the second floor clothes dryer duct/vent, due to it’s location high in the structure. Think of the second floor dryer vent ductwork as a little chimney.

As this trickle of warm air leaving the building, via the ‘little chimney’, reaches the cold surface of the vent flappers on the exterior wall, the moisture (water vapor) in the air will condense. If it is cold enough, the condensation will freeze. As more air passes, ice will continue to build until the hole allowing the air to pass is closed. So long as the little flappers are shut, the quantity of ice will be small, because it won’t take very much ice to freeze the flappers shut. Once the vent is frozen shut, the air will cease to flow out and the build-up of ice will stop.

Now, however, let’s say one or more of the little flappers is stuck open because of lint, particularly the upper flapper. The lint is there because you can’t easily get to the vent to clean it, and because the vent is clearly out of sight and out of mind. The build-up of ice would be quite significant. Inches of ice could build in an effort to close the 4” diameter hole as air continued to flow across the top of the ice. This much ice would be significant enough to break things due to expansion, or hold the duct frozen in place while the plastic vent expanded from warmth when the sun hit it.

This much ice would be significant enough to pour considerable amounts water down the siding when the dryer was turned on and the warm air from the dryer melted the ice.

It must be assumed the dryer vent was not broken when it was installed, because contractors don’t build broken houses, so how did it break?

The only plausible explanation is contributing factors due to the build-up of ice.
If the dryer vent is repaired to it’s original design configuration, it must be assumed the same thing will happen again because:

1. It is still not in a readily accessible area to perform maintenance, and It is still in a location that is very far out of sight and out of mind until something bad happens.

There is one other factor in the equation. Air pressure in the duct created due to a vent that is frozen shut. Pressure would certainly build, but I do not think the air pressure created by the dryer fan alone would be enough to ‘blow apart’ the dryer vent. However, the air pressure wouldn’t help the situation either, and it cannot be ruled out as a contributing factor."


At this point I didn't wanna pursue buying the house, how would I know that there are no issues with the attic? My insurance company will not pay for any mold issues as the house does not have a vapor barier, in this cause not caused by this, but I'm sure they will blame on it when it comes to pay out money.

I hope this gives you a better understanding of what's going on.



Thanks
Erik
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top