Whitehorse Daily Star

Image title

Photo by Vince Fedoroff

WOES BROUGHT TO PUBLIC ATTENTION – Michael Buurman holds a copy of a building inspection report at last Monday’s city council meeting. Inset Pat Ross

Problems with building inspections exposed

After spending $200,000 to have a garden suite built on his property,

By Stephanie Waddell on June 26, 2017

After spending $200,000 to have a garden suite built on his property, Michael Buurman says he’ll likely have to go into even greater debt for the repairs now required on the site.

Much of the issue, he argued at last Monday’s council meeting, stems from the city’s building inspection process.

“I feel the public deserves to know this,” Buurman said, after outlining the series of events that has seen him now faced with the repairs.

As he recalled, he trusted his contractor to do the work properly and the city to do its due diligence when it comes to building inspections.

Since the garden suite was built though, the drain pipe freezes on a regular basis.

Buurman finds himself in a situation where he’s required to pay for work to be done to fix it because the contractor who did the work on the property has since gone bankrupt.

Buurman said that he, as the property owner, pulled the necessary permits and had the contractor do the work.

Not being a builder, electrician nor such, he trusted his contractor to meet all the requirements outlined in the permits. And he expected the city to make note of any issues in its inspections.

Not seeing any violations listed on the building inspection report, Buurman paid his contractor in full.

He later learned there were issues of the contractor not having arranged for inspections at points during the build when they were supposed to happen.

“Why was I not informed?” he asked council.

Pat Ross, the city’s manager of land and building services, explained Friday that it’s not unusual for a residential builder to request a late inspection call, rather than contacting the city for the inspection when he or she was scheduled to.

Builders honestly forget, they may have thought the property owner was doing that part of the work, or they may be dealing with the challenges from a number of construction projects, Ross told the Star.

Typically, inspections are done about five or six times throughout the construction of a house at very specific points to make sure it meets building code and city bylaw standards.

In cases where the inspection is done late and work may be covered up, Ross said the city may ask for confirmation by a structural engineer that the work was done properly or ask for the contractor to go back and uncover the work to show it was done right.

In rare cases, a stop-work order could be put in place while the issues are sorted out, Ross said.

In cases where the inspector finds issues during a build, they can call for the builder to correct the issue, which then has to be inspected again before it can be signed off on.

Signing off on a building inspection, Ross explained, is not a guarantee on the house but rather the city making sure building code and bylaw regulations have been met.

In this case, he noted, all those requirements had been met and the inspections were signed off.

Typically, where there are deficiencies found, the contractor works with the property owner to correct them.

Ross acknowledged the city could work to better inform property owners of situations where a contractor is making late inspection calls or other such issues.

“We are taking steps,” he said.

He highlighted a proposed electronic system the city is currently testing out and aiming to have in place where property owners would be able to follow the inspection process along.

In the meantime, Ross said, the department has committed to contacting the property owner by phone when such issues come up.

During discussion last Monday night, council members also suggested the situation highlights the importance of “buyer beware,” as Coun. Samson Hartland described it.

However, it’s also important that the city provide information to the public about the process for permits, building inspections and so on when it comes to building a home.

Mike Gau, the city’s director of development services, said that while the city does have information, there is likely a need to make it more readily available.

Mayor Dan Curtis was absent from last Monday’s meeting, with Coun. Rob Fendrick serving as acting mayor.

Comments (21)

Up 1 Down 0

Mike on Feb 1, 2018 at 9:41 am

I have had to make the inspectors call contractors on code violations that are pretty clear. They didn't want to rock the boat. In the end they passed every inspection until the end. Then they failed it due to code violations that I was continually pushing the inspector on. Ended up in court because the contractor felt that all inspections had passed so they were in the clear. The city has protection for this. If they pass everything and it still fails the home owner is responsible. Permits are only a tax grab. The City is not doing their job. Their ridiculous list of codes that is ever increasing is pretty clear but not enforced by inspectors. The home owners have no protection. The city walks away pretty quick after the fact. They shove enough building codes down our throats and then do not follow them. Permit costs go up and you don't get much in return. Pretty pathetic. Placing the responsibility on the home owner to ensure the building codes are met. Who ever the contractor is, the inspector is supposed to ensure that codes are met to protect the homeowner. Any defense of the inspectors is indefensible. No accountability. Typical government. Accountability is only for the public.

Up 0 Down 6

Tradesman on Jul 2, 2017 at 5:11 pm

Who is the contractor? Who did the plumbing rough-in? Why was it not inspected? Also, how did Buurman spend 200k on a garden suite??? Something fishy about this story. This situation is 100% avoidable by hiring the right contractor. Stop pretending you know what you're doing because you watch HGTV and get better references!!!

Up 9 Down 1

Groucho d'North on Jul 2, 2017 at 11:53 am

This issue is about assuring quality control in the building or alterations of a house, perhaps the largest single investment the average Canadian will ever make. At various levels of government there are agencies who have the responsibility to ensure the standards of work - as defined in numerous regulations and codes - are met as they should be. Now it appears that these regulators are pushing back to how well they should perform their jobs and who is responsible for errors made in the construction, it's inspection and approval.
Lives were lost to carbon monoxide poisoning a few years back due to errors and omissions in inspecting a home heating system, so this issue is more than just about money and who pays what. Perhaps it’s time for our well-paid governments to develop quality control processes that work and enforce building standards for the safety, comfort and investment protection that home owners expect?

Up 13 Down 3

Capitan on Jun 29, 2017 at 10:18 pm

With all due respect to Pat Ross, I don't think he's really responding to the issue. What does a future electronic system that informs the homeowner about inspections have to do with the fundamental problem that confidence in inspections is shaken?

I wonder if part of the problem is that city staff sometimes seem somewhat intimidated/overly impressed with contractors and developers. While you don't want an adversarial relationship, there needs to be an understanding that the inspection is meaningful and boundaries are set. Sure "we're all in this together" is ideal, but you can't always get that.

Then again, they might just be understaffed.

Up 8 Down 1

Atom on Jun 29, 2017 at 6:50 pm

If you're concerned about the building inspectors abilities, don't look to home inspectors or appraisers to assure you. They get their money for nothin and their checks aren't free...not even close.....see what I did there

Up 14 Down 2

CoW inspections not worth the paper they are written on on Jun 28, 2017 at 4:17 pm

Just spent 100K+ replacing a roof built with rafters that spanned twice the distance allowed under the Canada Building Code at the time it was built. All approved by CoW inspectors back then. In other jurisdictions, engineer stamps are required for these kinds of projects. Without these, CoW inspections are just a tax grab and provide absolutely zero consumer protection: the Municipal Act even indemnifies the inspectors!

Up 20 Down 2

Gloria Boisvert on Jun 27, 2017 at 11:53 pm

More than a month after I bought property I had an inspection on a new woodstove installed. The woodstove and the chimney passed but the inspector decided that the oil tank did not pass. It was not part of the inspection and had already been approved for the former owner. I am now in a legal bind should I ever decide I want to sell. By the way the inspector opened the inspection by the former owner two months after I and my daughter bought it. Would someone from the city care to reply? I don't think they will. What is your vote?

Up 28 Down 1

Michelle on Jun 27, 2017 at 3:24 pm

The building inspection process is a joke. I had work done at my house. New concrete steps installed. The contactor brings me a signed off inspection report from the City and I made a progress payment. Shortly after, someone pointed out how uneven the steps were. I made a follow up call to the city and they returned and agreed that the steps were not up to code and were actually a dangerous tripping hazard. Their excuse was they did not understand what they were there for to inspect. They issued the permit and signed off on the work but they did not know what they were inspecting. And I was the one out of pocket. If the City is going to take the role of issuing building permits and inspections, the should get it right otherwise it is a waste of our time and money.

Up 19 Down 0

plumber on Jun 27, 2017 at 12:13 pm

"Since the garden suite was built though, the drain pipe freezes on a regular basis"
More info needed. Where are they freezing? In the building? Underground? Which side of the property line?
Who did the plumbing? A carpenter with a glue pot?
The plumbing code only specifies that piping be protected from freezing, no minimum requirements. The inspector would look to see that the plumbing rough in met minimum code requirements, and then approve for covering.
Really curious as to who the contractor was, but those of us in the trades have a good idea already. Small town etc.

Up 28 Down 3

canon2000 on Jun 27, 2017 at 11:10 am

you get what you pay for

Up 12 Down 8

Josey Wales on Jun 27, 2017 at 8:15 am

First post...I agree very much with most of your points.
Inspectors are not "the" problem, but are very much "part of" the problem.
Example...you get a project going near a green belt some idiot starts two, three meters onto property not theirs and along comes a inspector.
When the job is inspected properly and discovered, at no cost to the city it must be dealt with. Expensive to do over? Oh well best not have said idiots building things...and doing slack half assed inspections.
There are building codes, just requires a system of humans that care, not scammers and unqualified inspectors being often lazy and or complacent.

So yes your points are valid, I just wished to shine a light on a angle overlooked.

Up 38 Down 1

Barry Drury on Jun 27, 2017 at 7:26 am

The building inspector process is to make certain the build adheres to the Canadian Building Code and by laws. The Building code is the minimum. You must check contractor references, look at past work, etc. Have a stringent contract. Have a home inspector or engineer check the home during construction a number of times. The cheapest contractor is not always the cheapest. See it all the time..

Up 35 Down 1

Owner on Jun 26, 2017 at 10:00 pm

1. Always get good trusted references for any contractor.
2. Ensure contractor has adequate liability insurance - even if bankrupt you can sue for negligence and damages which will inevitably claim against the insurance and the insurers won't take just anybody. And WCB for that matter otherwise you will be liable for a site injury.
3. Even better, have them be bonded.
4. If you do not feel qualified to inspect and 'accept' the work as of good quality,
there are private inspectors who can be hired to do that on your behalf, who are again insured and liable for your costs if they miss something.

But under no circumstances rely upon the government inspectors. Their sole job is to enforce the building code, which is not the same thing as quality work.

Up 26 Down 0

Rural Yukoner on Jun 26, 2017 at 6:51 pm

Try living in a rural community when you're trying to follow the rules. You call the territorial inspector's offices and if you get a return phone call, you're lucky. I've known people to submit their applications and six months later, the inspector comes by. Six months? If they are that short handed, they need more inspectors. In the meantime, if you have a critical error, how much has it been compounded?

Up 23 Down 13

Olaf Wolfe on Jun 26, 2017 at 6:26 pm

Sounds like the property owner tried to cut corners by acting as the general contractor. Should have hired a general contractor instead of cutting corners and self hiring sub trade contractors.
Not an unusual situation

Up 24 Down 13

BnR on Jun 26, 2017 at 6:18 pm

Building inspections typically deal with life safety and structural issues.
Is the building safe?
Drain pipes freezing?
Should have researched your contractor better. Don't blame CofW for your poor planning. Who's ultimately responsible for their home? The home owner.

Up 18 Down 4

Matt on Jun 26, 2017 at 6:02 pm

You wanted a building inspector to know about building? Bwahahahahaha!

Up 22 Down 0

Martin on Jun 26, 2017 at 5:58 pm

While I agree with (and that) "The inspectors aren't the problem", I would like to point out that the CoW's protocol for inspection are quite loose. If a contractor doesn't keep a photo record of the buried work, then the CoW must start asking why not. I remember many years ago contractors did not compact trench and the Bldg Dept had to change the rules and now there is a Cert of Compaction required. Easy fix to give owners peace of mind.

Up 26 Down 2

OJW on Jun 26, 2017 at 5:14 pm

'Bout time we had BBB up here.

Up 22 Down 3

Alan Trail on Jun 26, 2017 at 4:47 pm

"In cases where the inspector finds issues during a build, they can call for the builder to correct the issue, which then has to be inspected again before it can be signed off on.
Signing off on a building inspection, Ross explained, is not a guarantee on the house but rather the city making sure building code and bylaw regulations have been met.
In this case, he noted, all those requirements had been met and the inspections were signed off."

If the build requires additional cost to the homeowner because the inspections did not call the contractor on deficiencies I strongly believe it's on the building inspector and the city and the city should compensate the homeowner.

If the inspectors are deficient the build may be deficient and it shows the city system is not working.
If you put it another way, a building inspector would not pay a contractor if they messed up when working on their home.
If council does not see the problem they should not run in the next election.

Up 95 Down 9

The inspectors aren't the problem on Jun 26, 2017 at 4:20 pm

The issue is with the now conveniently bankrupt contractor, not the building inspectors. I don't want the inspectors to start getting super legalistic about inspections. There must be some flexibility and forgiveness so far as scheduling goes. Contractors and inspectors should be able to work together with the common goal being a well built project.

The issue here is a person who either didn't have the talent and abilities to do the job, or who cut corners and didn't care. What we should in fact have is some way of knowing who is a 'real' contractor, and who bought a hammer on the way up the highway and calls him or her self a contractor. Some kind of contractor registry along with a record of complaints, legal action, and successful jobs completed.

Add your comments or reply via Twitter @whitehorsestar

In order to encourage thoughtful and responsible discussion, website comments will not be visible until a moderator approves them. Please add comments judiciously and refrain from maligning any individual or institution. Read about our user comment and privacy policies.

Your name and email address are required before your comment is posted. Otherwise, your comment will not be posted.