When is a special inspection not so special?

When is a special inspection not so special?

Postby brantfetter » Fri Feb 27, 2015 11:10 am

Who pays for special inspections? The Owner (unless…)

There are a lot of posts, including ones I’ve commented on that clarify what inspections and special inspections are. However, I’ve recently realized that there are some inherent logical conflicts in the practice surrounding special inspections. So I'll put this out there so others may weigh in. My concern arises when we have seen questions on the test that force you to choose the “most correct” answer or more significantly, where a correct answer involves sorting out the definition of something in the support of another issue. For example, who pays for a “special inspection” of a concrete form for a foundation? Here’s where we get into a strange problem. Concrete forms are frequently allowed to be inspected by the design professional that designed the foundation, and this is something called a special inspection. However, the engineer’s services such as this are part of the commonly contracted services provided under the architect’s contract per the A200 series. So this would directly conflict with the concept that the owner pays for the special inspections.

The basic definition is in the Guidelines for Special Inspection. http://www.cctia.org/guidelines/2010_Blue_Book_Final_110424.pdf The list includes a lot of inspections that most engineers provide as a routine and part of their CA phase. To further cloud the issue, in practice, if you ask a building department clerk or building official what a special inspection is, they will most likely show you a form that outlines the required “special inspections” and have the applicant verify that a qualified independent design professional hired by the owner is performing them on your project. For the sake of this conversation, we’ll call these “third party independent special inspections”. For example, a structural engineer will conduct what are classified by the guidelines as “special inspections” and those are included in their contracts as part of their CA phase services. Soils engineers will also conduct routine field inspections such as excavation soil verification and bearing types, that are classified as “special inspections” by the guidelines, but are not considered “special inspections” by the local jurisdictions.

Newer trends: Some jurisdictions now require you to have a third party inspection firm show evidence and verify that they are have hired on by the owner to perform such inspections PRIOR to application.

You're help and discussion of this is appreciated.
brantfetter
 
Posts: 22
Joined: Wed Jan 15, 2014 9:52 am

Re: When is a special inspection not so special?

Postby brantfetter » Sun Mar 01, 2015 8:45 am

Wow, not even an answer from coach? I'm surprised. This is based on the questions about who pays for special inspections that are on the test.
brantfetter
 
Posts: 22
Joined: Wed Jan 15, 2014 9:52 am

Re: When is a special inspection not so special?

Postby Coach » Mon Mar 02, 2015 12:21 am

CBC 1704
User avatar
Coach
Site Admin
 
Posts: 13249
Joined: Wed May 23, 2012 2:08 am

Re: When is a special inspection not so special?

Postby brantfetter » Tue Mar 03, 2015 12:27 pm

As usual, your answer is terse and unhelpful in how short it is. If you go look at 1704, the exception is that the local jurisdiction can dictate what is minor and thus does not warrant (independant) special inspection. This does not clarify or answer my question. From that, am I to gather that you don't really have an answer and/or we don't really need to worry about who pays because it can't be worked out consistantly because so many jurisidictions differ?
brantfetter
 
Posts: 22
Joined: Wed Jan 15, 2014 9:52 am

Re: When is a special inspection not so special?

Postby Coach » Tue Mar 03, 2015 7:25 pm

For exam purposes, keep is simple. If special inspections are required they are paid for by the owner outside of the contract.
User avatar
Coach
Site Admin
 
Posts: 13249
Joined: Wed May 23, 2012 2:08 am

Re: When is a special inspection not so special?

Postby brantfetter » Wed Mar 04, 2015 4:13 pm

Thank you.
brantfetter
 
Posts: 22
Joined: Wed Jan 15, 2014 9:52 am

Re: When is a special inspection not so special?

Postby hnQ_9999 » Sat Apr 01, 2017 1:31 pm

This is a good question.
IMHO: Architect prepares a schedule for Spe Inspctn (SI) at time of Building Permit submittal.
a) So this schedule is in the bid package, being seen and priced by GC. Saying GC
pays for SI is fair, regardless what being scheduled is more or less special, because it's inclusive in Cost of the Work ?
b) Then if there is additional testing required from these items (special or not), if found complied to codes,
Owner has to pay these extra test (bec it's part of (a)). If found non-complied, GC pays and fix and retest at no cost,
no CO for time (bec of breach of CT) ?
hnQ_9999
 
Posts: 1029
Joined: Tue Nov 26, 2013 1:35 am

Re: When is a special inspection not so special?

Postby Coach » Sat Apr 01, 2017 1:46 pm

hnQ_9999 wrote:This is a good question.
IMHO: Architect prepares a schedule for Spe Inspctn (SI) at time of Building Permit submittal.

Of course. Can't get a permit without it.

a) So this schedule is in the bid package, being seen and priced by GC. Saying GC
pays for SI is fair, regardless what being scheduled is more or less special, because it's inclusive in Cost of the Work ?



WRONG! Read the law... or any city's website regarding it.
User avatar
Coach
Site Admin
 
Posts: 13249
Joined: Wed May 23, 2012 2:08 am


Return to CALIFORNIA SUPPLEMENTAL EXAM

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 101 guests

cron