False advertising regarding home wiring

[justalayman]

Thanks for the input, guys!

First, I can almost guarantee there was never a permit pulled for it (but, I could be wrong). But, that's neither here nor there, as rewiring, or any mention of the wiring, was not in the final contract, so the seller isn't liable there.

I don't know that we dropped the ball by not explicitly telling the inspector the inspect the breaker box. In fact, there were many electrical issues that he informed us of (just not this).

This helps a lot - I understand now that this is probable, rather than someone trying to swindle me.

What I'm hearing from all of you is that I completely misunderstood the wiring setup (no surprise) and that I should consider consulting an attorney anyway.

Thank you.

sorry if this was already answered but:

presuming there is a main breaker in the new electrical panel, if you turn that off do all circuits in the house go dead?

then, if so, is there a breaker in the new panel that feeds the old fuse panel?


If so, it is quite likely the installation is legal, at least for that part of the system unless there is some specific state of local code that would require them to upgrade the entire system. It is not required per the NEC (National Electrical Code). They cannot add onto a circuit originating in that panel but there is no requirement to replace what is existing as long as it is not disturbed otherwise.

What it sounds like is they had an old 60 or maybe even 40 amp service to the home. When that was deemed inadequate they installed a 100 amp service (which is current electrical code in anyplace that uses the National Electrical Code as a basis for their rules) and fed the old fuse panel as a sub-panel. They then took the heavy loads off the fuse panel and put them directly into the new 100 amp panel.

as Ron stated, NEC requires a disconnect to be either outside the home (but attached to the home) or immediately inside when the service wiring enters the home. While there is no specified length allowed, in my area they tend to use a 12 foot rule. That is not within 12 feet of the entrance point but 12 feet of conductors from the point of entry into the building to the attachment on the disconnect. That means the panel has to be quite close to the point of entry. It allows for going up a wall of down a wall with very little lateral displacement.

 

[mrazy]

presuming there is a main breaker in the new electrical panel, if you turn that off do all circuits in the house go dead?

then, if so, is there a breaker in the new panel that feeds the old fuse panel?

I'll tell you what I know (with my complete lack of electrical knowledge). There is a double switch in the breaker box labeled MAIN, when that and all the other breakers are switched off, nothing turns off in the house except the heating and air.

I believe it doesn't matter as nothing in the contract said the house was up-to-code, and I suspect it isn't, especially according to the inspector's report. We understood that much when purchased the house, at a really reasonable rate. My argument (now debunked in this forum) was that the fancy new breaker box (I use "new" lightly, it's probably 20 years old) was a selling point on the house, which meant I assumed it was, you know, hooked up to entirety of the house, and that the wiring was 20 years old, as opposed to 70.

But, thanks for asking.

 

[justalayman]

You should check with the building department in your area. Some areas require homes to be brought up to code whenever they are sold.


so now, since the old panel does not appear to be fed from the new panel, how close are the two of them (the new panel and the old panel)? If they are immediately adjacent to each other, interpretation of the NEC can allow that to be adequate as far as having a proper disconnect. The NEC allows for up to 6 "main" disconnects and while some areas interpret that as they all must be in one panel (such that it would feed multiple sub panels), a looser and more often interpretation would allow for multiple panels placed closely together with one main disconnect in each to be acceptable, at least up to 6 of them grouped together.

again, there is nothing in the code specifying an actual measurement but most inspectors I have worked with require you to be able to operate them all from either a single position or no more than a couple steps. If they are placed in such a manner, it could still be a legal installation.


and just so you know, there are many homes out there with knob and tube wiring still in place. In itself there is nothing wrong with continuing to use it as long as it is in good repair. It is allowed to be continued to be used in the NEC but as I said previously, you cannot alter or add on to the existing circuit.

 

[mrazy]

There is no way our podhunk town has a law requiring homes to be up to code when sold, very few houses would sell - I would even venture to say we don't HAVE a building department (just a two room city hall).

how close are the two of them (the new panel and the old panel)?

They are on two different floors of the house, but sort of one on top of the other - maybe 6 feet apart (through walls and a floor).

 

[justalayman]

mrazy;3294572]There is no way our podhunk town has a law requiring homes to be up to code when sold, very few houses would sell - I would even venture to say we don't HAVE a building department (just a two room city hall).

ah but such a means of income for a municipality is often there hidden away somewhere. It is crucial to any possible action you might have that there be some governmental oversight for the work that was performed.

They are on two different floors of the house, but sort of one on top of the other - maybe 6 feet apart (through walls and a floor).

unless there is something about this building that would allow it to be classified as something other than a single family residence, that is not a legal installation per the NEC (Iowa currently uses the 2011 edition of the National Electrical Code (NEC) as their code).

That means it is quite likely there was no permit pulled to install the panel. If so and it was required to obtain a permit, you may have recourse against the seller if they owned the building when the panel was installed.

 

[mrazy]

The seller didn't own it long enough to be in the same time frame as the "new" breaker box.

However, your insight has been helpful. In a town that doesn't much believe in doing things by code ...

(allow me to digress: the house in question we actually purchased for our son, two doors from us. MY house has a perfectly lovely and functioning breaker box 6 inches from a working shower)

... I will go against the grain and make the extra effort when hiring an electrician to be certain his work is on the up and up to prevent future buyers from having recourse against us, should we ever choose to sell that house.

 

[FarmerJ]

So you know, if a town or township does not have a building inspections person then the next step up the ladder will be your county and yes they will have someone who handles inspections and permits. If the time comes in the future where you do move again it is really up to you to make it crystal clear how detailed you want your housing inspector to be but it has to be in writing so if you wanted to know the home had any wiring that was pre 1970 or say you wanted to know if the home had any old galvinized (bad spell) water lines in it then you would have to make sure in writing so the inspector knows to report on it.

 

[justalayman]

So you know, if a town or township does not have a building inspections person then the next step up the ladder will be your county and yes they will have someone who handles inspections and permits. If the time comes in the future where you do move again it is really up to you to make it crystal clear how detailed you want your housing inspector to be but it has to be in writing so if you wanted to know the home had any wiring that was pre 1970 or say you wanted to know if the home had any old galvinized (bad spell) water lines in it then you would have to make sure in writing so the inspector knows to report on it.

their are several problems with this method. First, many home purchasers have no idea what knob and tube wiring is so they would have no idea to ask whether the home has any. That applies to many parts of an electrical installation as well as other systems such as the galvanized pipe you spoke of. As long as the installation is legal, an inspector is not going to make a big issue about it although they may make a notation of the type of installation. In itself, unless there is a contingency specific enough to allow a termination of the contract should something like knob and tube wiring (that is code compliant) is included in the contract, it being present is really irrelevant to the sale. The other option is to make an inspection contingency general enough such that the buyer can terminate the contract simply based on whether they find the results acceptable. Again, most consumers are not going to know whether knob and tube wiring should be acceptable or not so they cannot make a reasonable decision there. If I was still in the biz, if a contingency that general come along, I would suggest the seller not accept such an offer. If you accept such an open contingency, it simply allows the buyer to escape simply because they changed their minds while hiding that fact behind a "I am not happy with the inspection results" claim. Bad RE agent for allowing the seller to accept such an offer. It could tie the home up for months, removing it from the market, only to have the sale terminated because the buyer changed their mind.

 

[Zigner]

In fact, there were many electrical issues that he informed us of (just not this).

This may actually make things worse for you. You knew there were concerns with the electrical system, but you didn't follow up with a more in-depth examination by an electrician.