2523 CHESTNUT ST 2019-07-16 - Laserfiche WebLink

Tony Lee From: Tony Lee Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2019 7:01 AM To: Tony Lee Subject: 2523 Chestnut Street, E1905-092 Note to file. Home owners Michelle and Chris Booth and their real estate agent Laura Ford came to the Permit Service Center this morning (approx. 9:00)to discuss the inspection findings from the electrical inspection last Thursday(May 16, 2019). The electrical permit had been applied for by PMA Electric the previous day to remove and replace the breaker panel and meter base.The inspection was made and corrections were required. Per her Email of Thursday to numerous city personnel (on file), Ms. Booth made several claims against City of Everett Electrical Inspector Steve Banks to include: o No permission was given to go through the house-privacy was violated. o Steve refused the direction of the electrician (who was on site for the inspection) and continued to inspect the house. o Steve made inappropriate comments regarding the home to the electrician and treated the inspection as if the house had undergone a 'filp.' o Steve left no business card nor any inspection report left on site. o Steve was talking down,extremely rude, abrasive and unprofessional to Ms. Booth on their phone conversation later that day. o Steve stated to Ms. Booth that the whole house needed to be brought up to code. o The house was a rental and had not been flipped and that no plumbing or electrical work had been done by them since they purchased the house. From the outset of the meeting, and continuing nearly all throughout Ms. Booth was visibly very upset.When I tried to answer her questions, she would often interrupt me.When I was able to finish my points,the feedback I typically received was disbelief.We talked about the issues noted above as well as the scope and authority of inspections/inspectors. I was told often by Ms. Booth that our inspection and code enforcement procedures had not been correctly followed. Regardless of how many times I tried to explain the code and inspection process, my explanations did not appear to be believed,or that they didn't apply in this situation. I retrieved Steve Banks who had been completing a specific list of electrical corrections required for him to be able to sign off the electrical permit (on file). Steve's arrival into the room raised the intensity level of the room.At times both Ms. Booth and Ms. Ford would talk at the same time over Steve, making it very difficult for him to respond to their questions or explain the required codes.Steve remained very poised throughout this meeting regardless of the accusations made about him and the tenor of the delivery of the accusations. He was asked directly as to why he had gone through the house—he responded that hewas doing his job(and also explained what,why and how he saw what he saw—that he had authorization and need to inspect the structure). During this time,Steve had also been able to address questions from Mr. Booth regarding the specifics of the inspection corrections as well as advice on how to go about the corrections. I believe that part of the discussion was highly productive. The end of the meeting was brought about by Ms. Booth leaving with verbal (and visible) disbelief at our unwillingness to compromise the code provisions. Ms. Ford also vocalized her disbelief at our unwillingness to compromise the code 1