No one except the builder.

Home inspectors also rarely have enough code knowledge to tell if things are correct.
They are looking for visual defects.

Thanks. Kind of what I figured. I watch too much Holmes on Homes. My mind is already worried for them and they haven't even chosen a GC yet. They aren't going to miss the price of permits and having inspections slow down the workplace, but I'd feel better if some things were inspected (even if just for visual defects.)

There are people qualified to do the inspections that are a step up from a "home inspector". You might find them listed under construction consultant or ask the bank if there is anyone they know of. I know the person who did some of our bank inspections acted as a consultant on the side. My BIL is more than a "home inspector", he is knowledgable in pretty much all fields. They are out there. But the builder may also take issue with you hiring such a person. Personally, if it were me, I would hire someone.

As an architect, I am required by state law to draw and specify a building that meets all applicable codes whatever the occupancy and I usually have to sign an affidavit before the Certificate of Occupancy is issued saying it was built in conformance with the drawings.

That service is in addition to the services of a contractor so it is more expensive ... but bad design and workmanship can be expensive too and considerably more distressing. I don't think I've ever visited a site where I didn't find something that needed to be corrected even with the best contractors I know ... I guess it's just that difficult to get everything right so I sympathize with your situation.

A home inspector would at least make the builder pay closer attention to the work of his subs which is where most problems occur. Send us the spec (if there is one) and a lot of photos. We love to argue about what is good practice and what isn't but don't tell the builder; he might not appreciate the opinions of armchair critics.

I'm still amazed that this exists. But since it does, does your state have code requirements? Perhaps the state has inspectors available as an option. It probably opens up a can of worms that you don't want to do but it should be out there. It depends how far the build is from civilization (not meant as a criticism).

The problem that I would see from outside inspectors is enforcement. Say Holmes comes down and says that using push connectors onto outlets is "wrong" - that is not a code issue (at least it wasn't). It might be in Canada. Code often is subject to interpretation and you might set up a battle every time the inspector doesn't like how the builder did something. You may have to decide which code to use - it is not like there is just one version.....

I felt like my builder was a good quality guy. There are still things that code required that he wouldn't have done. They did a leak test on the plumbing to 250 psi - I don't know if that would be done without inspectors.

And you should know that building a home to Holmes standards would cost a lot of money. Things are done in remodels as shortcuts all the time that are less of an issue with a new house.

Right now they are considering two people to use as the GC. I personally do not know anything about GC-1. He has a website and is building a new house a highway or two over from my parents right now. Does residential and commerical, but the only commercial projects I have ever seen his name attached to are exterior paint jobs. My dad's friend likes him and recommended him.

GC-2 is a man in his 60s that my husband and I have known socially for 10+ years. Over that time, he has installed a new metal roof for us, changed our our skirting after a storm, and most recently built a 48x30 carport with an RV bay. After seeing his work at our house, my parents had him come out and level a mobile home and also redo siding on part of their house. They like him and have been happy with his work, but have never experienced a major build with him. He has built many houses over the years, but not a full construction in probably 8 years.

GC-2 will do it cheaper, but it will take longer. He has a pretty good relationship with many subs, but there will probably be some he has to wait on if they are working on another project for a GC that gives them a lot of work. My parents are building on the same land they live on now (aobut 100 acres). They will not be selling the house they live in now, so really there isn't that much of a hurry and they won't find themselves in a postition where they have to be out of their old house and in the new house by a certain date.

As an aside, the GCs know each other. GC-2 said that GC-1 used to do some bad jobs, but then he spent a few years working in another state and when he came back he was better. (Still never got the full story on if he was sloppy or deceitful in his work.) After he came back, GC-2 hired him as a sub on some of his work.

I think it might get awkward if they used GC-2 and had someone come in to "check" his work when it wasn't a requirement. My husband and I have already decided to use GC-2 for more projects after the house is built, so I don't want to put any tension there. (We will be moving into my parent's old house after they move into the new house. I want to update the kitchen, fix a few plumbing issues and replace some carpet. After that happens and we move into that house, we will also need the carpet replaced in our current house and a few touchups done before we can get it on the market.)

Not done a full construction in 8 years. That would worry me....

I have a colleague who lives in a rural area and had GC2 build his house. He loves it but complains to me about this or that at times. Some rooms too hot in the summer. High utility bills. I can't remember what else. I'm sure he saved money and this guy was honest and hard working. But.....

In my profession, if I don't do a "full build" every 2 years, I am out.

Things change. Codes for one but that doesn't seem to matter here. But either way, a house built in 2011 shouldn't be based on 1990s construction techniques. New products become available. Costs change so alternatives need to be used.

So many houses are built without enough foresight by builders that do it every day.

Just because you have permits and inspections does not mean it is done correct. If the building inspector takes more than 10 minutes in your house you are lucky. If you want it right you need your own inspections no matter where you build.

A county/city building inspector should not be expected to provide project quality control.

"Build it as fast as possible" should not be considered to be a project schedule.

"Build it as cheap as possible" should not be considered to be a project budget.

If a project owner does not have sufficient knowledge and experience to provide the above minimum project management controls he/she needs to hire someone who can. If that person is the general contractor, the owner must have the skills to monitor that service to be sure the GC does not put his/her interests above the owner's and in some cases that can be easy and in others it can be very difficult.

My only direct experience with such situations is when I have been asked to monitor a project that is already in trouble. I find that just forcing all communication to be through me and making a few site visits and reports usually gets the project back on track.

We don't have local codes here either. We had to trust the GC to watch over the subs and make sure things were done right. I have no idea how well things were done, but our utility bills have been very very low, and everything seems to work properly. LOL

As if the lack of permits & inspections is not bad enough, in some regions there is absolutely no required certification for some contractors.

By example; In the state of Ohio a Commercial & Residential Plumber is required to complete a 4 year state approved apprenticeship and take a written exam to receive a "Plumbers License", but if one wants to work solely on single family or multi-family residential structures that do not exceed 3 stories in height or have more than 4 living units they can get a limited "Residential Plumbing License" directly from the county or municipality where they intend to work. To make matters even worse, in many counties and municipalities they simply do not have a licensing procedure whatsoever, and sadly, in those areas that do require a "Residential License" the procedure is at best a joke. In many cities one can go to the courthouse and declare they want to be a "Residential Plumber". The will then be required to produce a state tax number, a liability insurance policy and if they intend to hire 4 or more people they must have a workmans comp insurance policy, then pay a flat fee in the order of $125/annum and voila', they are a "Residential Plumber". The truth of the matter is that many of those people have absolutely no prior experience or training and most wouldn't know the plumbing code from the morse code, but who cares, the city doesn't require any permits or inspections anyway.

Many cities have adopted a permit program, but are they really intent on checking your home for proper installation or safety? The answer here is NO. If the truth was told they have adopted permits and inspections for two reasons:

1. The permits & Inspection fees are a cash cow for the city.
2. When your new construction, remodel or addition is completed the inspector can flag the tax assessors office to come and upgrade your assessment for tax purposes.

In recent years, as a result of the shake up in the banking industry in regions where they do not have strong code enforcement many banks have now hired their own code inspectors and they will not write a mortgage until the structure is signed off by their inspector.

If you live in a region where they do not have good code enforcement I would suggest you discuss your concern with your banker and they may have an inspector that will work with you.

The downside of using the banks inspector is that many GC's and subs will argue that the banks inspector does not have the authority to require changes. To that I would respond, if your work doesn't pass the bank inspector, I get no mortgage, and if I get no mortgage you get no money, simple as that.

If you want your inspector to have the authority to reject work that is not in compliance with the contract documents and applicable codes just say so in the Owner-Contractor Agreement. To make it even easier get a standard AIA agreement form and change the word "architect" to "owner's agent" or "owner's inspector", etc.

An owner should have the right to monitor the work of a contractor and should also have the right to pass that responsibility on to his agent or consultant.

This is the way all larger buildings are built. It is a mystery to me why it is not the case for all single family homes. Why do these contractors feel it is acceptable to work without independent review or quality control of any kind. You would think they were building porches or utility sheds instead of a building that represents the largest investment any of us is likely to ever make.