What's happening now?

(most recent entries - bottom of page)

The DBPR investigator told me the fact that the work passed inspection would weigh heavily in the contractor's favor. It looks like she was right. The DBPR did rule in the contractor's favor. The DBPR letter also mentioned that code violations should be handled on the local level.

I had met with the City Building Inspector and his supervisor back in December. They are very aware of the problem. The only assistance they have provided is a letter that I requested! I had written to the Mayor and the City Council Members back in March and still have not gotten any response.

Incompetent Building Inspector?

I decided to go the DBPR website and check the licensing of the City Inspector. According to their records they have not issued an Inspector's license to this man. According to their records he never even applied for a Provisional Inspector's license. According to their records my roof passed inspection based on the opinion of a plumber.

I have contacted the DBPR and asked that they re-open my complaint against the contractor. "The fact that the worked passed inspection weighs heavily in the contractor's favor."

I have also been reviewing the Florida Statutes. (highlighted portions can be found here) According to everything I have read Building Inspectors (not the same as home inspectors) must be licensed in Florida.

**I checked the licensing status of another person who was listed on the City Building Department's letterhead as a City Building Inspector (the letter was written in December 2006). According the DBPR licensing portal this person was not even issued a Provisional Building Inspector's license until February of 2007. It appears that he too was working for the City Building Department without a license.

According to the DBPR Investigator the fact that the work passed inspection weighs heavily in the contractor's favor. I believe the Inspector's credibility is very questionable. In an effort to get my complaint against the contractor re-opened I have filed a complaint for unlicensed activity against the City Building Inspector. According to the DBPR records he has never even applied for an Inspector's license.

I sent a letter to my Senator. Much to my surprise I received a call from one of her Legislative Assistants. He contacted the DBPR and was told that I need to hire a Contractual Consultant and submit a written statement of their findings. He explained that a Contractual Consultant in this case would be another roofer. I told him I already had one and the statement was submitted to the DBPR in December of 2006 - BEFORE they ruled in the contractor's favor! He asked that I email him a copy of that statement. 

The DBPR investigator called me and said he was on his way to the Building Department. He apologized for taking so long to get to my complaint and admitted that he had not fully reviewed the file. I explained to him that three packets of information were sent to the DBPR. They had my initial complaint, more information that was requested by the first investigator and the third packet was the complaint against the Building Inspector along with my request for the case against the contractor to be re-opened. I asked that he or someone gather all of the information and review it in its entirety.

The next day he called me again. He began by talking about a different case. Then he realized that my case was the roofing job gone bad. He said he did not get to meet with the Inspector because he was not in the office. The investigator did tell me that the Inspector did not do the  dry-in inspection on my roof. He KNOWS that because they showed him another Inspector's name on the computer. I said, "Oh, computer records can't be changed?"

** That's some heavy duty investigative work! We're in good hands now! LOL His tone seemed to strongly indicate that he has already ruled in favor of "Inspector Plumber."

There's also the matter of two other inspections this man did at my home. Did he even inquire about those? Doesn't the DBPR care about unlicensed activity?

The investigator admitted more than once that he still has not thoroughly reviewed my complaint against the Inspector nor has he seen the photos or any of the other documentation I sent to the DBPR but he wants me to send more information! He wants me to spend several hundred dollars for a home inspection even though they already have estimates from three roofers indicating that my entire roof needs to be replaced. One of them even provided a written statement explaining why. Now the investigator wants me to send even more documentation. Why, so he can ignore it too? He hasn't read what I've already sent!

I have two problems with his requests. One is the fact that he hasn't even properly reviewed the information he already has. The other is that he is asking me to spend hundreds of dollars for a home inspection. Home inspectors are not licensed in Florida. He'll be comparing the opinion of an unlicensed home inspector to that of a "City Building Official" even though the City Building Official is not licensed either. Who do you think will win?