Installing a clean out at home

Bob/Olallawa wrote:
I think I agree with WPT-GC. If you hire a contractor to install per code and pull a permit, it is up to the contractor to do it right. OK to ask about placement but let the contractor do the job you hired him to do and the inspector to aprove the work.

Maybe in a perfect world, but contractors are notorious for doing shoddy work, skipping out half way through a job, not being there when things go wrong.
As far as 'to code', just remember that is the MINIMUM quality that is acceptable by a government bureaucracy, written by politicians who have NO mechanical, engineering or construction skills and lobbied by unions that are paid only to protect their members, not the clients who hire them.

Ski Pro 3 wrote:

Bob/Olallawa wrote:
I think I agree with WPT-GC. If you hire a contractor to install per code and pull a permit, it is up to the contractor to do it right. OK to ask about placement but let the contractor do the job you hired him to do and the inspector to aprove the work.

Maybe in a perfect world, but contractors are notorious for doing shoddy work, skipping out half way through a job, not being there when things go wrong.
As far as 'to code', just remember that is the MINIMUM quality that is acceptable by a government bureaucracy, written by politicians who have NO mechanical, engineering or construction skills and lobbied by unions that are paid only to protect their members, not the clients who hire them.

Kind of like the contractor who told me that he didn't need a permit to install a new front door on my house - in FL, you do. Good thing I knew what questions to ask, otherwise I'd be on the hook to get it done correctly. Contractors who care about doing a good job correctly and pulling proper permits are becoming a rare breed. Ever been inside a newly built house? OP asked some good questions - nothing wrong with doing some research.

.

Customer involvement is required to have a successful project. Of course you want (and need) to satisfy the customer. The customer is part of the project and needs to feel that way. However, customer meddling into the means and methods of the contractor, especially when the customer knows nothing of the work being performed, is problematic. If you're using white pipe instead of black pipe, it's reasonable for the customer to ask why you chose those materials, but it's unreasonable for the customer to demand that you use black pipe because the Internet says so.

Ski Pro 3 wrote:


Maybe in a perfect world, but contractors are notorious for doing shoddy work, skipping out half way through a job, not being there when things go wrong.
As far as 'to code', just remember that is the MINIMUM quality that is acceptable by a government bureaucracy, written by politicians who have NO mechanical, engineering or construction skills and lobbied by unions that are paid only to protect their members, not the clients who hire them.

I know that every state is different, but licensed contractors in my state have statutory requirements to not do shoddy work, skip out on the job or go away when things go wrong. In FL, they do that and it gets reported, leading to an investigation and then license censure. Now unlicensed contractors are a different story. Most people agree that you should always hire a licensed contractor...until they get sticker shock and choose a guy without a license. Then they cry when things go wrong.

Funny thing is that you'll hear more stories about the customer not paying their bill than you will about the contractor skipping out on the job. I currenty have multiple customers that are way late on payments.

Your statement about the code being written by people who don't have a clue is flat out wrong. The code is developed and maintained/updated by industry professionals who have the proper accreditations. That's not to say that they don't have influence from lobbyists or politicians, but to say that it's written by politicians is incredibly false. Now, as a contractor, I don't always agree with the code and often wonder how it was determined, but that doesn't mean that the author was clueless.

Ski Pro 3 wrote:

WTP-GC wrote:
OP, as a contractor, I would not like that you hired me to do a job and then went onto a random Internet forum to verify the quality of my work or choice of materials. If you came to me (the professional) and told me that a faceless, nameless internet somebody said that I was doing it wrong and suggested a better way of doing it, I'd walk off the job. The nature of questions you're asking suggests that you don't know anything about the work taking place, so be mindful of that when you offer advice to your contractor. There's an old saying...if you can't dazzle them with your brilliance, then baffle them with your BS. It would in your best interest to let the contractor do their job without telling them how it should be done...in this case.

Amazing how so many contractors forget who the boss is.
(hint; it's the guy writing the checks)

Any good contractor would be happy that their customer is interested enough to stay involved and would take the time to address their concerns.

And I'm not just picking on contractors, this goes for doctors, mechanics, etc. If I'm paying the bills, I'm dang sure going to verify I am getting the best product possible.

As a retired general contractor you would be surprized at how many people want something done X way. Yet it is totally against code and common sense.

2012Coleman wrote:

Ski Pro 3 wrote:

Bob/Olallawa wrote:
I think I agree with WPT-GC. If you hire a contractor to install per code and pull a permit, it is up to the contractor to do it right. OK to ask about placement but let the contractor do the job you hired him to do and the inspector to aprove the work.

Maybe in a perfect world, but contractors are notorious for doing shoddy work, skipping out half way through a job, not being there when things go wrong.
As far as 'to code', just remember that is the MINIMUM quality that is acceptable by a government bureaucracy, written by politicians who have NO mechanical, engineering or construction skills and lobbied by unions that are paid only to protect their members, not the clients who hire them.

Kind of like the contractor who told me that he didn't need a permit to install a new front door on my house - in FL, you do. Good thing I knew what questions to ask, otherwise I'd be on the hook to get it done correctly. Contractors who care about doing a good job correctly and pulling proper permits are becoming a rare breed. Ever been inside a newly built house? OP asked some good questions - nothing wrong with doing some research.

A permit to replace a front door is just a money grab by that city/county.

3" or 4" PVC or ABS is all fine. The cleanout is the RV connection point. Be sure it's 1/4" per foot slope minimum. YES 4" can be laid to 1/8" per foot but I would NOT recommend doing so!!!.

WTP-GC wrote:

Your statement about the code being written by people who don't have a clue is flat out wrong. That's not to say that they don't have influence from lobbyists or politicians, but to say that it's written by politicians is incredibly false.

At least, here in California, they are written by bureaucrats. I'll define bureaucracy as a system of government in which most of the important decisions are made by state officials rather than by elected representatives. So I stand by my statement. If not politicians themselves, they are written by the people politicians have appointed and can remove from their positions.
Their websites end in .ca.gov then it's state run; AKA politicians.
Their boss, board or other head is elected into position, then it's run by politicians.
If their paycheck comes from the state of California, or what ever state they are in, it's run by politicians.
No different than say public schools, law or fire departments. The primary problem with it is that those in power are influenced by forces other than the absolute good of the craft. In this case, codes. In my other examples, teachers are forced into curriculum that makes no sense today at all. Police are not allowed to even touch an illegal alien and, in fact, are issued drivers licenses. Fire departments aren't allowed staffing to safe levels. All mandates by their bosses, the politicians and the bureaucrats they appoint.

But hey, I rant.

WTP-GC wrote:
Now, as a contractor, I don't always agree with the code and often wonder how it was determined, but that doesn't mean that the author was clueless.

No? yet in that instance that made you wonder, in your mind he probably was. He would have been in mine. Maybe not completely clueless, but plainly not on top of his game writing that one.

wrktfsh wrote:
As a retired general contractor you would be surprized at how many people want something done X way. Yet it is totally against code and common sense.

Not really. Once you realize your customer is your boss. Every boss I've ever had or known would on occasion make demands that were against policy or company rules. It's no different really with the trades.

Ski Pro 3 wrote:

wrktfsh wrote:
As a retired general contractor you would be surprized at how many people want something done X way. Yet it is totally against code and common sense.

Not really. Once you realize your customer is your boss. Every boss I've ever had or known would on occasion make demands that were against policy or company rules. It's no different really with the trades.

We recently had a customer request that we fix something that was broke. We fixed it. But he said we didn't fix it to the state it was in before it broke. We said "we didn't break it, but you asked us to fix it, so you tell us what state it was in and we'll try to achieve it." He couldn't tell us how it was before, only that what we did was not putting it back that way. Head scratcher. The customer became hostile toward us. As a good gesture, we figured out what the original state was and then we fixed it. Turned out, the problem we fixed was the reason why it broke in the first place. The customer said that he couldn't confirm that we didn't cause the problem (again broke before we were involved and called in special to fix it), so he wasn't going to pay for the "extra" work we did to solve his problem. Well, he's the boss and he was wrong to do that, but because the cost was so small, we have no reasonable recourse.