# Verbiage stamped on approved/reviewed drawings



## jar546 (Aug 26, 2020)

What kid of disclaimer do you use on the plans you stamp as a reviewer/code official letting the contractor know the field inspector may require additional work if required by code?

Show us your stamp or verbiage.


----------



## classicT (Aug 26, 2020)




----------



## cda (Aug 26, 2020)

"Whatever I missed, the field inspector will correct"
          "No attorneys please"


                 Or the other one

   """ Comply with IBC""""


----------



## jar546 (Aug 26, 2020)

Ty J. said:


> View attachment 6902


That's a lot of verbiage but I like it!


----------



## mark handler (Aug 26, 2020)




----------



## jj1289 (Aug 26, 2020)

*REVIEWED FOR CODE COMPLIANCE*​It shall be the duty of the permit holder or their agent to notify the building official that such work is ready for inspection and obtain approval prior to such portion being covered or concealed. Person requesting the inspection shall provide access and means for the inspection of the work.
Permit No.:______________ Date:__________


----------



## Sifu (Aug 26, 2020)




----------



## Keystone (Aug 26, 2020)

Whether Noted or Not, Work Shall Comply with All Applicable Codes & Ordinances.


----------



## cda (Aug 26, 2020)

Redacted:::


----------



## ICE (Aug 26, 2020)

We do not mention that the inspector might have corrections for the work or the plans.  They're usually not all that surprised.


----------



## mtlogcabin (Aug 26, 2020)

[A] 107.3.1 Approval of construction documents.
When the building official issues a permit, the construction documents shall be approved, in writing or by stamp, as “*Reviewed for Code Compliance.*” 
That is all that is required so that is all that we put on the drawing


----------



## TheCommish (Aug 26, 2020)

Massachusetts amended  chapter 1 same as 2015 IRC

105.4 Validity of Permit. The issuance or granting of a permit shall not be construed to
be a permit for, or an approval of, any violation of any of the provisions of 780 CMR or
of any other law or ordinance. Permits presuming to give authority to violate or cancel
the provisions of 780 CMR or other laws or ordinances shall not be valid. The issuance
of a permit based on construction documents and other data shall not prevent the building
official from requiring the correction of errors in the construction documents and other
data. The building official is also authorized to prevent occupancy or use of a structure
where in violation of 780 CMR or of any other laws or ordinances.

no stamp applied


----------



## Sifu (Aug 27, 2020)

I like the simple stamp for "reviewed for code compliance", but the disclaimers are more and more becoming a part of the process.  I know it's silly today but I expect the applicants to know things like the fact that the inspector can still make a call.  If I had my way (I don't) I would keep them to a minimum.


----------



## Rick18071 (Aug 27, 2020)

We don't need one. The law basically says we can't issue a C. O. unless it complies with code

And this:

 (f)  Issuance of a permit does not bar prosecution or other legal action for violations of the act, the Uniform Construction Code or a construction ordinance. A building code official may suspend or revoke a permit issued under the Uniform Construction Code when the permit holder does not make the required changes directed by the building code official under subsection (c), when the permit is issued in error, on the basis of inaccurate or incomplete information or in violation of any act, regulation, ordinance or the Uniform Construction Code.


----------



## rktect 1 (Aug 27, 2020)

We have never had a stamp like this.  Not sure if it helps us or not.  We have had a few issues come up over the years but most are easily handled out in the field.


----------



## Pcinspector1 (Aug 27, 2020)

*REVIEWED FOR CODE COMPLIANCE
        AND SUBJECT TO FIELD
                INSPECTIONS*


----------



## ADAguy (Aug 27, 2020)

mark handler said:


> View attachment 6903



Spelling! " Kept" not Keep


----------



## mark handler (Aug 27, 2020)

ADAguy said:


> Spelling! " Kept" not Keep


Thanks


----------



## ADAguy (Aug 27, 2020)

You give so much, you are welcome.


----------



## tmurray (Aug 31, 2020)

So...devils advocate here...if you all have statutory immunity there, why is there any concern about a disclaimer? I would assume this is to prevent claims related to reasonable expectation, but that only exists if the government body is subject to liability.

We just have a general statement in our building by-law that states that compliance with the code is at the cost of the owner.


----------



## Pcinspector1 (Aug 31, 2020)

tmurray, I think stamping stuff in red ink, might give some a state of euphoria!


----------



## classicT (Aug 31, 2020)

Pcinspector1 said:


> tmurray, I think stamping stuff in red ink, might give some a state of euphoria!


Stamp enough sheets with a fresh ink pad and it will give ya a state of euphoria, followed by a hellacious headache.


----------



## steveray (Aug 31, 2020)

It is probably more CYA with your higher ups or arguments than prosecution....We can't catch everything in the short time we have with plans so it is on the designer and contractor to do their part.




tmurray said:


> So...devils advocate here...if you all have statutory immunity there, why is there any concern about a disclaimer? I would assume this is to prevent claims related to reasonable expectation, but that only exists if the government body is subject to liability.
> 
> We just have a general statement in our building by-law that states that compliance with the code is at the cost of the owner.


----------



## Mark K (Aug 31, 2020)

What sort of liability do you believe you have?

Why repeat what is already stated in the statutes?


----------



## steveray (Aug 31, 2020)

Maybe a feasance and negligence if someone can prove we knowingly did something we should not have....We can go to jail for that here.....Nevermind the lawsuit...


----------



## jar546 (Aug 31, 2020)

Ty J. said:


> Stamp enough sheets with a fresh ink pad and it will give ya a state of euphoria, followed by a hellacious headache.



All of our ink stuff is drying rotting.  We have been 100% electronic and never looking back.


----------



## mark handler (Sep 1, 2020)

tmurray said:


> So...devils advocate here...if you all have statutory immunity there, why is there any concern about a disclaimer? I would assume this is to prevent claims related to reasonable expectation, but that only exists if the government body is subject to liability.
> 
> We just have a general statement in our building by-law that states that compliance with the code is at the cost of the owner.


Not everyone is a city employee, some are contract workers, with their own licenses to protect.


----------



## classicT (Sep 1, 2020)

jar546 said:


> All of our ink stuff is drying rotting.  We have been 100% electronic and never looking back.


Same thing here. 

We used to have an odd mom-and-pop drawing that we'd mark-up real quick and stamp, but now with COVID, we force even those to be emailed in. I haven't looked at a paper set of plans in probably 4 or 5 months.


----------

