If you were Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
|
Posted by RicodJour on October 13, 2009, 8:51 am
On Oct 13, 8:01=A0am, trad...@optonline.net wrote:
> > > "> Had a guy come in to help put up wood moulding in the kitchen. Mus=
t have
> > > > hit a wire becaue it blew a breaker.
> > > > He pulled the nail out (small nail) and hammered it in elsewhere. F=
lipped
> > > > the breaker back on. Said don't worry about it.
> > > > Now I lie awake at night fearing its a fire hazard.
> > > > Is it?
> > > *In a 1920's house that has had some electrical improvements over the=
years
> > > it is possible to have wiring anywhere. This is the kind of thing tha=
t will
> > > surface as a problem weeks, months or years from now. By nailing into=
the
> > > wiring and causing a dead short some of the copper wire is probably n=
icked.
> > > The wire may only be connected at that point by a hair, more or less.
> > > Depending on the load that travels over that point it can overheat an=
d if it
> > > is in contact with combustible materials will burn whatever it touche=
s.
> > > Eventually the wire will burn apart and whatever it is feeding will b=
ecome
> > > dead. To answer your question: Yes it is a potential fire hazard.
> > > For safety and piece of mind get an electrician in there and have him=
take a
> > > look.
> > EXACTLY! open the wall and inspect the damage. perhaps access it from
> > the other side.
> > its a real potential fire hazard- Hide quoted text -
> > - Show quoted text -
> Agree with John and Bob. =A0 I would also say the contractor is not
> responsible for this. =A0As others have pointed out, wiring is supposed
> to be run far enough back that a finishing nail from molding can't
> reach it or else have a metal plate covering it.
Yep. Even if you had a contract, and the contract was any good,
there'd be a clause in there about "latent and concealed conditions".
The contractor doesn't have X-ray vision, and can't determine what is
behind a wall. He has a reasonable expectation to believe that there
aren't wires too close to the surface.
If the contractor was using unnecessarily long nails - say 3" to
attach some trim - then there's some responsibility there, but it's
basically the owner's.
R
|
|
Posted by SteveB on October 13, 2009, 10:40 am
On Oct 13, 8:01 am, trad...@optonline.net wrote:
> > > "> Had a guy come in to help put up wood moulding in the kitchen. Must
> > > have
> > > > hit a wire becaue it blew a breaker.
> > > > He pulled the nail out (small nail) and hammered it in elsewhere.
> > > > Flipped
> > > > the breaker back on. Said don't worry about it.
> > > > Now I lie awake at night fearing its a fire hazard.
> > > > Is it?
> > > *In a 1920's house that has had some electrical improvements over the
> > > years
> > > it is possible to have wiring anywhere. This is the kind of thing that
> > > will
> > > surface as a problem weeks, months or years from now. By nailing into
> > > the
> > > wiring and causing a dead short some of the copper wire is probably
> > > nicked.
> > > The wire may only be connected at that point by a hair, more or less.
> > > Depending on the load that travels over that point it can overheat and
> > > if it
> > > is in contact with combustible materials will burn whatever it
> > > touches.
> > > Eventually the wire will burn apart and whatever it is feeding will
> > > become
> > > dead. To answer your question: Yes it is a potential fire hazard.
> > > For safety and piece of mind get an electrician in there and have him
> > > take a
> > > look.
> > EXACTLY! open the wall and inspect the damage. perhaps access it from
> > the other side.
> > its a real potential fire hazard- Hide quoted text -
> > - Show quoted text -
> Agree with John and Bob. I would also say the contractor is not
> responsible for this. As others have pointed out, wiring is supposed
> to be run far enough back that a finishing nail from molding can't
> reach it or else have a metal plate covering it.
Yep. Even if you had a contract, and the contract was any good,
there'd be a clause in there about "latent and concealed conditions".
The contractor doesn't have X-ray vision, and can't determine what is
behind a wall. He has a reasonable expectation to believe that there
aren't wires too close to the surface.
If the contractor was using unnecessarily long nails - say 3" to
attach some trim - then there's some responsibility there, but it's
basically the owner's.
R
Say WHAT?
Steve
|
|
Posted by RicodJour on October 13, 2009, 10:56 am
> > Agree with John and Bob. I would also say the contractor is not
> > responsible for this. As others have pointed out, wiring is supposed
> > to be run far enough back that a finishing nail from molding can't
> > reach it or else have a metal plate covering it.
> Yep. =A0Even if you had a contract, and the contract was any good,
> there'd be a clause in there about "latent and concealed conditions".
> The contractor doesn't have X-ray vision, and can't determine what is
> behind a wall. =A0He has a reasonable expectation to believe that there
> aren't wires too close to the surface.
> If the contractor was using unnecessarily long nails - say 3" to
> attach some trim - then there's some responsibility there, but it's
> basically the owner's.
> Say WHAT?
I don't know what that is supposed to mean. If you have a question,
ask it.
R
|
|
Posted by SteveB on October 13, 2009, 6:38 pm
> > Agree with John and Bob. I would also say the contractor is not
> > responsible for this. As others have pointed out, wiring is supposed
> > to be run far enough back that a finishing nail from molding can't
> > reach it or else have a metal plate covering it.
> Yep. Even if you had a contract, and the contract was any good,
> there'd be a clause in there about "latent and concealed conditions".
> The contractor doesn't have X-ray vision, and can't determine what is
> behind a wall. He has a reasonable expectation to believe that there
> aren't wires too close to the surface.
> If the contractor was using unnecessarily long nails - say 3" to
> attach some trim - then there's some responsibility there, but it's
> basically the owner's.
> Say WHAT?
I don't know what that is supposed to mean. If you have a question,
ask it.
R
Your statement that the owner would bear the responsibility for this act
befuddles me. The fact is that no matter what the location of the wire, the
wire was in good shape before the contractor did whatever he did. At the
least, he should have offered to open up a small area just to be safe. He
did not even do that, and gave the person, a layman, advice from an expert
professional that nothing was wrong, and it was safe, which may or may not
be the case. In my opinion, that was not a professional thing to do, and a
reasonable person would have cause to be concerned.
To the OP: Call your local Contractor's Board and the Fire Department and
see what they say. Find out if this man is in fact a licensed contractor.
I believe in your original question, you stated he was. If he is, they will
mediate, and bring on a fair solution. If someone else has to fix this and
open it up for inspection, it goes on him or his surety bond. They may be
interested in the hijinks of this fellow, who may or may not be licensed.
I, like you, would be concerned until I had a final impartial 100% sure
answer. What you got was not the actions and behavior of a "professional
contractor." And now you are living under stress from a potentially deadly
situation.
Steve, a retired contractor
|
|
Posted by HeyBub on October 13, 2009, 7:58 pm
SteveB wrote:
>>> Agree with John and Bob. I would also say the contractor is not
>>> responsible for this. As others have pointed out, wiring is supposed
>>> to be run far enough back that a finishing nail from molding can't
>>> reach it or else have a metal plate covering it.
>> Yep. Even if you had a contract, and the contract was any good,
>> there'd be a clause in there about "latent and concealed conditions".
>> The contractor doesn't have X-ray vision, and can't determine what is
>> behind a wall. He has a reasonable expectation to believe that there
>> aren't wires too close to the surface.
>> If the contractor was using unnecessarily long nails - say 3" to
>> attach some trim - then there's some responsibility there, but it's
>> basically the owner's.
>> Say WHAT?
> I don't know what that is supposed to mean. If you have a question,
> ask it.
> R
> Your statement that the owner would bear the responsibility for this
> act befuddles me. The fact is that no matter what the location of
> the wire, the wire was in good shape before the contractor did
> whatever he did. At the least, he should have offered to open up a
> small area just to be safe. He did not even do that, and gave the
> person, a layman, advice from an expert professional that nothing was
> wrong, and it was safe, which may or may not be the case. In my
> opinion, that was not a professional thing to do, and a reasonable
> person would have cause to be concerned.
> To the OP: Call your local Contractor's Board and the Fire
> Department and see what they say. Find out if this man is in fact a
> licensed contractor. I believe in your original question, you stated
> he was. If he is, they will mediate, and bring on a fair solution. If
> someone else has to fix this and open it up for inspection, it
> goes on him or his surety bond. They may be interested in the
> hijinks of this fellow, who may or may not be licensed. I, like you,
> would be concerned until I had a final impartial 100% sure answer. What
> you got was not the actions and behavior of a "professional
> contractor." And now you are living under stress from a potentially
> deadly situation.
> Steve, a retired contractor
It's said that the entire corpus of contract law theory can be mastered by
studying: The Fence, The Bull, and The Pit.
Here, we have a case of "The Pit," that is, a hidden hazard.
Some would argue that it is the responsibility of the owner to know, and
inform others, about this sort of thing. While a person with access may
exercise normal diligence, he cannot be expected to know all the problems.
If, for example, a visitor fell though a rotten porch step, liability would
lie with the owner of the porch. If, in this case, the carpenter shot a nail
into a live wire and was electrocuted, most, if not all, of the fault would
with the homeowner.
Admittedly, arguments can be made on either side. If I were on a jury,
however, I'd vote with the carpenter.
|
Page 3 of 10 < 1 2 3 > last >>
| Similar Threads | Posted | | kitchen crown moulding problem - long | June 30, 2005, 1:35 pm |
| Installing Crown Moulding on Kitchen Cabinets... condition them first? | February 10, 2005, 2:09 pm |
| Installing Crown Moulding on Kitchen Cabinets... condition them first? | February 10, 2005, 6:29 pm |
| kitchen contractor ordered the wrong cabinets, now what? | February 18, 2006, 10:04 pm |
| Kitchen range Hood/Vent in attic - How to Wire? | February 20, 2006, 12:36 am |
| frayed electrical wire behind kitchen stove/microwave | August 9, 2006, 8:56 pm |
| Ground wire for dual fuel kitchen stove | October 26, 2006, 1:40 am |
| Bathroom: architect versus contractor? which contractor? | March 4, 2007, 9:09 am |
| Subfloor Nailing | February 23, 2006, 12:52 am |
| U brackets, nailing | May 28, 2009, 8:51 pm |
|
|
Yahoo! 
Google 
Windows Live 
del.icio.us 
digg 
Netscape 
XML Sitemap