Code Violations On Grandfathered Property
If a property is "grandfathered" with respect to code issues and I choose to do some minor renovation work, does that give the building inspector the right to search the entire house/property for violations? I have a situation where I feel like I am going to be targeted for violations that predated my ownership. The only reason I chose to buy the building is because it was "grandfathered" (as stated in writing by the building inspector before I purchased) and I thought I was immune from those issues. Unfortunately, the building inspector is a very, very difficult person to work with. Any advice would be much appreciated. Thanks!!!
I think this is a question for a RE attorney in your area, and hopefully someone who knows the municipal players.
Building inspector a difficult person? Never happened before in my experience but I suppose it could be. LOL
A decent answer would require more understanding of what is grandfathered and what work you intend to do.
Usually "health and safety" items are not grandfathered. Zoning issues usually are. In between there is a variety of situations.
In addition there is ususally some standard to determine how much work is enough to cause you to loose your exemption. The one I see most often is a standard that goes something like, If your renovation costs exceed the original construction costs then you loose all grandfathering. Given that they do not adjust the original construction costs for inflation that is often very easy to do.
However there is some recognition by the code enforcers that they need to allow you to maintain the building without triggering the revocation of the grandfathered status or you will simply allow the building to gradually deteriorate.
Not terribly helpful but without more details about the situation its the best I could do.
Once upon a time, I was the listing agent of a building lot that was non-conforming in a muncipality that had a zoning officer who was a very difficult person. The zoning officer persisted in taking the position that the lot didn't qualify as non-conforming. His reasons had nothing to do with the ordinance and the facts. It had to do with "political" considerations--the guy next door to the lot was well connected and wanted to buy the lot.
This is why I suggest you consult a local RE attorney who's "plugged into" the muncipal network.