Jim Bob and Tom Frank

General discussion area relating to building and construction codes. To post a topic for discussion you must register. Everyone is welcome to register. Registration is necessary to fight off spam. Under no circumstance is any part of this forum to be used for advertising or spam purposes. Welcome to our Minnesota community forum!

Jim Bob and Tom Frank

Postby RDavidson » Thu Apr 23, 2015 2:07 pm

Inspectors Jim Bob and Tom Frank are having a discussion about some new codes. Jim Bob says he doesn’t like the way some rules are written and he thinks they aren’t necessary and he says so. He says he is going to interpret the code that this rule is not required.

Tom Frank asks Jim Bob if he isn’t worried about the repercussions of publicly stating he wasn’t going to enforce a certain rule.

Jim Bob says, “Heck no Tom Frank, the law gives me the responsibility to interpret the code and that is what I am doing, interpreting the code”.

Tom Franks says “I don’t think you are interpreting the code Jim Bob, I think you are ignoring it”.

Jim Bob says, “So what if I am, no big deal, I don’t want to deal with this rule”.

Tom Frank says, “But Jim Bob, what you are going to ignore might cause a serious injury or even a death. And since it is common knowledge that you are ignoring it, isn’t that what they called nonfeasance in that seminar you and I went to in Bermidji?”

Jim Bob says, “Nothing has ever happened before Tom Frank. Besides, I am retiring in a month and if something does happen I’ll be untouchable”.

Tom Frank then says, “Not so fast Jim Bob. Don’t you remember that inspector in Colorado who was charged criminally for something he missed and four people died from carbon monoxide poisoning and he was arrested and put in jail and he was retired when he was arrested? And he hadn’t publicly stated he was going to ignore something, it might have been an oversight.”

Jim Bob says, “Yabut”

Then Tom Frank says, “Yabut nothing, the guy had to post bail to get out and had to hire an attorney and the charges were eventually dismissed but then he was sued civilly. And you won’t be an employee and you might need to pay for your own defense. And, then there was a national code change in the I-Codes that requires a jurisdiction to pay your legal expenses even if it is a criminal charge but that language isn’t in Minnesota rules. They could hang you out to dry.”

Jim Bob says, “Yabut”.
RDavidson
 
Posts: 317
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2007 2:36 pm

Re: Jim Bob and Tom Frank

Postby s thorp » Fri May 08, 2015 11:17 am

So what happened to Jim Bob, how does Tom Frank know Jim Bob's interpretation is wrong?

Did Jim Bob and Tom Frank take any action to determine what the correct interpretation was/is?

Does Jim Bob just keep his mouth shut and continue his ways; therefore, he doesn't get into trouble but Tom Frank is going to hold it over him? What if Jim Bob was right?

Isn't there some avenue that Jim Bob can get a sufficient answer so he and Tom Frank can each feel comfortable with their interpretations?

If Jim Bob and Tom Frank are together with their interpretations, are they then on the same page with Curly Sue who lives many miles away?

There must be a conclusion to this, it cannot end with a yabut. Can it?
s thorp
 
Posts: 11
Joined: Thu Feb 22, 2007 5:27 pm
Location: City of Mounds View


Return to 10K Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests

cron