Two weeks before my "trial" date (Sept. 12, 2013 - 4 years AFTER the start of this fiasco with this municipality), a truss manufacturer told me they were told that a building inspector could "override" the provisions of the building code having to do with the "hinge situation" [created when the wrong truss was given for a load-bearing wall next to a cathedral ceiling - making the wall and roof subject to buckling and/or collapse]. THIS IS COMPLETELY FALSE!!!
NON-Engineers misrepresenting their qualifications are VIOLATING THE LAW!!!
The Building Code Act is very clear that persons enforcing the building code and/or Act can only enforce
those things WHICH THEY ARE QUALIFIED TO DO... and anyone who is NOT an ENGINEER would NOT know how to calculate Von Mises stress acting on the bottom chord of a gable end truss (the wrong truss we were given and which created a hinge condiion)!!!
To those who would attempt to say "Non-engineers" are qualified to tell us that... PROVE IT!!!
ANYONE determining truss suitability who is NOT an engineer, is thus, practicing engineering
without a license - and that is ILLEGAL!!!
Note: My "TRIAL" date was September 12, 2013!! Thus, this false belief is still very much a problem!!!
The fact that my "trial" was, in my opinion, nothing more than a "kangaroo court" because the "deputy
judge" refused to hear the issues before pronouncing "her judgment" instead of allowing the trial to
proceed as I was basically begging her to do in order to allow the issues to be heard and documented in
a legal forum, only further aggravated the situation as precedents were NOT allowed to be set in court!
A DANGEROUS AND COSTLY PROVISION IN THE BUILDING CODE...
Municipalities CAN NOT allow building inspectors to act as engineers in matters of structural integrity.
That would be a violation of BOTH the Engineering Act and Ontario Building Code Act!