08-27-2013, 03:41 AM
Here we go again.
If the bank is paying for it, and they require insurance coverage, then the bank and/or insurance company are within their rights to demand "compliance".
If the bank and/or insurance company aren't involved, the homeowner should be free to do as they see fit, subject to some minimal safety/sanitation requirements.
Given that County didn't see fit to enforce the "pavement before final plat approval" laws which were on the books at the time these "private" subdivisions were created, I see no reason to follow County's mandate that everything must be permitted/inspected.
"Like it matters, like anyone cares..."
If the bank is paying for it, and they require insurance coverage, then the bank and/or insurance company are within their rights to demand "compliance".
If the bank and/or insurance company aren't involved, the homeowner should be free to do as they see fit, subject to some minimal safety/sanitation requirements.
Given that County didn't see fit to enforce the "pavement before final plat approval" laws which were on the books at the time these "private" subdivisions were created, I see no reason to follow County's mandate that everything must be permitted/inspected.
"Like it matters, like anyone cares..."