Skip to content
News
Link copied to clipboard

City orders reinspections previously done by uncertified L&I workers

The city has ordered the reinspection of scores of buildings that were originally examined by inexperienced and uncertified inspectors from the Philadelphia Department of Licenses and Inspections.

This property on the 1900 block of Alter Street is among the scores that will be reinspected. ( Michael Bryant / Staff Photographer )
This property on the 1900 block of Alter Street is among the scores that will be reinspected. ( Michael Bryant / Staff Photographer )Read more

The city has ordered the reinspection of scores of buildings that were originally examined by inexperienced and uncertified inspectors from the Philadelphia Department of Licenses and Inspections.

The action comes after The Inquirer reported in March that L&I sent out uncertified inspectors to conduct 600 inspections on buildings throughout the city that had been declared unsafe - either badly damaged or deteriorated.

State officials said later in March that any of the original inspections of 181 buildings that fell under the Pennsylvania Uniform Construction Code (UCC) had to be performed by a person certified under the code. A large number of the inspections were affected by that and thus had to be repeated, according to people familiar with the situation.

"Any UCC inspection not performed by a UCC-certified individual is not valid," Department of Labor and Industry officials wrote in response to questions from The Inquirer.

Nine newly hired inspectors who were not UCC-certified conducted the February inspections, then recorded their work in the L&I database under the name of an inspector with more experience who had the required certification.

L&I Commissioner Carlton Williams declined to be interviewed.

In a statement, Williams said he ordered the reinspections "to reassure Philadelphians that their safety was not at risk and that there are no possible legal issues that could result from the training exercise."

He added that all nine inspectors are now UCC-certified.

In response to written questions, Williams said in March that while the original inspections were a training exercise, the nine performed "actual inspections on properties that are classified as unsafe."

An official city database record that says one person did the work of nine others is a misrepresentation akin to false police reports, said several L&I inspectors who asked not to be identified for fear of reprisal.

And City Controller Alan Butkovitz said the city could face possible legal problems as a result of inaccurate records.

If a contractor or property owner sued L&I, Butkovitz said, the agency would be hampered in court, having to acknowledge that an inspector examined a building but recorded his finding under an alias.

"Our records would be insufficient to establish what happened," Butkovitz said, adding, "There's a very good chance L&I will lose those cases."

On April 22, Williams said that the reinspections, which had begun eight days earlier, would be completed that day.

But L&I inspectors told The Inquirer last week that only half of the reinspections had been completed by April 22.

In response, a city spokesman acknowledged that the work had not been finished by April 22, but said the properties had been "visited by senior level inspectors" and that reinspections had been completed by April 27.

The L&I inspectors said that was not the case, noting that the agency's database shows that half of the inspections were either done incorrectly or were not done at all.

A city spokesman disputed that, saying the work was completed and had been done properly.

City officials and L&I inspectors remain at odds on the correct interpretation.

Regardless of when the reinspections were done, Butkovitz said, the work should have been done properly the first time.

"Why should the city have to duplicate the effort and pay twice the salary to get the required result?" he asked.

City officials declined to answer Butkovitz's question.

Butkovitz, along with several current or former L&I employees, disputed Williams' contention that the original inspections were a training exercise.

They suggested that agency officials had sent inexperienced, uncertified inspectors into the field to examine unsafe properties because the buildings had languished uninspected for two to three years. Agency officials felt pressure to inspect those buildings, inspectors said.

"This has all the hallmarks of an effort to clear a massive backlog of inspections," Butkovitz said.

City officials declined to comment on the controller's remarks.

Veteran L&I employees say they cannot recall a training exercise in which new hires were ordered to assess unsafe buildings, which often present complex and even dangerous problems. And they said trainees typically do not inspect buildings without a veteran in tow.

L&I workers also questioned why the trainees all signed into the L&I database under the name Shane McNulty, an L&I inspector who Williams said was helping train newcomers.

Williams has said the trainees had to sign in as McNulty because - even though part of their training was to learn the city's data system, they had not been set up on the system.

In fact, inspectors familiar with the L&I database said, most of the trainees had been signed into the system by the time they conducted the original inspections.