[galangalalgol]

The inspector did fail it, and has failed every house I've ever had inspected. The inspectors for my buyers also failed it. People just kind of live with it on old houses. Never thought about it making an insurance claim fail. So the main breaker only turns off one leg? Why wouldn't you have one for each.

[quesera]

The mains breaker controls both legs, but they are separately protected. So if a protection sensor fails, it might only interrupt one leg. The switch controls both legs though.

I've done a lot of electrical work in old houses, but only in big cities where a failing inspection is just not tolerated. I've seen old country homes where regulation is ... less strict. This might not be an urban/rural divide, but that's my experience having lived in both.

I'm amazed that you were able to buy or sell a house that did not pass inspection. If the buyer was financing, the mortgage would require insurance, which would require inspection. In a cash sale, the buyer should be sophisticated enough to take responsibility for the repairs.

I think (in my high-regulation states) it's actually not legal to sell a house that does not pass a safety inspection. At least not without surrendering the certificate of occupancy until repairs are completed and inspected.

[galangalalgol]

These houses have all been in the DFW metroplex, so low regulation TX. The people that bought the terrifying breakerbox had a first time homeowner loan and the lender complained about some of the vegetation being too close to the house, but somehow the box was ok. I turned the main breaker on and back off, and half the lights were still in. Weird one. All the outlets that had a ground hole were actually grounded, most of my friends have houses with fake grounds, knob and tube or worse, aluminum wiring. Regulations are sometimes a good thing. Its probably why our houses are cheaper though.