#FAIL
I wish that hashtag referred to a cheeky internet meme, but this time it describes our deck footing inspection. We scheduled the inspector to check the six holes we dug for footings, assuming he’d only verify the locations, widths, and depths. Simple, right?
We even went a bit further and attached some ledger boards so the inspector could evaluate them too. I thought it would be smarter for him to review the ledger details early, rather than finishing the whole deck and discovering problems at the final inspection.
But the inspector found issues right away.
When he arrived he did three things that made my stomach drop:
- He shook his head.
- He said, “we’ve got some problems here.”
- He began quietly writing in his notebook.
From inside the house Sherry snapped a photo of me peeking out the guest room window—clearly not thrilled.
Once he explained the issues, things became clearer (and more expensive to fix). First, I’d missed two tiny but crucial letters in the county’s deck guide: “P.T.”—pressure treated. The rim board where I attached the ledger on the siding side needed to be pressure treated, and ours wasn’t.
Although we installed waterproof flashing behind that ledger, the inspector said we had two choices if we wanted a ledger on that side: replace the rim board with pressure treated wood (which would mean working on the house structure) or lower the deck about two feet and bolt into the masonry foundation instead.
That ledger issue wasn’t the only problem. On the brick side of the house the inspector told me we couldn’t attach the deck to the brick because it wasn’t reliable enough to carry the load. I thought longer screws that reached the rim board would solve that, but apparently that approach isn’t acceptable in our county.
He even drew a little diagram on the ledger to show why it was unacceptable: the air gap between the brick veneer and the house prevents the brick from transferring the deck’s load into the structure. In short, the brick veneer supports only its own weight, not the deck. Again, the practical fix would be to lower the ledger to anchor into the masonry foundation.
The inspector’s other option was to build a free-standing deck supported entirely by posts in the ground. Since neither of us wanted our deck two feet below the doorway level, a free-standing deck—slightly adjusted from our original plan—became the sensible solution. That meant revisiting the plan, digging more holes, and aiming to pass the next inspection after the changes.
At first I was pretty defeated. It felt like starting over. But I asked a few more questions, thanked him for his time, and tried not to sulk too long—although I did pout at Sherry for capturing another window photo of me mid-frustration.
The inspector handed me the official failed inspection slip, which stung. Back inside, I took a few quiet minutes to be upset—no beers, just some self-reproach. I felt bad for wasting my dad’s time, delaying progress, and ignoring my initial gut about building a free-standing deck. I also resented the permit office a bit for approving plans without clarifying the type of siding and rim board we had.
Sherry, however, put a positive spin on things. She wasn’t surprised we failed one inspection—our county is strict and many people fail at least one check. She pointed out that catching the issue now was far better than completing the whole deck and having to tear it down at the final inspection. Her perspective helped: this was a setback, not a catastrophe. She reminded me that this would be a good story later and that DIY rarely goes perfectly, but it’s usually worth the effort.
After regrouping, I called the building department and met with the reviewer who approved our initial plan. He redrew the plans for a free-standing deck with as few new post holes as possible—seven in total—and tried to reuse materials we’d already bought. Best of all, he agreed the existing ledger boards could function as rim boards with proper flashing, since the new posts and footings would carry the structural load.
So the main change from our original plan is adding seven posts to convert the deck to a free-standing structure with girders attached to those posts instead of to the house. That keeps our deck at the desired height while meeting code and avoiding structural changes to the house.
The meeting was productive and opened lines of communication with the building department—I’ve already called the reviewer with follow-up questions. With a revised plan in hand, a few more holes to dig, and some additional materials to buy, we’re moving forward. We’ll wait until the footing inspection passes before buying more, but we’re optimistic.
So that’s the update: a temporary setback, a smarter path forward, and a renewed plan for a free-standing deck that meets code. We’ll keep you posted on progress and any more bumps along the way. In the meantime, share your failed inspection stories or other DIY mishaps—especially those with happy endings. They help remind me that the process is frustrating sometimes, but usually worth it in the end.