Builders, regulators quarrel over mandate on home sprinklers
Homebuilders in Connecticut say consumers should decide for themselves whether they want sprinklers installed in their homes, opposing a state mandate that requires homes built after January 1, 2011 have the anti-fire sprinklers installed.
Fire officials counter that aside from improving the safety rating of properties and helping to keep homeowners insurance costs low, they can save lives. However, builders told the Insurance Journal the systems are actually turning away consumers who fear the sprinklers may go off accidentally and ruin furniture, a concern they admit doesn't hold much water. At the same time, real or imagined, anything turning off consumers from buying a home is not welcome for builders dealing with a dearth of demand for new properties.
The report added data from the National Fire Protection Association showed an average 7 percent discount on homeowners insurance premiums is generally made available to residents in properties with the devices.
Municipalities around the country are following the NFPA's advice and mandating sprinklers. In an opinion piece for Pennsylvania's Morning Call, builder Ray Venema said most builders are fine with the anti-fire devices but believe they should only be installed at the request of a homeowner.
Related Home Insurance Articles:
- Homes destroyed by Nevada wildfire May 23, 2012
- Researchers hope to better understand tornado damage May 22, 2012
- Total costs from Minneapolis tornado reach $80 million May 21, 2012
- Analysis shows more than $2B of insurance claims from Joplin tornado May 18, 2012
- Recovery continues for Michigan tornado victims May 17, 2012
