Clermont’s current private-provider page tells applicants where to send inspection results and the final certificate of compliance. A separate City-hosted policy PDF, however, expressly refers to Chapter 2019-165, Laws of Florida. Before using that PDF to set a project’s deadlines or record format, compare it with the current statute rather than assuming an accessible document has been fully updated. City provider instructions City-hosted policy
Separate three different submissions
| Submission | What to match before delivery |
|---|---|
| Provider notice and plan-review affidavit, where applicable | Owner authorization, provider identity, services selected and the actual reviewed plan set |
| Individual inspection result | Permit and address, inspection type, date, inspector identity and pass/fail outcome |
| Certificate of compliance | The completed inspection set, the provider’s sworn representation and any remaining City completion requirements |
These checks are LSL’s document-reconciliation aid, not additional City forms. Clermont directs inspection results to its Inspection email address and requires the certificate to summarize completed inspections. A certificate is not a substitute for missing inspection results or an unexplained failed item. City submission route
The older policy and current law do not say the same thing
The older policy says inspection records go to the City within two business days. Section 553.791(14) in the 2026 statutory compilation specifies four business days, with electronic-delivery and waiver provisions. Ask Building and the provider to reconcile the applicable reporting instructions before relying on the PDF alone. Policy, page 2 Current statute, subsection 14
The PDF separately specifies a 4 a.m. day-of-inspection notification. That instruction is not permission to read ordinary City office hours as the only available inspection hours: subsection 10 protects private-provider inspections outside normal hours, including weekends and holidays. This comparison identifies questions for the responsible parties; it does not decide a private dispute or certify that the City is enforcing an outdated requirement.
If an inspection identifies noncomplying work, subsection 10 requires reinspection after correction and before concealment. Match the corrective result to the original deficiency instead of treating a later report for a different inspection as resolution. Deficiencies and reinspection
Ask for the City’s completion record, not only the provider’s certificate
The provider’s certificate of compliance and the City’s certificate of occupancy or completion are different records. Current subsection 16 ties the latter process to the certificate request, provider compliance certificate, other required government approvals and outstanding fees. Do not start a private deadline calculation using only the date of the last inspection. Completion requirements
For a delayed closeout, the useful question is specific: which required inspection, form, approval or fee is still missing from the City’s record? Keep the response attached to the matching submission. The article does not declare a permit closed or a certificate automatically issued for an individual project.
LSL reviewed the current City page, all four pages of the City-hosted policy in text, and the relevant 2026 statutory provisions on September 21, 2026. No provider was hired, private file examined, inspection requested or legal outcome determined. The substantive difference between the older policy and current compilation is preserved rather than silently choosing whichever deadline looks convenient.