Originally Posted by
Harvey Hempelstern
Judging by the defensive posture being taken by the supporters of this bill in Florida attempting to ensure that you do not get credit for any veto, Joe, it would appear you are closer to victory than many think.
Best wishes for success and a 16th consecutive year of fighting off the bad guys.
Who are the "supporters" of this bill? The "defensive posture" tact is similar to the penny stock boards saying when "bashers" show up, it must be a good stock!
I guess you never read Jerrys proposal. Maybe, if you are nice and he still has it, he will print it out for you.
I proposed a bill two years ago. It was too simple for the powers that be to grasp.
Here are some highlights:
1) Everyone who was in business as of the effective date was grandfathered in. No exceptions.
2) All inspections were performed to a set of standards (ASHI, NACHI, FABI), you choose.
3) All had to abide by a code of ethics, again, choose which one.
4) Limitation of liability 1 year from the inspection date, major defects only. Major to be defined as damage greater than $5,000.00.
Class one inspector: Passed the National home inspectors exam and code of ethics test.
Class two inspector: Same as one with these additions: Has completed 1,500 inspections or been in business for 5 years. Has maintained 60 hours of ceus yearly.
Class three inspector: Same as one and two with these additions: Performed 3,000 inspections or been in business for 10 years or more. Code certified in all areas. Note: Only a class three inspector can perform new home inspections.
Those were the broad strokes.
The problem with the current bill is that it only serves those that paid for it. It does not protect the public in any way and in fact, harms them, as an inspector who has met the requirements and never completed an inspection will be on par with a 10 year veteran.
Licensing needs to happen to legitimize the profession, not just for licensing sake.