Mike,
Thanks for posting your notes. I wish I lived close enough to attend those meeting.
To the input from Fred Willcox
. (I wish I could take the smile away.) The purpose of the Inspector's committee is NOT to protect the consumer. That is supposed to be TREC's job. The committee's job is to advise and interpret. But let's assume he is right. Protecting the consumer includes helping to develop and implement meaningful and fair criteria for performance and developing reasonable procedures for doing so. IT IS NOT EXCLUSIVE OF PROVIDING REASONABLE MEANS OF PROTECTION FOR THE LICENSEE, as well as the consumer.
Phillip, from all I can tell about you, you are a decent and honorable man. But, I must disagree with you about TREC and it's staff of attorneys. They do not understand that protecting the consumer is not acting as prosecutor or that enforcement is not the same as prosecution. It certainly appears that where HIs are concerned TREC has a definite air of "guilty until proven innocent." Otherwise, why would they, as a matter of course, stray from the complaint and search the Inspector's report for areas of non-compliance unrelated to a complaint? I think the position should be "accept the complaint, verify or deny the complaint, and take action if warranted on the complaint."
With 253 total complaints over 10 years and total 53 disciplinary actions over 10 years, I suggest that Mr. Willcox's assumptions of the need for Gestapo methods of protection are greatly exaggerated.