Home Inspector Licensing 2007 Scorecard

[Tim Moreira]

I think this thread has now surpassed the *garage door testing methods* thread.

OK now, don't make me ask the question, "How do you all test gara....."

[Deleted Account]

I have been asked to compose a letter to balance the one being circulated by NAHI here in Florida, I am posting it here for anyone to use in whole or part.

Dear Governor Crist:

From your years as Florida Attorney General and now as our Governor it is apparent that your goal is to protect the citizens of Florida. As a professional member of the Florida home inspection industry, I too seek to protect the consumer when making the single most expensive purchase they are likely to ever undertake, we are on the same team.

Today you are being presented the option to enact home inspector legislation into law here in Florida. At first glance House Bill 1399 and Senate Bill 2234 appear to be a viable way to set standards for the home inspection profession and insure the public will attain some modicum of protection. A true study of the bills provisions though would reveal they are lacking in any language that would set a minimum standard of care to protect the consumer. The bills are deficient in that they have no written Standards of Practice, nor is there any Code of Ethics upon which to guide the home inspector in his duty’s to the public. Furthermore the bill does not provide the consumer any information on what constitutes an inspection or what expectations can be relied upon when an inspection is performed. What really pains me and the majority of home inspectors in Florida is the association who is pushing hard for the passage of this legislation is the very same organizations that allows their members to perform repairs on homes they have inspected, which is clearly recognized as a conflict of interest by all other respected home inspection associations.

If you take the time to truly read this bill you will readily see this bill is not in keeping with the high standards that you have set for your administration and I respectfully request that you veto this legislation. Signing this poorly written legislation that lacks any set of standards into law would give consumers a false hope of protection where none currently exist within the bills.

We know your conviction to the citizens of Florida and your fervent desire to protect them, please send this legislation back to the House and Senate and demand this bill be amended to include language which would truly set Standards of Practice that will protect the public.

[Tim Moreira]

Joe,

I like it.

Can you send him one like that on our home owners insurance so that we all don't end up moving out of the state in the next three to five years.

[Harvey Hempelstern]

The sponsor of Missouri's bill, Mike Parson, announced to a reporter in the state capital that he is not advancing the bill. It is dead. Missouri remains free from home inspection legislation.

[Deleted Account]

The sponsor of Missouri's bill, Mike Parson, announced to a reporter in the state capital that he is not advancing the bill. It is dead. Missouri remains free from home inspection legislation.

It appears that using chaos theory and exposing your opponents dirty deals to the light of the free press is a valid method of defeating home inspector licensing legislation bills throughout the country.

Uncovering the clandestine dealings between the so-called home inspector coalition & the Realtors exposed the sham to the`public for what it was... a protectionist plan to allow Realtors to control the home inspection industry in Missouri.

What is your assessment of how much time & money was thrown down a rats hole on a supposed done-deal slam-dunk licensing legislation bill in Missouri?

I figure a quarter of a million dollars were wasted, imagine the results had those dollars been funneled into marketing & education instead of this nonsense? Hopefully next year the true concerned home inspectors of Missouri will help to empty the licensing Nazi's coffers and send them to the poorhouse once and for all.

[Michael P. O'Handley]

Well another one bites the dust... Home inspector licensing in the sunny state of Washington went down in flames, the wailing and gnashing of teeth from the TIJ board could be heard all the way down to Tampa.

Really?

Joe, you're going to have to point me to those threads, because what's been happening in Washington State hardly made a blip on TIJ. Hardly anyone from outside of the state showed any interest and I'll be darned if I can find one post with wailing or gnashing of teeth - even metaphorically. You haven't been dragging plastic wrapped bales of brown vegetable matter out of the ocean off the coast down there and been smoking it have you? Joe, you sly dog! Who would have ever expected you to be a potty-head?

My guess is that it will take at least another $100K and ten thousand man hours to get this thing through next year. Another win for freedom, liberty and the American way and another blow to socialism and big government.

Holy Sh*t! Did someone actually spend $100K trying to get that bill passed? (Oh, wait a minute - I see a reference to "blow" in there. Now I get it.) Funny, I thought it was the most powerful Democratic Senator in a Democratically-controlled state senate who got a bug up her butt about licensing who started the whole thing without anyone spending a dime. As best I could tell, nobody on either side of the issue spent much at all. Some gasoline to drive to Olympia. A few dollars on coffee and snacks once or twice a month. Maybe a little for bandwidth for some e-mails. But no real expenses for anyone in favor of it or anyone trying to defeat, as far as I could see.

Maybe one or two inspectors lost a job or two, because they chose to attend the hearings in Olympia, but there weren't any fancy high-paid lobbyists running around Olympia trying to wine and dine anyone. Heck, it wasn't even that much of an issue in Olympia. Despite the noise that folks on both side of the issue made for months, not a whole lot of people showed up for any hearings. The truth is, there's a lot of apathy here toward the whole subject of licensing and the number of people actually making noise is comparatively few compared to how many inspectors there actually are. Most inspectors here probably sort of yawned and said, "Home inspector licensing law? Really? Wow, I had no idea. Well, I've gotta job to go to, so let me know how it comes out."

Despite all of the rhetoric coming off of this and the NACHI board about how the people who were behind it are involved with training or are established inspectors who wanted to keep out competition, I couldn't find one single person in the state who could corroborate that with any real facts. Where do you get your information. You must have some amazing sources down there in Florida, Joe.

I hope the licensing boot-licker's are feeling the agony of defeat as the winners eat their Wheaties the Breakfast of Champions.

Maybe so. Could you tell me who they are, so I can interview them? I live up here and I can't find a whole lot of folks that were happy about the prospect of licensing, let alone any that could qualify as boot lickers. Oh, wait a minute. I just remembered, wasn't it your buddy Nick Gromicko who told Larry Stamp that he was personally pushing SB5788, and that when he, Nick Gromicko (not NACHI), pushes something, it usually gets passed? So, I guess Nick would be one of those so-called boot lickers who is feeling the agony of defeat. Huh! Who would have ever thought that with all of those members' dollars, that he could have used for a lobbyist, eating a hole in his pocket that Nick would have been defeated. Wow! I guess that is something to crow about.

Next year should be the best when the grandfather clause is eliminated and all the licensing pushers will have to jump through the same hoops as everyone else to get licensed, its gonna get messy, be sure to wear long pants.

No Grandfathering In Home Inspector Licensing Laws!

That's a helluva crystal ball you've got there, Joe. Gosh, it must be fantastic to be so all-knowing and wise. Can you teach me the secret of how one accumulates all of that wisdom and becomes so worldly?

OK, I truly don't know where Joe comes up with this stuff, but if he were to submit to a urine test to determine whether he's been dabbling in happy smoke, we might come to understand. Anyway, here's what's I can tell you about what's going on in Washington State - the licensing bill - SB5788 - is NOT dead. It's been temporarily sidelined while a sunrise review is being done.

We hope the bill is dead, but we won't know until the sunrise review is completed and returned to the house committee that sent it there. Then, depending on what the Department of Licensing reviewer has uncovered and recommends, it could once again rear its ugly head. The simple truth is that the most powerful democratic senator in a democratically controlled state government in a heavily democrat state, for whatever reason, wants to notch her holster with this bill, and unless someone can change her mind, it's liable to be revived this fall and see passage early in the next legislative session, because she's acting like a pit bull clamped onto a bull's behind and doesn't seem to want to let it go.

As of 10 days ago, which is the last time I talked to anyone from DOL about this, DOL still hadn't assigned the study to a specific caseworker because it hadn't officially begun the process yet. As soon as they get it the clock starts ticking and they have a certain time line to meet specific benchmarks in the sunrise review process. When they begin, they'll start soliciting input from home inspectors and anyone else they think the proposed regulation will impact. Maybe that will be the alleged "stakeholders" that the Senator told the Senate Labor and Commerce Committee had all been 'consulted' at the first public hearing on the bill.

The sunrise review is a study to determine whether the proposed legislation is justified. It is done only at the request of the chairs of the legislative committees. The only victory that anyone can ballyhoo is that they've managed to get the bill punted to DOL for the Sunrise Review. If Senator's Spanel and Kohl-Welles have their way, the sunrise review might just end up being a minor speed bump and nothing more.

According to legislative guidelines here, it's the intent of the state legislature that all individuals have the right to enter into any business profession, unless there is "an overwhelming need for the state to protect the interests of the public by restricting entry." Enhancement of professional status alone is not enough to justify regulation. Now, I've never seen where there are are hundreds of reports of incompetent home inspectors on the TV news or in the newspaper here. I did see where KIRO7 suddenly dug up an old still-unsettled case from about 4 years ago that one of the Senators conveniently used as a backdrop to declare her resolve to put controls on home inspectors, but that is about it, so one would logically expect that a fair process would see the bill's demise. One would logically expect that, but I think it's too soon to count chicks.

Anyone who wants to know more about the sunrise review process can find out more about it at The DOL website. It will explain that a business profession should be regulated or its scope of practice expanded only when:

"-Unregulated practice can clearly harm or endanger the health, safety or welfare of the public, and the potential for the harm is easily recognizable and not remote or dependent upon tenuous argument;

-The public needs and can reasonably be expected to benefit from an assurance of initial and continuing professional ability;

-The public cannot be effectively protected by other means in a more cost-beneficial manner."

That said, if they decide that a profession must be regulated, it's policy that they implement the least restrictive method of regulation that's consistent with the public interest.

So, let me give you the Reader's Digest version of what's going to happen:

DOL assigns it to a caseworker.

That caseworker is responsible for researching laws in other states to see what's worked, what hasn't worked and what affect - positive or negative - licensing has had on the profession.

That caseworker will collect input from stakeholders, special interest groups and others.

That caseworker will figure out what regulation will cost and whether there is sufficient number of inspectors in the state to pay for it.

The caseworker will turn his/her results over to his honcho and then the honcho will decide whether he/she feels the proposal is justified and there's a way to pay for it, based on the data the caseworker collected.

If DOL decides that regulation isn't warranted. or the benefit doesn't justify the cost, it's sent back to the committee chair with a recommendation to kill it.

If DOL decides that it's necessary and there are sufficient numbers of home inspectors to pay for it, but that the law is too restrictive, they'll send it back with a recommendation for modifications.

If DOL decides that it's not too restrictive and it's necessary, and the program will generate enough revenue to pay for itself, it will get sent back with a recommendation for passage.

From there, it's back into the legislators' hands.

They can still kill it, if there is overwhelming opposition and they're afraid it will hurt them politically. That's not likely. Home inspectors here as a demographic have about as much power as a gnat on a bull's ass. Without powerful allies, they're pretty much at the mercy of the pols.

If the legislators don't think it will hurt them and could do them some good politically, while still benefiting the consumer, they'll probably pass it, in which case, it's sent to the governor for signature.

The governor, also a lady democrat, will probably sign it, unless there is a really good reason not to. This is where DOL's sunrise review can come in handy, because DOL also recommends to the governor whether they think it should pass or should be defeated. If DOL doesn't recommend passage, there's a chance she'll veto it.

If there aren't enough votes to override a gubernatorial veto, then it dies and not before.

Folks in Washington State on either side of this issue should neither be congratulating themselves nor feeling defeated, because this bill is still far from dead. The DOL guy said they called it the "bill that wouldn't die."

So, inspectors, take this "scorecard" with a grain of salt and keep your ears to the ground in your own states, instead of giving credence to the megalomaniacal rantings of an inspector in another state who has less than a clue about what you have to go through in your own.

For those of you in Washington State, if you're really interested in this thing one way or the other, write to your pols and talk to influential friends about it and ask them to write to their pols, because the sunrise review is all about gauging interest one way or the other.

For more information about the process, go to: WA State Licensing: Sunrise review reports

ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!!

Mike O'Handley

[Deleted Account]

Mike,

As always thanks for your contribution to our little licensing thread, it would certainly be a dull world if we all agreed. In regards to blowing smoke, an old Irish proverb so eloquently says... Smoke your pipe and be silent; there's only wind and smoke in the world. Good advice if you ask me.

Joe.

[Deleted Account]

Defeated Missouri Home Inspector bill follow up. Posted for all the folks who said it couldn't be done, good work Missouri!

[Randy Aldering]

The reason that licensing proponents have such a difficult time getting bills passed is because those who favor licensing are by & large liars and the legislators are on to the lies. Had the inception of licensing been sprung from the loins of consumers we would have been licensed decades ago. But the push for licensing is not consumer driven no all licensing laws were created by home inspectors seeking to gain an unfair advantage over their competition. The good thing is that it takes very little effort to inject chaos, create doubt or an atmosphere of disharmony.

Inject what you may. But make sure it is the truth. THAT, is not.

[Deleted Account]

Inject what you may. But make sure it is the truth. THAT, is not.

And... What is truth?

[Michael P. O'Handley]

Update:

I'd completely forgotten about this thread. Well, this year the same Senator, for the 3rd January in a row, again introduced a bill in the Senate to regulate home inspectors.

This time, the Washington Home Inspectors Legislative Advisory Group (WHILAG), a coalition made up of home inspectors from all of the associations as well as independents, had done their homework and she found herself facing a companion bill introduced in the house that WHILAG had authored, as well as many key legislators that WHILAG had educated about the profession. Seeing the prospect of another killed bill, she finally invited WHILAG to meet with her and work out differences between her bill and the WHILAG version. The bill then breezed through the senate, went on to the house where a couple of slight housekeeping amendments were made, and then it passed the house 93 to 0 and is currently on the governor's desk awaiting her signature.

In the end, through WHILAG's efforts, backed by some strategic lobbying, home inspectors ended up with a board made up of 100% home inspectors instead of the real estate folks and educators that the senator had originally wanted on the board. There is no requirement to be a member of any home inspection organization, in order to be a member of the home inspectors advisory board, and no more than two members from any single home inspection organization may sit on the board at the same time. So, technically, it's impossible for members of any single home inspectors' association to control the board. In fact, it's just as likely that the board makeup could be 100% independents, or made up of one from each of the nationals and the rest independents. What's key though, is that it will be home inspectors and not non-inspectors making decisions about our profession.

But that's not the most significant thing; if she signs this bill into law, home inspectors here will finally, after 18 years, again be separated from the pest inspection business and will be able to write up rotten wood and conducive conditions, without the need to be licensed as a pest inspector and carry coverage for pest-related issues. To those of you in the majority of other states where that's the norm, that's no big deal, but here it is huge 'cuz it was the pest guys who foisted that rule on us back in 1991 and it's been sand in the shorts of home inspectors ever since.

Whether or not licensing will not "solve" anything, as Joe is so fond of saying, won't be known for a few years. We should be able to tell you whether it was a good thing or a bad thing for inspectors here somewhere around the middle of 2011.

First though, one thing at a time; let's see if she signs the bill into law or vetos it.

ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!!

Mike

[Raymond Wand]

As the way it should be. Congratulations, hope it passes reading.

In the end, through WHILAG's efforts, backed by some strategic lobbying, home inspectors ended up with a board made up of 100% home inspectors instead of the real estate folks and educators that the senator had originally wanted on the board. There is no requirement to be a member of any home inspection organization, in order to be a member of the home inspectors advisory board, and no more than two members from any single home inspection organization may sit on the board at the same time. So, technically, it's impossible for members of any single home inspectors' association to control the board. In fact, it's just as likely that the board makeup could be 100% independents, or made up of one from each of the nationals and the rest independents. What's key though, is that it will be home inspectors and not non-inspectors making decisions about our profession.

[Deleted Account]

As the way it should be. Congratulations, hope it passes reading.

I'll be willing to bet thousands that if & when licensing comes the board will be populated with political appointments from the Governors office and those who do in fact become board members will be clueless as to who we are and what we do.

Inspector disappointment with the process & results of licensing legislation is the number one outcome experienced when working with the government.

Elected officials will forever and always put their re-election priorities before doing what is right and that is why incompetent home inspectors are handed a license, they are after all voters too.

[Raymond Wand]

Inspector disappointment with the process & results of licensing legislation is the number one outcome experienced when working with the government.

Well if thats the case then inspectors need to assure their interests are represented which does not appear to have been the case in every instance of licencing.

Cheers,

[Deleted Account]

Well if thats the case then inspectors need to assure their interests are represented which does not appear to have been the case in every instance of licencing.

And just how do powerless home inspectors insure that their interests will be represented when working with lying, cheating government officials who's only goal is to be re-elected?

The wise home inspector would be much better off resisting any intervention of government into our profession. There simply are no cases where state licensing has benefited our profession, none.

[Raymond Wand]

Okay Joesph, whatever you say. You seem to be the lone voice of reasoning to suit your agenda. Carry on!

[Harvey Hempelstern]

It appears that Missouri HB 2057 proposing the licensing of home inspectors has been shelved.

No one could show the "Show Me" state a demonstrated need.

A room full of dejected ASHI presidents had to leave the conference room to look for inspection work, having had their hopes of making money mentoring inspectors under the new bill dashed to pieces.

[Raymond Wand]

James,

No doubt to see your posts everywhere on licencing, everyone owes you a great deal of gratitude. For once your big mouth staved of licencing!

Btw James why do you feel it necessary to hack this board and the ASHI board, after your little rant about hacking?

[Deleted Account]

It appears that Missouri HB 2057 proposing the licensing of home inspectors has been shelved.

No one could show the "Show Me" state a demonstrated need.

I congratulate the wisdom of those leaders in Missouri who saw past the empty promises and false sense of consumer protection touted by those who push licensing as the panacea that will cure all of our profession's ills. The licensing proponents remind me of dime store novel snake-oil barkers who push their worthless colored water in fancy glass bottles at carnival sideshows.

Furthermore I hope the license pushers pissed away their entire bankroll in this useless folly and that word spreads far & wide that resistance is not futile regarding home inspector licensing and that bills can be defeated.

Florida is a perfect example of failed home inspector licensing legislation. Since the bill's signing the effective date has been pushed out once and it still has not been funded. Faced with the cut-backs Florida will endure the money may never materialize, and if it does there is a group preparing to get the state attorney involved in nullifying the bill based on the sunrise study.

Remember, chaos is the fabric of the universe and all systems gain entropy, In other words... it don't take half as much effort to tip the applecart as it did to load it.

Bravo Missouri!

[Steven Meyer]

Licensing vs non licensing

Either way, it still comes down to "buyer beware"

There are good and bad inspectors in any state with licensing and does not have licensing.

I don't see where licensing will deal with/find/take out bad inspectors.

The free market will take care of that, in both situations. Bad inspectors will be found out (license or not), will lose business, and thus financially forced out of business.

The good drives out the bad

Consider other licensing: doctors, lawyers, Real Estate Agents etc. They all have their share of bad apples, however don't see/hear of those licenses being revoked very often.

Consumer protection NOT!!! The consumer should always research, get recommendations, and should not rely on government licensing as a gurantee of a competent person, no matter what the profession/industry.

[Raymond Wand]

And who protects the inspectors from unscrupulous associations if there is no outside oversight, never mind the public?

[Harvey Hempelstern]

The last I heard, membership in "associations" (unscrupulous or otherwise) is voluntary. Protecting one from his own choice is about as Socialist as you can get.

[Michael Larson]

And who protects the inspectors from unscrupulous associations if there is no outside oversight, never mind the public?

“Things cannot always go your way. Learn to accept in silence the minor aggravations, cultivate the gift of taciturnity and consume your own smoke with an extra draught of hard work, so that those about you may not be annoyed with the dust and soot of your complaint.”
Sir William Osler

[Raymond Wand]

Joe B.

I like the last paragraph of the letter you drafted to Govenor Crist.

We know your conviction to the citizens of Florida and your fervent desire to protect them, please send this legislation back to the House and Senate and demand this bill be amended to include language which would truly set Standards of Practice that will protect the public.

So you really do support licencing as long as it meets a SOP that will protect the public!

Thats great news. Congratulations. I couldn't agree with you more!

Cheers,

[Raymond Wand]

Michael,

Going my way? Thats funny coming from someone of your ilk and lowly qualifications. Btw did you ever find your flashlight? I know where it is.

[Raymond Wand]

James

You are being a hypocrite again, considering your record of abuse of power!

[Michael Larson]

Michael,

Going my way? Thats funny coming from someone of your ilk and lowly qualifications. Btw did you ever find your flashlight? I know where it is.

Raymond, you're so predictable. Better watch out, Brian doesn't like personal attacks on his board.

[Raymond Wand]

Michael

Whats the matter Michael, don't like the heat?

[Michael Larson]

Michael

Whats the matter Michael, don't like the heat?

Excuse me?

[Raymond Wand]

.... okay you are excused.

[Michael Larson]

.... okay you are excused.

No heat in here.
There is a lot of smoke however.

Raymond, if you love licensing so much I suggest you move to the states. Maybe Texas would suit you.

[Raymond Wand]

Michael

Do you have any room at your house? I hear there is a lot of smoke at your house! And I don't mean the meat smoker out back.

[Michael Larson]

Michael

Do you have any room at your house? I hear there is a lot of smoke at your house! And I don't mean the meat smoker out back.

Hearing voices again?

Up your meds Raymond.

[Steven Meyer]

Raymond Wand

The same applies to HI organizations. Buyer beware Research, ask questions of others, Get all the advice you can get, then you can make a educated decission. Knowledge equals personal power and responsability.

So, in your world then, all HI organizations should be subjected to licensing? And I guess that would apply to just about any organization? Don't know about you up accross the northern boarder, but we have this nifty little right, in our constution, FREEDOM OF CHOICE, FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION.

You seem to believe that government, through licensing, can protect you from yourself. Freedom, try it, you might like it. Now, take a deep breath of fresh air, before the government a licenses(and taxes) that.

How about a litte personal responsibilty in the decissions we make in life.

And, when, will we need a license, so we can make decissions on our own????

[Raymond Wand]

Michael

You don't tolerate heat very well!

[Raymond Wand]

Steven,

We need protection from ourselves. Anyone who has been in the game long enough and has first hand experience with associations knows that they are anything but self policing. Therein lies the problem vis-a-vis the public, no outside scrutiny or accountability results in the rules being bent for special interests.

[Ron Bibler]

Think of some one from the your state comming into your office. Putting his boot on you desk. then pulls out a hanky and starts to shine the tips of his boots and looks you in the eyes and says may i see your papers!

This happen to me one time.

California Structural Pest Control Board.

You guys can't just rool over on this one.

Then they want a X $ for each inspection and give you 10 days to report all your address.

best

Ron

[Deleted Account]

Some of us have been pro licensing for quite some time, others have been anti-licensing and still the vast majority of home inspectors are ambivalent and clueless, the net-net result of all this hooey has been a proliferation of weak licensing laws that fall far short of their intended goals.

I have said all there is about this dilemma and other to have the privilege of saying "I told you so" nothing of value was accomplished. I am through with this losing battle of attrition and will have no further say on the subject, my time & resources are limited and better spent on worthwhile goals that produce fruit for me. Besides there is not now, nor will there ever be a licensing requirement that I can't meet.

So, I am declaring myself free from carrying this anti-licensing torch and you can all clean up after yourselves, especially Mr. O'Handley who I suspect will soon be up to his elbows alligators vainly attempting to drain the Washington swamp. Thanks for the ride, Adiós.

[Billy Stephens]

.
So, I am declaring myself free from carrying this anti-licensing torch --- Adiós.

Ah Joe,
.
Don't go away mad.

[Michael P. O'Handley]

So, I am declaring myself free from carrying this anti-licensing torch and you can all clean up after yourselves, especially Mr. O'Handley who I suspect will soon be up to his elbows alligators vainly attempting to drain the Washington swamp. Thanks for the ride, Adiós.

Ah, Joey Chubbycheeks, you give me too much credit. Although I've made it my business to know what's happening with this law, I really had very little to do with it, other than to help some folks form a coalition to address a flawed bill a little more than two years ago. I really wish I was as smart and capable of engineering all of the machinations that folks are always attributing to me. If I were, I'd be rich and spending my days on a warm beach someplace instead of slogging around sloppy crawlspaces for a living.

ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!!

Mike

[Raymond Wand]

Or....you could spend your time with Nick in Colorado!

[Harvey Hempelstern]

It would appear by his many recent outbursts against NACHI that Wand's efforts to regain his membership with them has failed.

[Raymond Wand]

Outbursts James?

Strange considering your private emails laced with profanities! You sure have an extensive vocabulary! You should set an example for others instead of being the proverbial jaw bone of a donkey!

Whens the next sitting of the Kangaroo Court?

[Jerry Peck]

Some of us have been pro licensing for quite some time, others have been anti-licensing and still the vast majority of home inspectors are ambivalent and clueless, the net-net result of all this hooey has been a proliferation of weak licensing laws that fall far short of their intended goals.

I have said all there is about this dilemma and other to have the privilege of saying "I told you so" nothing of value was accomplished. I am through with this losing battle of attrition

"Some of us have been pro licensing"???????

Joey, you are putting yourself in the "us" of "some of us"??

You don't fit in there at all.

You do fit in the "others have been anti-licensing" category.


"the net-net result of all this hooey has been a proliferation of weak licensing laws that fall far short of their intended goals"

Let's see, YOU (specifically "you", not as in 'you' meaning plural) have fought and resisted licensing which contained ANY semblance of decent
strength, and now YOU are lamenting the weak license laws which have resulted in part from YOUR and others rantings?

"I am through with this losing battle"

Yeah, you lost that one, and REALLY LOST, because of your efforts to make everything weak - and now are complaining that they are weak.

"So, I am declaring myself free from carrying this anti-licensing torch "

See? There you go again.

"Thanks for the ride, Adiós."

Don't let the screen door hit you in your butt on your way out ...

[William Mize]

Gentlemen:

Allowme to wax philosophically (spel chk sad it wuz OK) about inspector licensening. I have watched this thread with interest and amuzement.

First, Oklahoma is a licensing state and was before I began my inspection business, I had even planned to start the business before I did but the Inspector Licensing Law passed and I decided to wait until things had settled down before starting doing inspections. After the bureaucrats had everything set the way they wanted it I got my waterfoul arrayed in a linear fashion and got my license to perform home inspectors.

Second, Inspector Licensing is never about making inspectors do better jobs. For the politician backing inspecton licensing it is about "Look at what I am doing for you home buyers the inspectors are required to do this or that" it's what polilticians do best politicize. For the bureaucrats it is about jobs and job security. When a government office becomes overstaffed they look for ways to expand their jobs and guess what "hey politico did you know we don't license home inspectors and Texas or what ever state just passed a licensing law and now they have all this money coming in from the fees they require.

Third, licensing is coming in your state, maybe not today or tomorrow but it will come with state budgets the politicos are looking for new sources of revenue and in Oklalhoma's case it is a lot easier to charge the Home Inspectors X$ for this and Y$ for that than to increase taxes by .1% and this is true in all states. So... Whether you are a Pro-Licensing or an Anti-Licensing it is goingtohappen.The best thing for Home Inspectors to do is to get on board and make the Inspection Licensing laws the best they can be.Get involved and help determine who is going to be on governing boards, get involved with continuing ED requirements. Put aside the organizational differences and work together and build a better Profession and we are or should be professionals.

In conclusion as I stated I have watched this thread with interest and amuzement and I have been dismayed by the verbal urinating contests some of you think is cute and the outright profane inuendos that some are famous for.

Is the Oklahoma Licensing Law good, NO could it be improved YES. what would I change, I ain't gonna tell cause somebody would do it and I wouldn't get the credit I deserve. And every states licensing regulations could use some tune-up.

Finally one of the personal beliefs I have is the quote "It is better to keep your mouth shut and people think you are a fool than to open it and prove them right"

Have a good day inspecting.

Willie

[Steven Meyer]

RAYMOND WAND

We need protection from ourselves? NO We need protection from an over reaching government!!!

I have the faith that an individual can vote with their feet (and check book)

As a case in point, years ago a lumber company I delt with really ticked me off, this after having years of my business. My response to their poor service/attitude, was I found a lumber company that offered better service, and never went back to the other company. It was not long that the first company went out of business, so I assume others felt the same as I did. This company HAD been in business for many many years.

This example applies to ANY organization, any business. It is the consumer who really has the power, not the other way around.

THE free market does work!!!


The good does drive out the bad.

I guess we will have to agree, to disagree.

I believe in personal choice, you believe the government knows best.

I have faith in the individual, your faith is in the government.

[Raymond Wand]

Steven

If that was the case with your supplier you should have told him about the lack of customer service. Its far easier to leave and say nothing than it is to let someone know so that they may correct that which they may not be aware of. I know associations that are run without accountability, and many members don't have the wherewithal to speak up, and simply walk away.

My faith is not in the government, but when all else fails an there is no one to fall back on then you better have someone where the buck stops.

As to the government know best, well in some cases yes they do.

Cheers,

[Steven Meyer]

RAYMOND

You can be assured they were aware of my displeasure. After placing my order, and not getting what I wanted, and would work for me, (their attitude/statement was that's just the way we do it), I "unloaded" on the store manager, cancleled my order, and walked out. Fun part is that they called later, told them no, I went elsewhere, and no, they would no longer get my business.

This also applies to associations. If you just drop out, don't pay your dues, think they get the message. If you want to send a letter and vent your displeasure, ok. If enough people do that, it should put those in power on notice, they better change their ways.
Problem solved!!!

Don't think ANY industry association is need of government oversight. Joining an association is strictly voluntary (well, except in union states)

Steven

If that was the case with your supplier you should have told him about the lack of customer service. Its far easier to leave and say nothing than it is to let someone know so that they may correct that which they may not be aware of. I know associations that are run without accountability, and many members don't have the wherewithal to speak up, and simply walk away.

My faith is not in the government, but when all else fails an there is no one to fall back on then you better have someone where the buck stops.

As to the government know best, well in some cases yes they do.

Cheers,

[Lewis Capaul]

[QUOTE=William Mize;37734] Gentlemen:

Allowme to wax p[FONT=Times New Roman][SIZE=3]hilosophically (spel chk sad it wuz OK) about inspector licensening. I have watched this thread with interest and amuzement

William, I believe that a truly creative mind can easily come up with many ways to spell any given word, but if you are relying on Spell-Check for the spelling of words in a way that would be acceptable to those with less creative minds, you'd better check your Spell-Check program....AmuZment???

Me, I figure that if someone can spell a word in any way that I can understand its meaning on any Internet BB, then they've done a good enough job for me

[Lewis Capaul]

RAYMOND WAND

We need protection from ourselves? NO We need protection from an over reaching government!!!

I have the faith that an individual can vote with their feet (and check book)

As a case in point, years ago a lumber company I delt with really ticked me off, this after having years of my business. My response to their poor service/attitude, was I found a lumber company that offered better service, and never went back to the other company. It was not long that the first company went out of business, so I assume others felt the same as I did. This company HAD been in business for many many years.

This example applies to ANY organization, any business. It is the consumer who really has the power, not the other way around.

THE free market does work!!!


The good does drive out the bad.

I guess we will have to agree, to disagree.

I believe in personal choice, you believe the government knows best.

I have faith in the individual, your faith is in the government.

Not a bad example Steve, but say the order you placed was for several tsand dollars, maybe even 10's of thousands, and the product you received was wrong and of no use to you. Then say the company you purchased the product tells you to go screw yourself, so then you end up having to spend the same amount again to finish your project and then you attempt to recover your costs, and legal costs, by taking the company to court, only to find that the Company has no money and no assets, leaving you holding the bag.

Now say you are a home buyer who, like most, know nothing or little about what is right or wrong about the condition of the home you are buying so you hire a Home Inspector who, due to lack of knowledge/experience or just plain incompetence or even dishonesty, misses a major fault in the home, you purchase the home and then find that it will cost you thousands to repair the condition, but find that, like the Compay who screwed you, the Home Inspector has no money or assets?

True the buyer may not use that inspector again, but then how often does the buyer purchase a new home, and complaints to Realtors etc. may even put the inspector out of business, at least in the name is was using.

It's not the Inspector who needs protection, although a State Law with a strong SOP backed by the Law does offer some, but its mainly the consumer who needs the protection.

Laws like the one just passed in Washington do nothing to protect either the Consumer, most HI Asscoiations already have higher standards than those in the new law, the law may provide a little protection for the HI because it does establish a "standard" which thecan claim they meet,

If a State can come up with no better law than what most have came up with, then maybe they should just adopt a law similar to Idaho's General Contractor regulation, register and provide proof of $300k of Liability or E&O insurance or bond.

A wothless Law is worse than no law at all.

I hate it when I agree with Burkeson.

[Harvey Hempelstern]

Laws, like the one just passed in Washington and those introduced in other states, have nothing to do with the consumer.

No home inspection law ever proposed in any state was consumer driven. No consumer or advocacy group has ever lobbied for or publicly supported a home inspection bill or law.

The only consumer group to voice a public opinion on a home inspection bill was HADD (Homeowners Against Deficient Dwellings) in their announcement of opposition of HB 2057 in Missouri.

Consumers do not care about home inspection legislation and never have.

Home inspectors who desire to make money from other home inspectors through legislation and home inspectors who hope to eliminate competition....do this, they say...in the interest of "the consumer". Why? Because to tell the truth and explain that they do push this legislation to further their own personal interests does little to build support for their bill.

[Scott Patterson]

Laws, like the one just passed in Washington and those introduced in other states, have nothing to do with the consumer.

No home inspection law ever proposed in any state was consumer driven. No consumer or advocacy group has ever lobbied for or publicly supported a home inspection bill or law.

The only consumer group to voice a public opinion on a home inspection bill was HADD (Homeowners Against Deficient Dwellings) in their announcement of opposition of HB 2057 in Missouri.

Consumers do not care about home inspection legislation and never have.

Home inspectors who desire to make money from other home inspectors through legislation and home inspectors who hope to eliminate competition....do this, they say...in the interest of "the consumer". Why? Because to tell the truth and explain that they do push this legislation to further their own personal interests does little to build support for their bill.

Jim Bushart aka. Harvey Hempelstern , you are so lame. Why does a law have to be just for consumer protection? It doesn't! A good home inspector law protects the home inspector in addition to providing protection to the consumer.

The fallacy is that most consumers already think that home inspectors are licensed. They do not have a clue that, say for example a person in your state of Missouri could be selling hearing aids today and decide the want to be a home inspector. All they have to do is have some cards printed up, buy a flashlight and a notebook! POOF!! They are a home inspector. Better yet they can take an unproctored easy to pass open book quiz and become a "Certified Home Inspector" from a diploma mill organization just as you did. Even better they can become a Master Home Inspector all by simply paying the man at the door, no real requirements that you would associate with a "Master" classification!

This is why we need to have home inspector licensing. To protect everyone, not just the consumer.

[Lewis Capaul]

The only consumer group to voice a public opinion on a home inspection bill was HADD (Homeowners Against Deficient Dwellings) in their announcement of opposition of HB 2057 in Missouri.

The reason few groups of consumers have addressed the HI Licensing subject is that most of the public believe that, like Realtors, Home Inspectors are already licensed, they are confused between the fact that in most States HI's are required to have a Business License and are usually surprised when they find that there is no licensing or registration requirements by the State.

I don't know if it was you or Joe B. it's hard to tell the difference, who claimed that someone in Washington had spent $100K on getting the WA Bill Passed, that's totally B.S. and both of you know it, but it makes good sheep food.

Washington is an Initiative State, anyone who can gather enough signatures can bypass the State Legislature and get a Bill/Initiative placed on the State Ballots ask Mike O' and other WA Inspectors about a guy named Tim Eyman. In Washington any HI who wanted to spend some money to get his proposal made into law even if the sole purpose of the Bill was to eliminate competition. No one in WA went that way, in fact no one even went public, other than a couple of articles in a local paper. Even if someone had wanted to put some teeth in the Law that was passed they could have gone public with articles and letters to the editor arguing their opinions that the law provided no protection to the consumer, they could even have used examples from the Sunrise Committee to reinforce their argument, then things might have turned out different and the Bill might have ended up with an E&O or bond requirement.

I don't have any dog in the fight over there anymore, I may in the future if things change, but being WA's next door neighbor I'm sure one or two of Idaho's polititcians may take the issue up, one already approached me about the subject, a Republican at that, of course that's all we have here.

[Michael Larson]

Jim Bushart aka. Harvey Hempelstern , you are so lame. Why does a law have to be just for consumer protection? It doesn't! A good home inspector law protects the home inspector in addition to providing protection to the consumer.

Then why is this tactic used to in support of the proposed law if it.s not true?

A "good" HI law?
What protection is offered to the HI.
I can't even limit by liability via contract in my state.

[Scott Patterson]

The only consumer group to voice a public opinion on a home inspection bill was HADD (Homeowners Against Deficient Dwellings) in their announcement of opposition of HB 2057 in Missouri.

The reason few groups of consumers have addressed the HI Licensing subject is that most of the public believe that, like Realtors, Home Inspectors are already licensed, they are confused between the fact that in most States HI's are required to have a Business License and are usually surprised when they find that there is no licensing or registration requirements by the State.

I don't know if it was you or Joe B. it's hard to tell the difference, who claimed that someone in Washington had spent $100K on getting the WA Bill Passed, that's totally B.S. and both of you know it, but it makes good sheep food.

Washington is an Initiative State, anyone who can gather enough signatures can bypass the State Legislature and get a Bill/Initiative placed on the State Ballots ask Mike O' and other WA Inspectors about a guy named Tim Eyman. In Washington any HI who wanted to spend some money to get his proposal made into law even if the sole purpose of the Bill was to eliminate competition. No one in WA went that way, in fact no one even went public, other than a couple of articles in a local paper. Even if someone had wanted to put some teeth in the Law that was passed they could have gone public with articles and letters to the editor arguing their opinions that the law provided no protection to the consumer, they could even have used examples from the Sunrise Committee to reinforce their argument, then things might have turned out different and the Bill might have ended up with an E&O or bond requirement.

I don't have any dog in the fight over there anymore, I may in the future if things change, but being WA's next door neighbor I'm sure one or two of Idaho's polititcians may take the issue up, one already approached me about the subject, a Republican at that, of course that's all we have here.

Lewis, I would be very surprised if Idaho was to even consider a license law for home inspector in the next 3-5 years. Almost to the date, I had the pleasure of meeting and having dinner with Jeanne Jackson-Helm at the ARRELO meeting in Banff, CN., she is the ED for the Idaho Real Estate Commission. They are the ones who issue agents their license. She said that they just do not have enough inspectors in the state to justify the cost for licensing. Granted she had a concern that if a license was created it would be placed in her commission, as it is in several states.

[Scott Patterson]

Then why is this tactic used to in support of the proposed law if it.s not true?

A "good" HI law?
What protection is offered to the HI.
I can't even limit by liability via contract in my state.

Michael, I don't know that it really is. I have been involved in various home inspector license laws and legislation efforts since 1998 and it has been very rare that I have heard the consumer protection mantra. Most of the time this what the anti-license folks use to say that nobody wants it.

Lewis described it very well

The reason few groups of consumers have addressed the HI Licensing subject is that most of the public believe that, like Realtors, Home Inspectors are already licensed, they are confused between the fact that in most States HI's are required to have a Business License and are usually surprised when they find that there is no licensing or registration requirements by the State.

[Harvey Hempelstern]

Licensing is pushed by home inspectors looking to get out of the crawlspace and in front of a classroom, with a state law mandating attendance in their class.

Licensing is pushed by home inspectors who want to charge $275 to inspect to be competitive, then have four guys paying them $75 each to "ride along" on each one so they can "mentor" them. Your Stl Louis ASHI president presented this to his membership at a meeting in an attempt to convince them to support the bill.....that they all opposed.

Licensing is a scam....a way to get tax dollars to do for certain inspectors what their marketing dollars have failed to do.

You will never publicly admit it. That is a job for the opposition.

[Lewis Capaul]

Then why is this tactic used to in support of the proposed law if it.s not true?

A "good" HI law?
What protection is offered to the HI.
I can't even limit by liability via contract in my state.

Regardless of what you association tells you Michael, its SOP does not provide nearly as much protection as one that had been adopted by the State, neither does your "certification" when compared to having met the standards written into law. as meaningless as they most often are. Oregon I believe has a provision in its AHI Law that requires mediation through a State Board before a Lawsuit can be filed, isn't that protection for both the HI and the client?

In my opinion State Laws that do not provide proof of financial responsibility on the part of the Inspector provide little protection at all to the consumer. Until last year we had no regulation of General Contractors in Idaho, like other States with no regulation we had the problem of incompetent and dishonest Contractors either doing crappy work and then refusing to make repairs or restitution to their clients or dishonest Contractors who just took their clients money and ran, both often showing up again operating under another business name, and none having any money or assets for the client to recover. Now at least a contractor has to show proof of financial responsibility even though they may be almost totally incompetent.

You guys don't like laws, then how about if the businesses connected to the Real Estate Industry made their own rules. Say a Realtor was to put into their contract a warning that their clients should only hire HI's that met certain standards, or if Banks and Mortgage companies demanded Home Inspections to be performed by only those Inspectors who met their standards, it's their money they can add what ever requirements to a loan they want? Can you see the problem there, different Businesses coming up with different standards all designed solely for their benefit.

I've been doing quite a few Insurance Company Inspections lately on both vacant and newly purchased homes, the Insurance Companies have their own standards already, how long before the Financial Institutions develop their own, which may exceed State and Association Standards?

[Michael Larson]

You guys don't like laws, then how about if the businesses connected to the Real Estate Industry made their own rules. Say a Realtor was to put into their contract a warning that their clients should only hire HI's that met certain standards, or if Banks and Mortgage companies demanded Home Inspections to be performed by only those Inspectors who met their standards, it's their money they can add what ever requirements to a loan they want? Can you see the problem there, different Businesses coming up with different standards all designed solely for their benefit.

In a free country that is exactly where the push for standards should come from especially the insurance companies in the interest of loss prevention.

Government only messes it up.

[Lewis Capaul]

Michael, I don't know that it really is. I have been involved in various home inspector license laws and legislation efforts since 1998 and it has been very rare that I have heard the consumer protection mantra. Most of the time this what the anti-license folks use to say that nobody wants it.

Lewis described it very well

Scott, Most clients also believe that, again like Realtors , Home Inspectors are Insured. I like to explain to some of my clients that there is no requirment for licensing or regulation here, then I pause, and then tell them that there is no requirment for E&O Insurance either, pause again and watch the flash of panic cross their faces, and then I tell them that I am.

The "consumer protection mantra" is a very useful tool when someone interested in passing a Bill runs into opposition from the politicians. I'veen doing been involved in several initiative campaigns over the years, Protect the Consumer, Protect the Public almost always works. If I had still been doing business in WA as a HI when I found out that no bond or E&O Requirement had been included in the Bill I might have brought the "Protect the Cinsumer mantra" into play through local papers, TV, the Realtors Association, General Contractors Association, etc., politics is always a timing thing, what better time to push for "Consumer Protection" within the Real Estate Industry than right now in the middle of the meltdown? I just can't get that excited anymore about the subject, or politics for that matter.

I turned 60 a few months ago, Saling and Fishing are a lot more important to me now than even making money, I have a new, for me, 39' Sailboat calling for me to take off again for a few more years while I still can, but my wife has two more years before she wants to retire, women!

[Raymond Wand]

Government only messes it up?

In my opinion its been the insurers messing up by paying out rather than fighting many of these cases as it is financially prudent for them to do so. Then they are quick to label the inspector as a bad risk. The government can only created bad legislation, thats why it is imperative inspectors who are under the sights of licencing had better make certain they are heard, this does not always appear to be the case from what I am seeing, but thats my take on it for what its worth.

Cheers,

[Lewis Capaul]

In a free country that is exactly where the push for standards should come from especially the insurance companies in the interest of loss prevention.

Government only messes it up.

You don't think too deeply Michael, I have nothing against businesses creating their own standards and requirements, I've argued for years about why the County or State should have the right to tell anyone how to build their house, Codes are fine but they should required and enforced by those lending the money or insuring the property, but they are Codes, they're standardized

A bunch of businesses making coming up with their own standards could lead to some pretty severe problems seeing as all those requirments would be written for their own benefit and not to any standard, it could end up with the various compainies having their own Home Inspectors, which is again fine with me, but that may do away with a lot of private one owner HI companies, it might be cheaper for them to have hourly wage Inspectors than to contract their inspections out.

Thsi meltdown the Housing and Banking industry is going through now is likely to effect the way things are done in the future, the Fed is planning on giving up to a Trillion $$ of borrowed money to banks and lending institutions to bail them out for their piss poor business practices, that money is going to come with strings attached. This is also a good example of your Free Country/Enterpris at work.

[Michael Larson]

You don't think too deeply Michael, I have nothing against businesses creating their own standards and requirements, I've argued for years about why the County or State should have the right to tell anyone how to build their house, Codes are fine but they should required and enforced by those lending the money or insuring the property, but they are Codes, they're standardized

Deep thinking is not required to understand that government makes more messes than it cleans up.

Your beef is with lenders and insurance companies.

I'm not going to change your mind in thinking that government is the solution.

Government has a horrible track record of solving real problems let alone made up ones like the need for home inspector regulation.

[Lewis Capaul]

Lewis, I would be very surprised if Idaho was to even consider a license law for home inspector in the next 3-5 years. Almost to the date, I had the pleasure of meeting and having dinner with Jeanne Jackson-Helm at the ARRELO meeting in Banff, CN., she is the ED for the Idaho Real Estate Commission. They are the ones who issue agents their license. She said that they just do not have enough inspectors in the state to justify the cost for licensing. Granted she had a concern that if a license was created it would be placed in her commission, as it is in several states.

I was approached, while fishing, by one of my State Senators who had noticed the signs on my truck. He told me that the subject of HI Regulation had come up while discussing changes to the GC Law here and wanted to know what I thought of having the same type of regulation for Home Inspectors, registration and insurance.

The Idaho RE Commission most likely wouldn't be in control of the regulation. The GC regulation is controlled by the State's Bureau of Occupational Licensing, the Real Estate Commission, as in other States, has dreams of possibly controlling everything.

With WA getting an HI Law there may be some politician here who will want to follow along, unless someone does then you're probably right and there will be no licensing within the next few years, regulation like the GC's ugh might get sneaked through pretty quickly.

Either way they'd have to be pretty fast to effect me, I hear the call of Sailing off into the sunset, again, louder every day, I'm thinking about moving my boat back to New Zealand next year in preparation to my wife's retirement, I retired 8 years ago, went sailing for a couple of years, and then went back to work, I still deliver a boat from Puget Sound to California or Hawaii once or twice a year, I like to take my retirement a little at a time, while I can, the next time should be for good, turning 60 hurt, I hadn't even recovered from turning 30 yet.

[Raymond Wand]

Licensing is a scam....a way to get tax dollars to do for certain inspectors what their marketing dollars have failed to do.

That refrain has as much credibility as you do. Will you; can you provide us all with documentation to back up those outrageous claims?