Texas Senate Bill SB914 was amended today to include the requirement for mandatory E/O. I recognize that there are those of you who are proponents of carrying E/O. I do not wish to debate that here. It's been beaten to death.

However, I would like to invite you, all of you, to go back through the TREC Advisor files for as far back as they go and count the total number of sanctions against Inspectors. TREC - Disciplinary Actions Main Page

This amendment is not consumer driven. It is driven by the industry most certain to profit from it and it is driven by a State government so dishonest that it has taken UNUSED monies from the recovery fund and added it to the general budget. There is a surplus because there have not been enough claims to use the monies already collected from Inspectors.

The following is an exact reprinting. I have inserted no diacritical markings.

""Amend CSSB 914 (House committee printing) by inserting the
following appropriately numbered SECTIONS and renumbering
subsequent SECTIONS of the bill accordingly:
SECTION ____. Section 1102.114, Occupations Code, is
amended to read as follows:
Sec. 1102.114. ISSUANCE OF LICENSE. The commission shall
issue the appropriate license to an applicant who:
(1) meets the required qualifications; [and]
(2) pays the fee required by Section 1102.352(a); and
(3) offers proof that the applicant carries liability
insurance with a minimum limit of $100,000 per occurrence to
protect the public against a violation of Subchapter G.
SECTION ____. Section 1102.203(a), Occupations Code, is
amended to read as follows:
(a) A person may renew an unexpired license by paying the
required renewal fee to the commission before the expiration date
of the license and providing proof of liability insurance as
required by Section 1102.114(3).""

__________________
The only reason some people get lost in thought is because it's unfamiliar territory.
- Paul Fix

Are inspection referrals from past clients important to you? If so, click here to get even more referrals!

That does not specify...

General vs Professional. Although, we know where they are headed with this abomination...

S.O.B.!!!

RR

__________________
"If con is the opposite of pro, is Congress the opposite of progress?"
Richard Rushing, HCRI
Duncanville, Tx.

Bend over and grab your ankles should this one pass.
Why dont other licensees have to carry E/O insurance?
This should be a sure fire way to drive out inspectors that arent doing a whole lot of inspections. (Me included).

Hopefully common sense will prevail.

Looks like General Liability Insurance to me per the statement, not E&O.

If so, should cost you make 1000. to 1500. a year.

If its E&O, different story.

__________________
Rick Hurst_Home Works Inspection Co_Rockwall TX
In the words of Mike Tyson.... "Everyone has a plan until they get hit inda mouf"

I have considered that. After hearing from Danny South it has been explained as E/O. I am waiting for clarification from the State. Not holding my breath for the answer.

__________________
The only reason some people get lost in thought is because it's unfamiliar territory.
- Paul Fix

Sounds like the same liability that just about all the other trades such as the PC industry has to carry.

My insurance man told me this was coming months ago.

I'll have a balloon policy that will cover both of my businesses.

__________________
Rick Hurst_Home Works Inspection Co_Rockwall TX
In the words of Mike Tyson.... "Everyone has a plan until they get hit inda mouf"

If it is E&O it would or should say Professional Liability Insurance or Errors and Omissions Insurance. As it is now written it would be General Liability.

Do inspectors in TX have to have GL now?

__________________
Scott Patterson
Spring Hill, TN
http://www.traceinspections.com

Scott,

No we don't.

I already carry it myself. General Liability that is.

__________________
Rick Hurst_Home Works Inspection Co_Rockwall TX
In the words of Mike Tyson.... "Everyone has a plan until they get hit inda mouf"

That was my first assumption. TAREI is saying it's E/O.

I feel the thread morphing into a virtues discussion again. My concerns are that the issue is not a consumer driven consumer protection issue. It has been spearheaded by the insurance industry. That's how Rick's agent knew it was coming. This amendment was just tacked on. It wasn't even part of the original discussions or the debate. And it's an issue of our State looking for revenue. They want to turn over the recovery fund to the general fund and this is an opportunity.

__________________
The only reason some people get lost in thought is because it's unfamiliar territory.
- Paul Fix

Like other have said, that's General Liability innsurance.

I used to carry $2 mil worth, it was cheap enough.

__________________
Jerry Peck, Construction / Litigation Consultant
Construction Litigation Consultants, LLC ( www.ConstructionLitigationConsultants.com )
EastWestData (www.EastWestData.com )

I thought it was general liability insurance at first but I am now almost convinced that E&O is what they are talking about.

The wording is...

"...to protect the public against a violation of Subchapter G."

Subchapter G from the Texas Occupations Code regarding inspectors is short and sweet and says...

"SUBCHAPTER G. PROHIBITED ACTS
Sec. 1102.301. NEGLIGENCE OR INCOMPETENCE.
An inspector may not perform a real estate
inspection in a negligent or incompetent manner."

"Negligent and incompetent" is the term TREC uses when an inspector has not followed the SoP. In other words, when the inspector has missed something. Now that's starting to sound more and more like errors and omission insurance to me.

Read section 1102.353.d. This is why I'm so angry about MANDATED any kind of the I word.
http://www.trec.state.tx.us/pdf/rela/RELA_Sept_2005.pdf

Read my summary of the data from TREC regarding discipline occurrences for Texas inspectors from 1996 to May 2007, 10 1/4 years. It is based on data from TREC.
TREC - Disciplinary Actions Main Page

This is more than shameful. In my opinion it is no less than criminal collusion between the Insurance and members of the Texas Legislature. The only other explanation would be immeasurable stupidity. I guess I can accept that.

Attached Images

Disciplinary actions against Inspectors in Texas 1996.pdf (28.2 KB, 17 views)

__________________
The only reason some people get lost in thought is because it's unfamiliar territory.
- Paul Fix

"This is more than shameful. In my opinion it is no less than criminal collusion between the Insurance and members of the Texas Legislature."

And that surprises you with politicians?

__________________
Dave

It does look, at first glance, as General Liability. However, what Philip posted hits the bell hard with a loud and ringing sound of Professional Liability Insurance.

S.O.B.!!! This crap sucks...

Oh well... EVERY INSPECTION IN TEXAS SHOULD IMMEDIALY JUMP $100-$150 PER INSPECTION!!!! NO EXCEPTIONS (except those higher ).

The drastic jump will be mandated by not only premiums but also in occurrances of claims that will now be 10-fold. You'll now have every Tom-Dick-and-Harry & Assoc. advertising on the cheap television networks for litigation and trying to drum up business for their law firm while going after their new insurance treasure chests.

Oh well... just raise prices!!! Sorry Mr. & Mrs. home-buyer-- don't blame us, blame the State of Texas for breaking a system that was already fixed.

I know I won't be using any E&O company who specifically bashes "Other" organizations on private BB's...

Rich

__________________
"If con is the opposite of pro, is Congress the opposite of progress?"
Richard Rushing, HCRI
Duncanville, Tx.

I have worked under mandated E&O for right at 6 years.

I really don't care for the state telling me I must have it, but it does tend to keep the number of inspectors down. We have very few if any part-time inspectors. Also I have not seen an increase in claims, like everyone says happens. I just have not seen it.

__________________
Scott Patterson
Spring Hill, TN
http://www.traceinspections.com

Richard, you are absolutely right. Im not a TAREI member but had been thinking about joining for some time. Nows a good time, hopefully they have enough stroke to help get this stopped. If not, I would absolutely have to raise my costs $100 or more per inspection to offset the cost of the insurance.

Good time to research the inner workings of TREC and bombard them (elected officials) with emails, phone calls, letters, etc.

The TREC advisor disciplinary page is about 95% actions against real estate agents. Are they required to have E/O insurance? I dont know.

The realtors have to carry E&O per transaction.

They pay so much out of each transaction it when they close a deal.

Not near what the cost is for HI's.

An agent told me yesterday, she pays less than 800. a year. She also a broker.

__________________
Rick Hurst_Home Works Inspection Co_Rockwall TX
In the words of Mike Tyson.... "Everyone has a plan until they get hit inda mouf"

As Scott said above, E & 0 tends to weed out those not serious about the business, HOWEVER, mandating or supporting E & O to limit the competition is JUST WRONG.

General Liability here in Kentucky costs me less than $300.00 per year for $1,000,000.

__________________
Erby Crofutt, Georgetown, KY
B4U Close Home Inspections & Radon Testing