Georgia home inspector license in the works - InspectionNews

Scott Patterson · #1 (**permalink**) 05-24-2007, 09:46 AM

This has gone under the radar. Georgia General Assembly - SB 334

Does anyone have any information about this legislation? On the surface it looks like a fairly good bill.

Bob White · #2 (**permalink**) 05-24-2007, 03:15 PM

I've heard nothing in the local grapevine....

It doesn't seem to be drawing a lot of interest pro or con around these parts.

Jim Luttrall · #3 (**permalink**) 05-24-2007, 04:16 PM

Be careful guys, if GA legislature is anything like TX, you could be in for a fast ride where you don't want to go. Watch "em!

Bob White · #4 (**permalink**) 05-24-2007, 05:44 PM

In the proposed bill for licensing of home inspectors in GA, paragraph 43-39B-5 (b) says (in part):

Quote:

(b) A person shall be eligible for licensure as a home inspector if he or she:

(1) ....
(2) ....
(3) ....
(4) ....
(5) Prior to or within one year of the effective date of this chapter, has passed a valid, reliable examination designed to test competence in home inspection practice and developed pursuant to accepted psychometric standards promulgated by the American Educational Research Association or similar organization acceptable to the board.

I assume that the above refers to the NHIE. Is there another exam that meets the above proposed requirement? Please don't bother to list the ones that don't meet the standard.

What are the similar organizations to the one above?

Scott Patterson · #5 (**permalink**) 05-24-2007, 10:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bob White

In the proposed bill for licensing of home inspectors in GA, paragraph 43-39B-5 (b) says (in part):

I assume that the above refers to the NHIE. Is there another exam that meets the above proposed requirement? Please don't bother to list the ones that don't meet the standard.

What are the similar organizations to the one above?

The testing requirement is poorly worded, but it does leave it up to the board to choose what will be acceptable.

Yes, the NHIE meets those requirements. It is also the only non-association bias exam for home inspectors. I think that NAHI has been trying to get their exam validated as well, so they might be able to meet the requirements in the future. But for now it would be the NHIE.

Joseph P. Hagarty · #6 (**permalink**) 05-24-2007, 11:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scott Patterson

The testing requirement is poorly worded,.....

....the NHIE meets those requirements.

It is also the only non-association bias exam for home inspectors.

I think that NAHI has been trying to get their exam validated as well, so they might be able to meet the requirements in the future. But for now it would be the NHIE.

The NHIE (ASHI Exam) meets the Poorly worded requirements of a Non-Associational biased exam.

Interesting observation Scott.

I agree with you...

Scott Patterson · #7 (**permalink**) 05-25-2007, 09:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joseph P. Hagarty

The NHIE (ASHI Exam) meets the Poorly worded requirements of a Non-Associational biased exam.

Interesting observation Scott.

I agree with you...

The NHIE is not only used by ASHI as one of their membership exams. AII uses it for their exam, NAHI allows it, 2 municipalities and 19 States require it for their licensing exam.

If GA adopts HI licensing, that will mean that all of the Southern states, except for Florida will have home inspector licensing (VA is in the left field of licensing). I would bet that Governor Crist will sign the bill into law for Florida.

Rick Hurst · #8 (**permalink**) 05-25-2007, 02:36 PM

They should all be required to have a license and have to carry E&O insurance.

Seems only fair.

Why should one state be any different from another, right?

Scott Patterson · #9 (**permalink**) 05-25-2007, 02:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rick Hurst

They should all be required to have a license and have to carry E&O insurance.

Seems only fair.

Why should one state be any different from another, right?

Yep, kind of like state required Car Insurance. Some have it and some don't.

#10 (**permalink**) 05-25-2007, 07:52 PM

Licensing solves nothing.

Rob Thomas · #11 (**permalink**) 05-26-2007, 09:00 PM

Why does Bushart post here using the name Hemplestern and repeating his inane "licensing solves nothing" mantra?

It's just sad.

RT

Quote:

Originally Posted by Harvey Hempelstern

Licensing solves nothing.

Deleted Account · #12 (**permalink**) 05-26-2007, 09:02 PM

Does licensing solve anything?

Scott Patterson · #13 (**permalink**) 05-27-2007, 10:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joseph Burkeson

Does licensing solve anything?

Well, that would depend on how the law is written. A poorly written law(and we have a few stinkers) does nothing for anyone. A law that is written well, establishes a benchmark or an entry requirement for those who want to work in the profession. A good law offers a level of protection to the consumer and the home inspector; you do not have this in an unregulated environment.

If you are offering a service, you should be accountable for your actions if you screw-up. Conversely you should also be afforded a level of protection if you are properly performing to a set of required guidelines and or standards.

What is wrong with this?

Deleted Account · #14 (**permalink**) 05-27-2007, 01:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scott Patterson

Well, that would depend on how the law is written. A poorly written law(and we have a few stinkers) does nothing for anyone. A law that is written well, establishes a benchmark or an entry requirement for those who want to work in the profession. A good law offers a level of protection to the consumer and the home inspector; you do not have this in an unregulated environment.

If you are offering a service, you should be accountable for your actions if you screw-up. Conversely you should also be afforded a level of protection if you are properly performing to a set of required guidelines and or standards.

What is wrong with this?

Blah,blah,blah. I've heard it all before, nothing to back it up but wishful thinking on your part, please get some new material would you? Answer me this how is ASHI going to fix the screw-up in New York?

Licensing is about as useful as tits on a bull and you know it.

Rob Thomas · #15 (**permalink**) 05-27-2007, 03:50 PM

Why does Burkeson ask a question and then berate the one person who was gracious enough to answer it?

Patterson should have known that anyone who uses the terms 'socialism' and 'porridge' in discussions about home inspection isn't likely to understand a cogent argument no matter how many times he sees it.

It's clear to me that the last thing members of an organization that manufactures its own credentials want is for the state to interfere with their little scam. That might limit the number of recruits for their 'boot camps'.

RT

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joseph Burkeson

Does licensing solve anything?

Blah,blah,blah. I've heard it all before, nothing to back it up but wishful thinking on your part, please get some new material would you? Answer me this how is ASHI going to fix the screw-up in New York?

Licensing is about as useful as tits on a bull and you know it.

Scott Patterson · #16 (**permalink**) 05-27-2007, 04:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joseph Burkeson

Blah,blah,blah. I've heard it all before, nothing to back it up but wishful thinking on your part, please get some new material would you? Answer me this how is ASHI going to fix the screw-up in New York?

Licensing is about as useful as tits on a bull and you know it.

Hi Joe,

Sounds like a little of the Napoleon syndrome!

I have nothing to gain or loose as states become licensed, but apparently you do.

As for what ASHI is going to do with the New York "Screwup" as you say. ASHI national does not get involved, with the individual states it is up to the folks in that state to take care of their own issues.

IMO, part of the problem in NY is that the inspectors let the PE's run over them. As with most licensing efforts, you will find that a small group of folks do the work while the majority sit back and watch. Come to think of it, that holds true with just about everything.

And it is "Teats on a Bull"!

Deleted Account · #17 (**permalink**) 05-27-2007, 06:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rob Thomas

It's clear to me that the last thing members of an organization that manufactures its own credentials want is for the state to interfere with their little scam. That might limit the number of recruits for their 'boot camps'.

RT

I just hope that Scott jumps in here to defend ASHI from your rude comment, after all I am not just an ASHI member but I also sit on the board of my local chapter. In regards to boots... I wouldn't even let you shine mine.

Jack Feldmann · #18 (**permalink**) 05-27-2007, 07:17 PM

I can only guess that some chapters are in such dire need for volunteers they will accept anyone to fill a position.

Deleted Account · #19 (**permalink**) 05-27-2007, 08:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jack Feldmann

I can only guess that some chapters are in such dire need for volunteers they will accept anyone to fill a position.

To me it looks like the whole association is a bit dire these days, creating quite a mess for the profession at large and sticking their nose into places where it doesn't belong.

Thom Walker · #20 (**permalink**) 05-27-2007, 09:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rob Thomas

Why does Burkeson ask a question and then berate the one person who was gracious enough to answer it?

Patterson should have known that anyone who uses the terms 'socialism' and 'porridge' in discussions about home inspection isn't likely to understand a cogent argument no matter how many times he sees it.

It's clear to me that the last thing members of an organization that manufactures its own credentials want is for the state to interfere with their little scam. That might limit the number of recruits for their 'boot camps'.

RT

A blog where everyone agreed would be deservedly short lived. Grant it, most of the time Joe sounds like he graduated Summa cum laude from the Don Rickles school of charm. And most of the time it is clear that his motives for hating licensing are motivated by self serving reasons. That is not the same thing as his arguments having no merit and not worth consideration instead of automatic rejection.

It has been to the detriment of American society that anyone who opposes government regulation is quickly labeled a whiner and a nut case.

As a proponent of responsible licensing, those that accept it as it is; without question, deserve the consequences they may suffer. The weakness in Scott's argument is in his last sentence.

"Conversely you should also be afforded a level of protection if you are properly performing to a set of required guidelines and or standards."

"Should" is the operative word. In Texas, they have sought the right to suspend your license before you have been found guilty of anything. Yet I have seen no request for a means of compensating the Inspector should he be absolved. I think that means that the outcome is predetermined or at least presumed.

Consumers should be protected and fair and impartial licensing is a good way to do it. The question is, How do we get fair and impartial licensing authorities? What measures are in effect to keep consumers from making outrageous claims against Inspectors? Remember, it does not have to be your Client.

Rob Thomas · #21 (**permalink**) 05-27-2007, 09:49 PM

I really don't mean to be critical, but this last post of yours is just gibberish.

Why would you post a message quoting me, and then state that you hope Scott addresses it? It seems that you would have had that discussion with Scott and just left me out of it until you and he had reached some kind of agreement.

And why did you reference ASHI in response to my comment? I didn't mention ASHI, or any other organization. I mean, it's just strange. You whine for years about ASHI involving itself in state licensing initiatives, and then when I opinie about the reasons an organization would RESIST licensing, the only organization you can think of is ASHI. That's just nonsense. What's more, everyone reading this knows it's nonsense.

And, after attempting to smear ASHI with your ridiculous statement: "I just hope that Scott jumps in here to defend ASHI from your rude comment", why would you then boast about being a member of that organization, and why would you further boast about being a board member? I don't know about anyone else, but I'm not impressed to learn that you are a board member of an organization you despise. That seems to me to be a miserable existence.

Finally, why would you assume that I would want to shine your boots? Did you think I would find such a comment from such an individual to be insulting? When you wrote that comment, did you imagine that people would think less of me, or less of you?

I really didn't intend to get into a contentious discussion here. I just wanted to know why Bushart was posting under the name of Hemplestern.

RT

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joseph Burkeson

I just hope that Scott jumps in here to defend ASHI from your rude comment, after all I am not just an ASHI member but I also sit on the board of my local chapter. In regards to boots... I wouldn't even let you shine mine.

Rob Thomas · #22 (**permalink**) 05-27-2007, 10:03 PM

Apparently, this message board has a feature called "Private Messages". I was surprised to see that someone had sent a private message to me, given I have been here for only a very short time.

I copied the message here, because I wanted everyone to benefit from Burkeson's insights, if not from his spelling and proofreading skills.

RT

You said... It's clear to me that the last thing members of an organization that manufactures its own credentials want is for the state to interfere with their little scam. That might limit the number of recruits for their 'boot camps'.

Ate you talking about ASHI?
__________________
"A wise and frugal government, which shall leave men free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor and bread it has earned - this is the sum of good government." ~ Thomas Jefferson

Jerry Peck · #23 (**permalink**) 05-27-2007, 10:11 PM

Rob,

You will learn to ignore Joe's comments.

Basically he is against anything and everything that is not designed to help Joe out.

He's even against things designed to help him out if those things also help other out.

I tried to get to know Joe at some of the FABI meetings he came to, I even tried to help him in his fight with/against ASHI, but Joe would have no help if one does not think exactly like Joe thinks.

So I have learned to let him rant, occasionally I will prod him on, he is so much fun to watch rant on, especially about licensing ...

Oh, and guns, and ...

Deleted Account · #24 (**permalink**) 05-27-2007, 10:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rob Thomas

I really don't mean to be critical, but this last post of yours is just gibberish.

Why would you post a message quoting me, and then state that you hope Scott addresses it? It seems that you would have had that discussion with Scott and just left me out of it until you and he had reached some kind of agreement.

And why did you reference ASHI in response to my comment? I didn't mention ASHI, or any other organization. I mean, it's just strange. You whine for years about ASHI involving itself in state licensing initiatives, and then when I opinie about the reasons an organization would RESIST licensing, the only organization you can think of is ASHI. That's just nonsense. What's more, everyone reading this knows it's nonsense.

And, after attempting to smear ASHI with your ridiculous statement: "I just hope that Scott jumps in here to defend ASHI from your rude comment", why would you then boast about being a member of that organization, and why would you further boast about being a board member? I don't know about anyone else, but I'm not impressed to learn that you are a board member of an organization you despise. That seems to me to be a miserable existence.

Finally, why would you assume that I would want to shine your boots? Did you think I would find such a comment from such an individual to be insulting? When you wrote that comment, did you imagine that people would think less of me, or less of you?

I really didn't intend to get into a contentious discussion here. I just wanted to know why Bushart was posting under the name of Hemplestern.

RT

What kind of troll are you?

Rob Thomas · #25 (**permalink**) 05-27-2007, 11:12 PM

A better question would be: Why do you continue sending me private messages? What force on earth could convince you that I am interested in anything you could write?

I deleted the last unsolicited message you sent without reading it. If you are too ashamed of your literary efforts to post them here in an open forum, maybe you should keep them to yourself.

I apologize for having so little regard for your opinions and observations.

RT

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joseph Burkeson

What kind of troll are you?

Deleted Account · #26 (**permalink**) 05-28-2007, 09:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rob Thomas

I apologize for having so little regard for your opinions and observations.

RT

No apology necessary, it is a free country. So, let me guess, your belief in licensing has been shaken and now you are going to show all of us who oppose the government socialization of our profession a thing or two, right?

Please, share your pain, since licensing are there now more inspectors in your market performing inspections at 1/3 of your price or is it the burden of useless CEU's which do nothing but line the pockets of the training institutes that have you out of spirits? Or maybe it is the disgust over the thousands of dollars you pissed away on membership to an association who has lost touch with their members and no longer control the standards of practice for the profession?

Come on Rob tell us how licensing protects the public promotes the profession and creates profits to those stooges who are willing to exchange freedom for conformity. Life is a difficult game. You can win it only by retaining your birthright to be a person, good luck with yours.

Dan Harris · #27 (**permalink**) 05-28-2007, 12:52 PM

[quote=Jerry Peck;7051]Rob,

You will learn to ignore Joe's comments.

Basically he is against anything and everything that is not designed to help Joe out.

He's even against things designed to help him out if those things also help other out.

Joe has been an interesting guy to follow..
For years he was one of the most anti ASHI guys around, [ untill Bushart showed up]
It will be interesting to see what it will take to change his position on Licensing.

Thom Walker · #28 (**permalink**) 05-28-2007, 02:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joseph Burkeson

No apology necessary, it is a free country. So, let me guess, your belief in licensing has been shaken and now you are going to show all of us who oppose the government socialization of our profession a thing or two, right?

Rob, forgive me for interjecting. I recognize that you are capable of addressing Joe, or any of the rest of us who at some point may spit in your Cheerios. As one of the "stooges" I felt I had earned the right to comment.

Joe, I have defended your right to dissent on several occasions. I can't defend your right to ignorance, because you have no rights there. Usually, when someone expresses the level of disdain that you do for formal education and structure, it's an indication that they possess little of either.

Get some education so that you understand the basic concepts of governing. NOTHING you have ever ranted about has a damned thing to do with socialism. Licensing is not inherently Socialistic any more than ins is inherently unbridled Capitalism. The abuses of either throws them in and out of many social constructs.

Please, share your pain, since licensing are there now more inspectors in your market performing inspections at 1/3 of your price or is it the burden of useless CEU's which do nothing but line the pockets of the training institutes that have you out of spirits?

Please explain under what scenario that a restrictive construct like licensing actually increases the numbers of any trade or profession?

Regarding CEUs, you have to understand, Joe that you are the only human being who can't learn something because you already have the sum total of all knowledge. The rest of us might occasionally learn something, therefore not all CEUs are useless.

Or maybe it is the disgust over the thousands of dollars you pissed away on membership to an association who has lost touch with their members and no longer control the standards of practice for the profession?

I assume you refer to ASHI. News Flash, as much as they may sometimes want you to believe it, they never controlled the SOP, at least not in Texas.

Come on Rob tell us how licensing protects the public promotes the profession and creates profits to those stooges who are willing to exchange freedom for conformity. Life is a difficult game. You can win it only by retaining your birthright to be a person, good luck with yours.

Licensing does protect the public when it removes the licences of those who abuse the public trust. It does a disservice to the public when it becomes a profit center for a State's general fund and when the licensing authority hasn't the courage to stand up to politicians who would influence it for their own personal gain. It provides a disservice to the public and the licensee when it fails to provide real protections for both.

How does licensing create profits for us "stooges who would exchange freedom for conformity?" It doesn't, because licensing or the lack of licensing can't create profits. Factors like demand, supply, marketing skills, product quality, frivolous lawsuits, unfair taxation, stupid decisions, education levels, personality, working habits, etc. all can create profits. There are more inspectors because there is a perceived need for them and a perception that it a trade that some feel will earn them a better living than they make at whatever they are currently doing. There are more doing inspections at 1/3 of someone else's price because 1. there are more inspectors and 2. because the majority of self employed persons are not very good businessmen, at least not in the beginning. They erroneously think they can make up their losses with volume.

To equate freedom with non conformity is a child's argument. Nonconformity may be a privilege of freedom, but it by no means defines freedom. As you obviously don't (won't) understand the differences between socialism, capitalism. communism, and autocracy, neither do you choose to recognize the critical differences between freedom and anarchy.

Deleted Account · #29 (**permalink**) 05-28-2007, 02:19 PM

Thom,

I am not here to provide you with a platform whereby you can spout your pro-licensing propaganda or to provide you with talking-points. My agenda is simply to express the other side as succinctly and often as possible.

Just so that we understand one another, I'll not be answering your questions in regards to home inspector licensing, nor do I care what opinion you and yours might have of me. As far as my education and ability to freely think goes, my guess is that it will be able to keep up any deep thoughts you might come up with.

Joe.

Jerry Peck · #30 (**permalink**) 05-28-2007, 02:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joseph Burkeson

... ability to freely think ...

Joe, you have every right to freely think, but some day, you should try to 'think freely'.

Without all that baggage you are carrying around clogging up what you are thinking.

#31 (**permalink**) 05-28-2007, 09:06 PM

You can attack the messenger all you want, but it does not change the facts that Mr. Burkeson has presented. No matter how hard you might wish it to be different, licensing has solved nothing.

For the proponent who supported it in order to limit his competition...he found brand new schools pumping out hundreds more.

For the proponent who supported it to "enhance the profession"...he found minimal standards becoming the definition of "qualified and competent" inspectors.

For the proponent who (chuckle) sought to "protect the consumer"...he still finds evening news reports in May and November that reveal shoddy home inspections.

Not one single proponent of licensing - anywhere at any time - has provided documented evidence that a problem that existed prior to a HI licensing law was eliminated by enacting that law.

Licensing solves nothing...and no one can prove otherwise.

Jack Feldmann · #32 (**permalink**) 05-29-2007, 05:33 AM

When I moved to Knoxville in 1994 there were ten home inspectors in my area, and two other ASHI members.

Prior to licensing in July 2006, there were about 50 inspectors and close to 20 ASHI members.

When licensing took affect, a few established inspectors quit the business (1 moved out of state). A bunch of new guys (and girls) started up. As of a week ago, I counted 71 licensed inspectors in my area (an a couple unlicensed ones). ASHI picked up a few new members along the way too.

There are two things licensing did for the profession here. It made all the new guys take the NHIE, and required ALL inspectors to have E&O insurance.

While many may argue that the NHIE is very easy (too easy?), it's probably the best exam out there. Passing it at least proves that the inspector has some basic inspection knowledge. It is way better than what we had before, which was grab a flashlight, print some cards, and get going.

While the issue of insurance has been battered around here many times before, there is one positive aspect of requiring it. It places a financial commitment on the inspector. Regardless of how we as inspectors feel about it, I think it does give the average Joe Public a feeling of comfort.

Licensing has not made much of an impact on my business. The fee for my license is minimal, and I always carried insurance anyway. The increased number of inspectors has maybe made an impact, but not much.

I think it will be interesting to see what happens to the numbers when we have to send in our insurance renewals. I'm going to guess there will be a bunch of inspectors drop out when they have to shell out another $4000 for insurance this year, and they try to balance it out with how much business they got this past year.

Licensing did not change the way I did inspections, or conducted myself in any way, except I now have a signature page in my report, and include a copy of my license.

JF

Deleted Account · #33 (**permalink**) 05-29-2007, 07:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jack Feldmann

I think it will be interesting to see what happens to the numbers when we have to send in our insurance renewals. I'm going to guess there will be a bunch of inspectors drop out when they have to shell out another $4000 for insurance this year, and they try to balance it out with how much business they got this past year.

I always thought you were a two-faced charlatan, thanks for proving me right. Your confession that you expect licensing and all that goes with it will reduce your competition warms my heart and drives home the point that licensing solves nothing. I suggest that you work on improving your skill set instead of attempting to hide behind bad licensing laws to keep you in business.

Legislation has a way of disappointing its staunches supporters whereas improving one's skills is like chopping wood, it warms you twice.

Scott Patterson · #34 (**permalink**) 05-29-2007, 08:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joseph Burkeson

I always thought you were a two-faced charlatan, thanks for proving me right. Your confession that you expect licensing and all that goes with it will reduce your competition warms my heart and drives home the point that licensing solves nothing. I suggest that you work on improving your skill set instead of attempting to hide behind bad licensing laws to keep you in business.

Legislation has a way of disappointing its staunches supporters whereas improving one's skills is like chopping wood, it warms you twice.

Blah,blah,blah. I've heard it all before, nothing to back it up but wishful thinking on your part, please get some new material would you?

Those that fear licensing have the most to loose!

Deleted Account · #35 (**permalink**) 05-29-2007, 09:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scott Patterson

Blah,blah,blah. I've heard it all before, nothing to back it up but wishful thinking on your part, please get some new material would you?

Those that fear licensing have the most to loose!

First of all... Do I really look or act afraid to you? Get a grip.

Scott Patterson · #36 (**permalink**) 05-29-2007, 09:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joseph Burkeson

First of all... Do I really look or act afraid to you? Get a grip.

It would appear so!

Those that fear licensing have the most too loose!

Deleted Account · #37 (**permalink**) 05-29-2007, 09:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scott Patterson

It would appear so!

Those that fear licensing have the most to loose!

Dream on oh bloviated one there is nothing to fear but fear itself.

When will you guys learn that licensing solves nothing!

Scott Patterson · #38 (**permalink**) 05-29-2007, 02:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joseph Burkeson

Dream on oh bloviated one there is nothing to fear but fear itself.

When will you guys learn that licensing solves nothing!

Oh, Yes it does. It would make you a really pissed off person!

Those that fear licensing have the most too loose!

Thom Walker · #39 (**permalink**) 05-29-2007, 02:49 PM

Scott,

You need either one more "o* in "to" or one less "o" in "lose." In the case of what you meant, either would work.

Jerry Peck · #40 (**permalink**) 05-29-2007, 03:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Harvey Hempelstern

that a problem that existed prior to a HI licensing law was eliminated by enacting that law.

Let me get this straight, then, ...

*YOU* have documented evidence which shows there are problems existing in home inspections?

*YOU* have no solution for those document problems other than to continue the status quo.

*YOU* have no reason to believe the status quo of home inspection problems will change ...

... "with or without" licensing, yet *YOU* are unwilling to try something which "might" be able to alter the status quo and solve a few problems?

What does that make *YOU*? One of the participants of those home inspection problems who are afraid *YOUR WAY* would be altered for some potential benefit?

I know, I know, ...

YOU will respond with something about 'licensing does not solve problems' while ignoring the fact that NOT HAVING licensing has been proven to 'not solve problems' too.

Please provide your answer, I can't wait to see it.

Deleted Account · #41 (**permalink**) 05-29-2007, 06:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

YOU will respond with something about 'licensing does not solve problems' while ignoring the fact that NOT HAVING licensing has been proven to 'not solve problems' too.

I believe what we have here is a perfect example of... "First do no harm" clause as outlined by Hippocrates around 450 BC in a document we now call the Hippocratic Oath.

At this time there is no creditable evidence that licensing solves anything, what we do know is that in general when a state adopts licensing there is in a very short time more inspectors in that state because a path to inspector status was provided by the state and beyond that those newly licensed inspectors have a skill set far below the average skill set of the inspector pool prior to licensing.

Furthermore, we are also very aware that in 90% of the cases the standards adopted by the state are far below the currently accepted professional standards. This has the effect of actually lowering the "standard of care" the public now receives under licensing.

All in all the legislators would be wise to study Hippocrates prior to making any hasty decisions in regards to home inspector licensing.

Jerry, I would like to thank you for providing a platform for the discussion of home inspector licensing and its failures to date.

Fearlessly,

Joe Burkeson

#42 (**permalink**) 05-29-2007, 06:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

Let me get this straight, then, ...

*YOU* are unwilling to try something which "might" be able to alter the status quo and solve a few problems?

Mr. Peck,

*YOUR* solution of licensing has already been tried --- and has subsequently failed --- in over 18 states, to date. What makes you think the 19th state will be any different?

Indeed, I am unwilling to marry a woman with 18 ex-husbands. I hope your Governor is, too.

Jerry Peck · #43 (**permalink**) 05-29-2007, 06:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joseph Burkeson

I believe what we have here is a perfect example of... "First do no harm" clause as outlined by Hippocrates around 450 BC in a document we now call the Hippocratic Oath.

However, for those civilizations which have progressed beyond 450 BC, once 'First, do no harm" has failed because if inaction, the alternative is action, doing as little harm as possible while trying to control the blight.

Thus, throughout the centuries, the survival of the masses many times leads to pain for a few. Not referring to human sacrifices, but to the fact that to protect many, a few may, regrettably, be hurt.

Civilization as we know it, as you know it, and as you enjoy it, is not possible without some being hurt, and other feeling hurt, whether they are hurt or not.

To save the patient, a leg is amputated ... first, do no harm ... then save the patient ...

Refusing to amputate a leg because you want to do no harm could be negligence and malpractice.

#44 (**permalink**) 05-29-2007, 06:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

Refusing to amputate a leg because you want to do no harm could be negligence and malpractice.

Amputating YOUR leg because MY nose is running is not a solution, either. Licensing solves nothing.

Scott Patterson · #45 (**permalink**) 05-29-2007, 06:50 PM

Joe,

Wow, now that is an improvement. We knew that you could do it!

Quote:

Mr. Peck,
*YOUR* solution of licensing has already been tried --- and has subsequently failed --- in over 18 states, to date. What makes you think the 19th state will be any different?

Indeed, I am unwilling to marry a woman with 18 ex-husbands. I hope your Governor is, too

Now if we could only get Harvey Bushart to figure it out. Heck he thinks that only 18 states are licensed! I think at last count it was around 33 states with either regulation or licensing (Yes, and about 7 or so are real stinkers).

Resistance is Futile!

Deleted Account · #46 (**permalink**) 05-29-2007, 06:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

Refusing to amputate a leg because you want to do no harm could be negligence and malpractice.

Let me just say this and leave it at that... A man has gotta know his limitations. The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits. -Albert Einstein

Fearlessly

Joe Burkeson

Jerry Peck · #47 (**permalink**) 05-29-2007, 07:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joseph Burkeson

Let me just say this and leave it at that... A man has gotta know his limitations. The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits. -Albert Einstein

And refusing to amputate ones own head would be one of those limits, but not ones own leg.

Like that guy caught in that rock a couple of years ago. He had two choices: 1) Die there. 2) Amputate his own arm off.

The one lacking genius dies there, the other lives on.

Stupid is as stupid does. Forrest Gump

Life is like a box of chocolates, you never know what you're gonna get. Forrest Gump

#48 (**permalink**) 05-29-2007, 07:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scott Patterson

Heck he thinks that only 18 states are licensed! I think at last count it was around 33 states with------------- either regulation ----------------or licensing (Yes, and about 7 or so are real stinkers).

Resistance is Futile!

Scott,

I am surprised that you would endorse the demise of your own association who pushes its only real benefit - that being a provider of "credentials" - as an alternative to licensing. To me, seeing ASHI membership dwindle with each law that is passed is the only positive thing to come from licensing...but that is for another thread.

There is a difference between registration and licensing. My numbers, as stated, are very close to being accurate...depending upon how one would interpret the laws of a couple of states.

Illinois already has as many unlicensed inspectors operating as licensed inspectors writing reports and the state has no means or desire to enforce this marketing plan...I mean...law. It's starting to happen in Tennessee, too.

People are asking themselves why they should carry the burden while others ignore it.

Not only is resistance not futile...but resistance to laws in place are already gaining momentum to the degree that it is repeal...not licensing...that is truly inevitable.

Jack Feldmann · #49 (**permalink**) 05-29-2007, 07:39 PM

Joe,
I'm not sure what part of my post made you think that I was a " a two-faced charlatan". I was just making an observation, and commenting on something that licensing did for the state.

Licensing DID require everyone to pass a test AND have insurance. I think that is positive. As I said, it is better than the old way.

I have been up front and honest with ALL of my posts on this forum. That is a lot more than I can say for some others here.

I think you should look in the mirror when you call someone "two faced". Not that long ago you were bashing ASHI every chance you got, now you are bashing NACHI with the same venom, and adding your claim to fame of being on the BOD of your local Chapter. I can only wonder what could be wrong with that chapter to not only allow you to be a member, but to want you to serve in a leadership position. It reminds me of a book written by John Kennedy Toole.

Speaking of charlatans - someone that won't post under their own name. What a joke.
JF

Deleted Account · #50 (**permalink**) 05-29-2007, 08:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jack Feldmann

I think you should look in the mirror when you call someone "two faced". Not that long ago you were bashing ASHI every chance you got, now you are bashing NACHI with the same venom, and adding your claim to fame of being on the BOD of your local Chapter. I can only wonder what could be wrong with that chapter to not only allow you to be a member, but to want you to serve in a leadership position.

I don't allow anyone to dictate how my life is lived and it appears that my style of leadership is apparently attractive to many as I not only sit on a local ASHI board but on the prestigious Leadership Hillsborough board also. Don't look now but I have also been asked to join the National ASHI legislative Committee, I've been told my voice is in demand, something about not being pussy whipped.

Your behavior which I described as two-faced is predicated on how you preach that HI licensing somehow protects the consumer in one breath then how HI licensing reduces your competition and protects your market in another.

You call yourself loyal ASHI brother but it appears to me that all you want to do is put people out of work, you should be ashamed of yourself. Tell me what have you done for your community or association lately? I have a laundry list of items with many hours devoted to local ASHI training, ask anyone, then bug off.

Fearlessly,

Joe Burkeson.

Rob Thomas · #51 (**permalink**) 05-29-2007, 08:48 PM

At this time there is no creditable evidence that licensing solves anything, what we do know is that in general when a state adopts licensing there is in a very short time more inspectors in that state because a path to inspector status was provided by the state and beyond that those newly licensed inspectors have a skill set far below the average skill set of the inspector pool prior to licensing.

I think you mean “credible” evidence. It’s hard to make a convincing argument when you don’t understand the language.

Furthermore, we are also very aware that in 90% of the cases the standards adopted by the state are far below the currently accepted professional standards. This has the effect of actually lowering the "standard of care" the public now receives under licensing.

That’s gibberish. The only “currently accepted professional standards” are those in the ASHI SoP, and most states have adopted a standard that deviates very little from it. State licensing doesn’t change the applicable standard to any measurable degree, it changes the level of accountability.

And, by the way, if the “we” to whom you refer are you and Bushart, then no one will have any confidence in the data you regurgitate or your ability to analyze it.

RT

Rob Thomas · #52 (**permalink**) 05-29-2007, 09:11 PM

Scott,

I am surprised that you would endorse the demise of your own association who pushes its only real benefit - that being a provider of "credentials" - as an alternative to licensing. To me, seeing ASHI membership dwindle with each law that is passed is the only positive thing to come from licensing...but that is for another thread.

Bushart, your analytical powers haven’t improved with your name change. ASHI will continue quite nicely I’m sure, because the best in any business always want to associate with the best. Your little group of pretenders at NACHI will do ok and will always be larger, because most of the room in any pyramid is at the bottom.

If you knew anything about history, which you obviously don’t, you would know that ASHI resisted licensing because it invariably lowered the bar to a point that only the newest non-proctored, online test-taker couldn’t reach it. ASHI offered model legislation that mirrored its own requirements, so that licensing would have real value for consumers. The people who resist the ASHI model are you and your ilk who can’t hope to meet the requirements.

I must say I agree with your decision. If I had a tag line as stupid as “licensing solves nothing”, I’d change my name too.

RT

Rob Thomas · #53 (**permalink**) 05-29-2007, 09:19 PM

I don't allow anyone to dictate how my life is lived and it appears that my style of leadership is apparently attractive to many as I not only sit on a local ASHI board but on the prestigious Leadership Hillsborough board also.

How prestigious can it be when it’s a “volunteer” board? What a joke. You involve yourself in local activities to network, hoping you might squeeze one or two inspections out of the people who don’t know you too well. Trolling for business is hardly a community service.

RT

From the website: Leadership Hillsborough is a non-profit organization governed by a volunteer Board of Directors.

It was founded in 1989 to promote harmonious relations and enhance communication by unifying all sectors of Hillsborough County through encouraging interaction among business, professional and community-oriented individuals.

Jerry Peck · #54 (**permalink**) 05-29-2007, 09:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joseph Burkeson

Blow me!

Wow!

Coming from someone who usually tags their spiels with "Fearlessly".

Seems like someone just put the fear of something in you.

All I can say is ... Wow! A new low ... even for Joe B.

Rob Thomas · #55 (**permalink**) 05-29-2007, 09:35 PM

I can't. I'm too busy laughing at you.

Maybe you could volunteer for the Supreme Court. That would really look good on your resume.

RT

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joseph Burkeson

Blow me!

Jerry Peck · #56 (**permalink**) 05-29-2007, 09:35 PM

This thread does seem to have degenerated into a pissing match and it may be time for the thread to 'disappear' and allow everyone to cool their heels a bit.

What do y'all think?

Richard Rushing · #57 (**permalink**) 05-29-2007, 10:04 PM

All I can say is Rob T... where have you been, boy. You been gone much too long.

This stuff is like watching people with Tourette Syndrome F@(+ ... it ain't fun to watch but is entertaining as hell!!

Heck... this thread hasn't disentigrated enough yet.

Jack Feldmann · #58 (**permalink**) 05-29-2007, 10:09 PM

Joe,
You need to read my post again. I was making observations (about insurance). First of all, I don't think there is anyone in business that wouldn't mind having fewer businesses in competition. That said, I would never do anyting to try to put someone OUT of business. For you to suggest so shows just how much you don't know me at all.

As far as what I have done for my association and community? Get real! I think you would have to work overtime to get even close to my involvement with ASHI.
Just off the top:
president Mid South Chapter
COR rep for 4 years
founding president east Tennessee Chapter
3 years ASHI director
vice president East TN ASHI - 2 terms
Cor rep for 2 years
Served on national committees 1994 - 2004 every year
report verifier for 4 years
instructor for paid verifiers
education chair for East TN ASHI
Served on various projects for EBPHI
Officer nominating committee
mentoring program @ East TN ASHI
I'm sure there's more...

As far as community..
Various church committees - youth, etc.
Habitat
Fight for Diabetes
Teach non credit class at UT
Teach Realtor continuing ed class
Local community business association

again, just a few off the top

I take many many guys on ride alongs, or mentor them over the phone or e-mail, and not just ASHI guys. Have been doing this for a decade.

There, I showed you mine.
JF

ESAFT

Thom Walker · #59 (**permalink**) 05-29-2007, 10:15 PM

Richard,
As the brother of a guy with polio, I hope you'll reconsider before ever saying something that ignorant again. It is far beneath who I imagine you strive to be.

I promise you, there is nothing entertaining about it.

Rob Thomas · #60 (**permalink**) 05-29-2007, 10:52 PM

Thanks.

RT

[quote=Richard Rushing;7295]All I can say is Rob T... where have you been, boy. You been gone much too long.

#61 (**permalink**) 05-30-2007, 04:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

What do y'all think?

I think that, since you have obviously lost your argument, you now would prefer that this thread disappear so as to do with censorship what you could not accomplish in debate. Attempts made by others to distract the conversation from the facts relating to the topic and turn this discussion into personal attacks should simply be ignored.

Thanks for asking.

Thom Walker · #62 (**permalink**) 05-30-2007, 05:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Harvey Hempelstern

I think that, since you have obviously lost your argument, you now would prefer that this thread disappear so as to do with censorship what you could not accomplish in debate. Attempts made by others to distract the conversation from the facts relating to the topic and turn this discussion into personal attacks should simply be ignored.

Thanks for asking.

I tried to debate by giving my position and by answering Joe's accusations/assumptions. I asked one question.

Please explain under what scenario that a restrictive construct like licensing actually increases the numbers of any trade or profession?

The answer I got was:

"I am not here to provide you with a platform whereby you can spout your pro-licensing propaganda or to provide you with talking-points. My agenda is simply to express the other side as succinctly and often as possible.

Just so that we understand one another, I'll not be answering your questions in regards to home inspector licensing, nor do I care what opinion you and yours might have of me. As far as my education and ability to freely think goes, my guess is that it will be able to keep up any deep thoughts you might come up with. "

So much for debate. A debate involves expressing your reasons for you opinions followed by an EXCHANGE of ideas based on an answerable question. It's not digging a trench and hurling your opinions at the other side.

Rob Thomas · #63 (**permalink**) 05-30-2007, 06:05 AM

Thom, what you don't seem to realize is that Burkeson and Bushart (who is so ashamed of himself that he now uses the name Hemplestern) have no facts on which to base their assertions. They are simply NACHI shills.

And pretty sorry ones at that.

RT

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thom Walker

I tried to debate by giving my position and by answering Joe's accusations/assumptions. I asked one question.

Please explain under what scenario that a restrictive construct like licensing actually increases the numbers of any trade or profession?

The answer I got was:

"I am not here to provide you with a platform whereby you can spout your pro-licensing propaganda or to provide you with talking-points. My agenda is simply to express the other side as succinctly and often as possible.

Just so that we understand one another, I'll not be answering your questions in regards to home inspector licensing, nor do I care what opinion you and yours might have of me. As far as my education and ability to freely think goes, my guess is that it will be able to keep up any deep thoughts you might come up with. "

So much for debate. A debate involves expressing your reasons for you opinions followed by an EXCHANGE of ideas based on an answerable question. It's not digging a trench and hurling your opinions at the other side.

Jerry Peck · #64 (**permalink**) 05-30-2007, 06:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Harvey Hempelstern

I think that, since you have obviously lost your argument, you now would prefer that this thread disappear so as to do with censorship what you could not accomplish in debate.

Harvey, Jim, Billy Bob, Jim Bob, Bobby Joe, whoever you are,

No, I have not lost my argument, I was offering a way for this to go away for Joe after his grade school remark.

As for "censorship", that is done *without asking*, I asked.

If the majority do not want to relent and give old Joe B. a reprieve, and to get this back to cooler heads, there is no "censorship", and, if they do, there STILL IS no "censorship" - it's called 'democratic action', but those from some association(s) do not know what 'democratic action' is, only 'dictatorship' rules to follow.

You can be your own guide through the forest, but here's a hint for you finding your way out: Once half way in, you might as well keep going, it's just as long to go back the way you went in.

Deleted Account · #65 (**permalink**) 05-30-2007, 06:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rob Thomas

Thom, what you don't seem to realize is that Burkeson and Bushart (who is so ashamed of himself that he now uses the name Hemplestern) have no facts on which to base their assertions. They are simply NACHI shills.

And pretty sorry ones at that.

RT

I would prefer to be known as an ASHI shill if you don't mind.

I say keep the BS coming, this thread shows the weakness of the licensing Nazis in all their glory, the best they could do is attack the messenger. This thread and the attacks I have received here changes nothing. Licensing is still the worst way to attempt to control your competition or your market share and in the end we will begin to see these bad laws repealed.

Fearlessly,

Joe Burkeson

Thom Walker · #66 (**permalink**) 05-30-2007, 07:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rob Thomas

Thom, what you don't seem to realize is that Burkeson and Bushart (who is so ashamed of himself that he now uses the name Hemplestern) have no facts on which to base their assertions. They are simply NACHI shills.

And pretty sorry ones at that.

RT

Thanks for your response, Rob.

I'm pretty sure that everyone understands that there is no way of "winning" this argument with either guy. I do realize who they are and I understand that both are capable only of inductive reasoning. It's the only thing that allows them to hold onto their opinions. Ex: There were bad inspectors before licensing, there are bad inspectors after licensing. Conclusion, licensing is ineffective. Ex: There were fewer inspectors before licensing. Conclusion, licensing increases the number of inspectors.
I thought I'd pitch in a question that couldn't be supported by inductive reasoning because there is no anecdotal incident to support their conclusion. Not surprisingly, I did not get an answer.
Anyway, the link has deteriorated sufficiently that I'm out of here.
As I know at least one really good Inspector who is also a NACHI member, I'll decline painting that group with such a wide brush.

Bob White · #67 (**permalink**) 05-30-2007, 08:16 AM

Back to the thread.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scott Patterson

This has gone under the radar. Georgia General Assembly - SB 334

Does anyone have any information about this legislation? On the surface it looks like a fairly good bill.

The bill was written/sponsored by a state senator from Gwinnett County (no other sponsors)....

It was read and assigned to the appropriate committee on April 19.

It has to go through the committee process, a senate debate, vote, then to the house for debate, re-drafting, debate, vote, then to another committee for final changes etcetera, etcetera, etcetera......

The bill is so young, it has sparked virtually no interest yet in Georgia (in contrast to the 'spirited' discussion here).

It is, I think, the second try for some sort of regulation of HI's here in GA. The first bill died a few years ago ( I believe it was sort of a companion to the General Contractor licensing bill that was passed a few years ago).

Is it a 'good' bill? I don't know. Good or bad, I think it is certainly not worth the venom displayed in this forum.

I take myself seriously from time to time, then I remember how small I am.

Brian Hannigan · #68 (**permalink**) 05-30-2007, 08:55 AM

Since I have received several e-mails from members asking me to watch this thread I will post the InspectionNews Rules/Agreement below.

Bob, thank you for getting the thread back on topic.

Quote:

Just a reminder that everyone registered on InspectionNews has agreed to abide by the rules of InspectionNews as stated in the InspectionNews registration agreement.

For reference the agreement is posted below.

===============

Forum Rules

*** InspectionNews Message Board Rules, Policies, and Disclaimers. ***

Becoming a member of InspectionNews entitles you to a subscription of the InspectionNews Digest and other outstanding offers.

By accessing the InspectionNews Message Board and retrieving your password, you are stating that you agree to abide by the following Message Board Rules, Policies, and Disclaimers:

Considering the real-time nature of this bulletin board, it is impossible for Hann Tech Marketing Links / InspectionNews to review all messages or confirm the validity of information posted. Please remember that we do not actively monitor the contents of posted messages and are not responsible for any messages posted. We do not vouch for or warrant the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any message, and are not responsible for the contents of any message.

The messages express the views of the author of the message, not necessarily the views of Hann Tech Marketing Links / InspectionNews or any entity associated with Hann Tech Marketing Links / InspectionNews. Any user who feels that a posted message is objectionable is encouraged to contact Hann Tech Marketing Links / InspectionNews immediately by e-mail. Hann Tech Marketing Links / InspectionNews has the ability to remove objectionable messages and we will make every effort to do so, within a reasonable time frame, if Hann Tech Marketing Links / InspectionNews determines that removal is necessary. This is a manual process, however, so please realize that Hann Tech Marketing Links / InspectionNews may not be able to remove or edit particular messages immediately. In addition, repeat offenders can and will be banned from the board.

The goal of Hann Tech Marketing Links / InspectionNews is to have peaceful, educational and informative discussions related to the inspection business. Please discuss the topics and do not get into personality conflicts and/or arguments.

You agree, through your use of this service, that you will not use this Message Board to post any material which is knowingly false and/or defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, sexually oriented, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, or otherwise violative of any law. You agree not to post any copyrighted material unless the copyright is owned by you or by Hann Tech Marketing Links / InspectionNews. Furthermore, you acknowledge that by being a registered member of this message board you will accept an e-mail digest twice a week.

Please note that unsolicited advertisements, chain letters, pyramid schemes and solicitations are STRICTLY forbidden. If you would like to take advantage of an excellent opportunity to promote your services/products in front of the inspector members, please contact us.

Although Hann Tech Marketing Links / InspectionNews does not and cannot review all the messages posted and is not responsible for the content of any of these messages, we at Hann Tech Marketing Links / InspectionNews reserve the right to delete any message for any reason whatsoever. You remain solely responsible for the content of your messages, and you agree to indemnify and hold harmless Hann Tech Marketing Links / InspectionNews and their agents with respect to any claim based upon transmission of your message(s). Messages that may be edited or deleted include any message that violates any part of this agreement and/or any message that does not relate to or follow the original topic of the thread it is posted in.

If you agree to the terms, please check the 'I agree' check box and press the 'Register' button below. If you would like to cancel the registration, click here to return to the forums index.

==============

If you no longer agree with the rules please contact the board administrator and your membership will be deleted.

Rob Thomas · #69 (**permalink**) 05-30-2007, 10:58 PM

Brian,

If you are willing to allow Burkeson free rein to spew his obnoxious comments to anyone and everyone who is good enough to acknowledge him, you shouldn’t be surprised when the conversation deteriorates. On top of that, you have Bushart/ Hempelstern calling your participants “hooligans” on the toxic wasteland that is the NACHI board, and then using your service to spread his all-consuming fear of licensing. Don’t blame me when I expose these thugs for who and what they are.

You didn’t ask for my advice, but it would be to add to the quality of your message board by subtraction.

RT

Burkeson asked: Does licensing solve anything?

And to Patterson’s response he wrote: Blah,blah,blah. I've heard it all before, nothing to back it up but wishful thinking on your part, please get some new material would you? Answer me this how is ASHI going to fix the screw-up in New York?

Licensing is about as useful as tits on a bull and you know it.

To Feldmann from Burkeson: I always thought you were a two-faced charlatan, thanks for proving me right. Your confession that you expect licensing and all that goes with it will reduce your competition warms my heart and drives home the point that licensing solves nothing. I suggest that you work on improving your skill set instead of attempting to hide behind bad licensing laws to keep you in business.

Then this to Feldmann: You call yourself loyal ASHI brother but it appears to me that all you want to do is put people out of work, you should be ashamed of yourself. Tell me what have you done for your community or association lately? I have a laundry list of items with many hours devoted to local ASHI training, ask anyone, then bug off.

He continued his downward spiral with this: Blow me!

And completed it by calling anyone who disagrees with him a Nazi: I say keep the BS coming, this thread shows the weakness of the licensing Nazis in all their glory, the best they could do is attack the messenger. This thread and the attacks I have received here changes nothing. Licensing is still the worst way to attempt to control your competition or your market share and in the end we will begin to see these bad laws repealed.

Jack Feldmann · #70 (**permalink**) 05-31-2007, 05:13 AM

Joe,
I've yet to see your laundry list (of your vast involvement in ASHI training).
JF

Rob,
I think if Brian were to ban some of these folks, they would find a way to re-enter under an assumed name, and start spreading their vitriolic rhetoric once again.
Jack

Scott Patterson · #71 (**permalink**) 05-31-2007, 09:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jack Feldmann

Joe,
I've yet to see your laundry list (of your vast involvement in ASHI training).
JF

Rob,
I think if Brian were to ban some of these folks, they would find a way to re-enter under an assumed name, and start spreading their vitriolic rhetoric once again.
Jack

Now if you have a problem with a particular person(s) you can add them to your ignore list. This is a new feature that the board has.

#72 (**permalink**) 05-31-2007, 03:44 PM

Ignore the people you choose to, but the facts do not change.

Licensing solves nothing.

Jerry Peck · #73 (**permalink**) 05-31-2007, 06:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Harvey Hempelstern

Licensing solves nothing.

Doing nothing solves nothing.

Doing ANYTHING ELSE is an attempt to solve it.

#74 (**permalink**) 05-31-2007, 06:12 PM

One of the funniest stories collected among the many failures of the licensing effort comes from New Jersey where a state senator got a bad inspection (says it cost him $100,000) and went to work on making a law...initially, one of the toughest in the country. Once it was passed, the very first license was issued to the guy who inspected his house. Seems that the grandfathering clause saved his bacon.

Then there was the inspector in Massachusetts credited for the media push for licensing in that state. Multi-inspector firm that had a string of lawsuits a mile long. Licensing becomes law and....guess who gets a seat on the state licensing board. LOL

It's great.....and all goes to prove....licensing solves nothing.

Jack Feldmann · #75 (**permalink**) 05-31-2007, 07:19 PM

Harv,
As I said before..In TN licensing did provide that all licensed HI's will have E&O insurance. THAT solved something.

In TN licensing provided that all inspectors would have passed the NHIE. THAT solved something.

Now, it may not have solved whatever is on your agenda, but it did, at the very least, make all inspectors meet those two criteria. Now if Joe Public is any safer because of that - I don't know. But it DID solve those two concerns. Those two concerns were the highest on the list of requirements that the Realtors and Builders wanted.

As a home inspector that fought licensing for almost a decade in TN, those two things were something I could certainly live with. They were not unreasonable requirements.

As I said before, licensing has not really changed the way I do business at all, except for the fee for the license.

I guess the big question is what will you (and Joe) do when licensing comes into effect in your state? Will you get a license? Will you quit the business? Will you continue in business and break the law?

Like it or not, no matter how hard you fight, at some point you might just find yourself in a licensed state. I would like to know what your plans are.
JF

Deleted Account · #76 (**permalink**) 05-31-2007, 09:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jack Feldmann

Joe,
I've yet to see your laundry list (of your vast involvement in ASHI training).
JF

I never let my left hand know what my right hand is doing.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jack Feldmann

Rob,
I think if Brian were to ban some of these folks, they would find a way to re-enter under an assumed name, and start spreading their vitriolic rhetoric once again.
Jack

Not true, we would leave and this place would become a ghost town like the TIJ board... crickets.

It is only vitriolic rhetoric if your a licensing Nazi, otherwise its is representative patriotic discord.

Fearlessly,

Joe Burkeson

Jack Feldmann · #77 (**permalink**) 06-01-2007, 05:17 AM

"I never let my left hand know what my right hand is doing."
So in other words - YOU GOT NOTHING.

"Not true, we would leave and this place would become a ghost town like the TIJ board... crickets."

I think many of us would welcome the silence. Why not give it a try?

"I would rather have some crickets than be infested with lice" - The Bug Man 1967

#78 (**permalink**) 06-01-2007, 05:40 AM

Joe,

They start threads on state legislation...and call for the banning of those who oppose it. Bless their hearts.

Losing this debate should be almost second nature to them, by now.

Someone posted earlier the "logic" that passing a law requiring the NHIE "solved" the problem of not having the NHIE. They admit that it may have done nothing to improve the quality of home inspections, but they have at least "solved" the problem of not having the NHIE. I'm going to refer to that, often.

I think we should leave these folks alone for a while. Their frustration over having no argument to defend their illogic is making them a bit testy.

Deleted Account · #79 (**permalink**) 06-01-2007, 07:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Harvey Hempelstern

I think we should leave these folks alone for a while. Their frustration over having no argument to defend their illogic is making them a bit testy.

Agreed, but not before I inject a bit of freethought logic of my own.

We all know the notion that licensing somehow raises the bar is at best just a straw man argument that has never been proven to be true. The reality is that legislators set the bar so low that those who would have never thought to have become home inspectors are found filling up classrooms and taking exams just to enter our profession.

Plain old unfettered American capitalism does a much better job of ridding our profession of undesirables then any law has up to this date. This profession is still mostly a referral business and regardless whether your referrals come by word of mouth or through other sources such as Realtors the truth is... incompetent and unskilled home inspectors do not last for very long in our profession. Capitalism has time & time again just proven itself to be a better defender of the public than legislation in regards to eliminating inexperienced, uneducated and non-skilled inspectors from the general pool of home inspectors.

Rob Thomas · #80 (**permalink**) 06-01-2007, 09:48 AM

According to Godwin's Law, which I'm sure he will need to research at Wiki, Burkeson loses again.

He should certainly be used to it by now.

RT

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joseph Burkeson

It is only vitriolic rhetoric if your a licensing Nazi, otherwise its is representative patriotic discord.

Fearlessly,

Joe Burkeson

Rob Thomas · #81 (**permalink**) 06-01-2007, 10:01 AM

Bushart is so mentally challenged that he doesn't know the difference between opinion and fact. But then, what should be expected from someone who is too ashamed to use his own name when he posts here.

I say, if you have an argument that supports your position, Bushart, make it. Maybe you will convince someone (and maybe pigs will fly).

You won't, because you can't. You lost any credibility you had when you attempted to deceive the good people here by posting under an assumed name.

RT

Quote:

Originally Posted by Harvey Hempelstern

Ignore the people you choose to, but the facts do not change.

Licensing solves nothing.

Deleted Account · #82 (**permalink**) 06-01-2007, 06:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rob Thomas

According to Godwin's Law, which I'm sure he will need to research at Wiki, Burkeson loses again.

He should certainly be used to it by now.

RT

I have nothing to lose should licensing become a reality I will simply become licensed, end of story. You are the big loser here, because it is you who has pinned your future on licensing to "raise the bar" and limit your competition, a marketing plan doomed to failure.

My guess is that you we won't be able to carry on this conversation a year from now as you will have gone back to flippin' burgers or some other menial task due to depending on home inspector licensing as one of the primary support pillars of your business plan. Tough to milk a cow or the public for that matter when sitting on a two-legged stool, time will tell.

Jack Feldmann · #83 (**permalink**) 06-01-2007, 07:45 PM

"We all know the notion that licensing somehow raises the bar is at best just a straw man argument that has never been proven to be true."

WOW! Is that not the pot calling the kettle black?

I believe I have proven it to be true. HI's in TN were not required to have insurance prior to 7/1/06. They were not required to have passed ANY exam prior to 7/1/06.

Since these two requirements were part of the licensing bill, I submit that (even if you don't think the NHIE is a valid test ) the bar WAS RAISED.

I don't believe these two requirements are such a hardship that it really restricts someone from entering the profession.

"...due to depending on home inspector licensing as one of the primary support pillars of your business plan." I don't believe ANYONE here has posted that they put licensing as any part of their business plan, much less a primary support pillar. I know I HAVEN'T! IN fact, licensing isn't even mentioned in my business plan.

"Tell me what have you done for your community or association lately? I have a laundry list of items with many hours devoted to local ASHI training, ask anyone, then bug off." Well Joe, I did tell you what I have done for my community and ASHI lately - I've yet to see your "laundry list". I did ask some FL people and got NOTHING with regards to your "many hours".

Since you did not respond, I have to assume you are woefully short with your list. You and harv will be missed.
JF

Deleted Account · #84 (**permalink**) 06-01-2007, 07:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jack Feldmann

Since you did not respond, I have to assume you are woefully short with your list. You and harv will be missed.
JF

Asked & answered. The only way you are going to miss me is if you move away. Jack, I came to play and I'm here to stay, get friggin' used to it already.

Licensing is a pox upon our profession and I will continue to pick at the scab whenever possible.

Fearlessly,

Joe Burkeson

Jack Feldmann · #85 (**permalink**) 06-01-2007, 09:06 PM

Sorry, I misunderstood I guess. When you said "Not true, we would leave and this place would become a ghost town like the TIJ board... crickets." I just assumed you were planning on taking off, to leave the rest of us listening to the crickets. My mistake.

Not sure I understand your "asked and answered" comment. You implied that you had a laundry list of your vast accomplishments.

I guess I have to assume you are either a liar or fraud, or possibly both, since you have not come forth with your list.

If you want to be known as a scab picker, so be it.
JF

Deleted Account · #86 (**permalink**) 06-01-2007, 10:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jack Feldmann

Sorry, I misunderstood I guess. When you said "Not true, we would leave and this place would become a ghost town like the TIJ board... crickets." I just assumed you were planning on taking off, to leave the rest of us listening to the crickets. My mistake.

Not sure I understand your "asked and answered" comment. You implied that you had a laundry list of your vast accomplishments.

I guess I have to assume you are either a liar or fraud, or possibly both, since you have not come forth with your list.

If you want to be known as a scab picker, so be it.
JF

I said I never let my left hand know what my right hand is doing, furthermore I don't owe you anything not a laundry list, not even a how do you do, you are just attempting to pick a fight over losing any argument in regards to home inspector licensing. I never lie, there is never any need.

You & yours are simply pissed off that all your efforts to advance your restrictive home inspector licensing agenda has been an abject failure. But what really makes your head spin is knowing that the all efforts of a organized licensing coalition that has spent thousands of dollars and expended hundreds of man hours pushing legislation like a crack-whore can have their whole house of cards come tumbling down around their asses with very little effort from the opposition.

What irks you and causes you to lose sleep is the fact it is so much easier to prevent a bill from passing into law then to get one passed, I laugh at your feeble and weak forays into state politics thinking you have crossed all your t's and dotted all of your i's only to see it all be flushed down the toilet year after year. It is you who are the fraud & liar, sadly it is yourself who you have been lying to all these years, nobody else really cares.

Licensing is a pox upon our profession and I will continue to pick at the scab whenever possible.

JB

Rob Thomas · #87 (**permalink**) 06-01-2007, 10:59 PM

I have nothing to lose should licensing become a reality I will simply become licensed, end of story. You are the big loser here, because it is you who has pinned your future on licensing to "raise the bar" and limit your competition, a marketing plan doomed to failure.

RT: Why do you waste your time writing such foolishness here? You don’t know how I earn my living; you don’t know how I spend my time; and you obviously have no idea what my position is re: state licensing of home inspectors. Oddly, your vast ignorance hasn’t diminished in the least your willingness to publish your opinions, all of which are based on nothing.

My guess is that you we won't be able to carry on this conversation a year from now as you will have gone back to flippin' burgers or some other menial task due to depending on home inspector licensing as one of the primary support pillars of your business plan. Tough to milk a cow or the public for that matter when sitting on a two-legged stool, time will tell.

RT: I have $10,000 I’m willing to wager that you’re wrong about what I’ll be doing in a year from now. Are you willing to match it? Are you willing to risk a month’s work that you know what you’re writing about?

You have two choices here. You can wager $10,000 on your prediction, which by the way is based on an incorrect premise; or you can show everyone how fearful you really are to back up the foolishness you post here.

I say you don’t have a clue what you’re writing about. Prove me wrong and take 10,000 of my dollars for your trouble.

If you accept my challenge, we will both send cashier’s checks for $10,000 to someone on this board who we both trust. Next June 1st, this person will cash the checks and issue another cashier’s check for $18,000 to the winner, and keep $2000 for his trouble.

If you don’t have the money to risk on your prediction, I’m sure one of your supporters here will lend it to you.

I have the money, and I’m about to double it.

RT

Deleted Account · #88 (**permalink**) 06-01-2007, 11:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rob Thomas

I have nothing to lose should licensing become a reality I will simply become licensed, end of story. You are the big loser here, because it is you who has pinned your future on licensing to "raise the bar" and limit your competition, a marketing plan doomed to failure.

RT: Why do you waste your time writing such foolishness here? You don’t know how I earn my living; you don’t know how I spend my time; and you obviously have no idea what my position is re: state licensing of home inspectors. Oddly, your vast ignorance hasn’t diminished in the least your willingness to publish your opinions, all of which are based on nothing.

My guess is that you we won't be able to carry on this conversation a year from now as you will have gone back to flippin' burgers or some other menial task due to depending on home inspector licensing as one of the primary support pillars of your business plan. Tough to milk a cow or the public for that matter when sitting on a two-legged stool, time will tell.

RT: I have $10,000 I’m willing to wager that you’re wrong about what I’ll be doing in a year from now. Are you willing to match it? Are you willing to risk a month’s work that you know what you’re writing about?

You have two choices here. You can wager $10,000 on your prediction, which by the way is based on an incorrect premise; or you can show everyone how fearful you really are to back up the foolishness you post here.

I say you don’t have a clue what you’re writing about. Prove me wrong and take 10,000 of my dollars for your trouble.

If you accept my challenge, we will both send cashier’s checks for $10,000 to someone on this board who we both trust. Next June 1st, this person will cash the checks and issue another cashier’s check for $18,000 to the winner, and keep $2000 for his trouble.

If you don’t have the money to risk on your prediction, I’m sure one of your supporters here will lend it to you.

I have the money, and I’m about to double it.

RT

What a fool, you refuse to discuss the pratfall known as home inspector licensing and instead It appears you are breaking the law in regards to gambling and furthermore attempting to seduce me as your accomplice. I believe the authorities need to be notified of your little scheme, they can decide if the law has been breached and act accordingly.

Rob, I never discuss my finances publicly, but truth be known I live well, you know couple acres, gated community 3-car garage, pool, no mortgage. My guess is you ain't got two nickles to rub together let alone $10K, checked out your website nchomeinspectors.com, I was nonpulsed. BTW the knock at the door is probably the FED's, smile.

Licensing is a pox upon our profession and I will continue to pick at the scab whenever possible.

#89 (**permalink**) 06-02-2007, 04:44 AM

Joe, are you as amused as I am by the bitterness and venom that is spewed from those who are losing the pro-licensing argument?

BTW, Bushart sends his regards and we both continue to hope for the best for you guys in Florida. It looks as if your governor might be looking to take the easy way out.

Rob Thomas · #90 (**permalink**) 06-02-2007, 07:55 AM

Point 1: That's the wrong door, wrong guy, wrong website.

Point 2: I never gamble.

Point 3: You won't risk your money because you are afraid you're wrong. I'm not risking my money because I know I'm right.

Point 4: I haven't discussed licensing because I'm not interested in it. I entered this thread asking why Bushart was posting under the guise of Hempelstern.

Point 5: Everyone here knows who issued the challenge, and everone knows who was afraid of it.

Point 6: Everyone here now knows Hempelstern is Bushart, who is to afraid to post under his own name.

Point 7: My only interest here was to pull your strings and watch you and Bushart jump. Thanks for playing along.

RT

Jerry Peck · #91 (**permalink**) 06-02-2007, 08:45 AM

Joe B.,

Let me get this straight:

1) You made a statement about Rob.

2) Rob is willing to put up $10,000 that you are wrong.

3) You refused to match it.

4) Rob called your bluff and you folded.

That is THE ONLY WAY to read what just went on.

From this point on, whatever you say has no meaning, no integrity , no practical standing at all the realm of things as honesty and forthrightness goes.

You need to stand down and, maybe your foolishness will disappear over time, in which case maybe others will start to give you some credibility again (or maybe not), but ...

... for now, you have none.

You just folded and left your integrity on the table, might as well get up now and walk out into the night.

Deleted Account · #92 (**permalink**) 06-02-2007, 12:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

Joe B.,

Let me get this straight:

1) You made a statement about Rob.

2) Rob is willing to put up $10,000 that you are wrong.

3) You refused to match it.

4) Rob called your bluff and you folded.

That is THE ONLY WAY to read what just went on.

From this point on, whatever you say has no meaning, no integrity , no practical standing at all the realm of things as honesty and forthrightness goes.

You need to stand down and, maybe your foolishness will disappear over time, in which case maybe others will start to give you some credibility again (or maybe not), but ...

... for now, you have none.

You just folded and left your integrity on the table, might as well get up now and walk out into the night.

Jerry,

It is you who have no credibility here, this ain't your argument you have no dog in this hunt and for your sake walk away before this escalates into something that may cost you even more.

Rob Thomas is a walking/talking joke, I owe him nothing and that is what he will get, nothing, were he on fire I would not spit on him.

I am no ones fool, I choose the time and place and games to which I play, no one chooses for me, no one especially a clown like you.

Hey Bob here is the challenge. Bring your ass and your $20K in cash down to Tampa to the Hard Rock Casino (we will give it to the Casino to hold while we play) and we will play heads-up Texas Hold EM in public, winner take all. It would be a pleasure to take your money and send you back to North Carolina on a greyhound bus.

The challenge you offered me is bogus because I can't even prove that you are in business today.

You've got to ask yourself one question: 'Do I feel lucky?' Well, do ya punk?” - Clint Eastwood

P.S. Rob, Before I reserve the table, send me a picture of either your money or a bank statement, you have already seen a picture of my house.

Fearlessly,

Joe Burkeson

Jerry Peck · #93 (**permalink**) 06-02-2007, 01:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joseph Burkeson

Jerry,

It is you who have no credibility here, this ain't your argument you have no dog in this hunt and for your sake walk away before this escalates into something that may cost you even more.

This is Brian's Casino, I'm volunteering as Pit Boss for this table.

Your bluff was called, you then started counting your money at the table to try to show the others why they should not challenge you.

You've got to know when to hold 'em, when to fold 'em, when to walk away, and when to run, never count you money 'til the dealin's done (something like that - Kenny Rogers)

You folded and started counting your money, in doing so, you left it all on the table, including your integrity.

No one wants to play with a ... how do we say this tactfully ... well, it rhymes with 'beat' ...

The unfortunate thing is that, as a volunteer Pit Boss, I have no authority to grab you by the collar and toss you out the door, Brian, though, is watching from those windows way up there, he does, it's his casino.

#94 (**permalink**) 06-02-2007, 01:14 PM

Looks like those losing the licensing argument and who also lost their bid to censor you are now baiting you into being banned from their very small club, Joe.

You would think with all of this unused webspace, there would be room for opinions other than theirs (wink).

Jerry Peck · #95 (**permalink**) 06-02-2007, 01:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Harvey Hempelstern

You would think with all of this unused webspace, there would be room for opinions other than theirs (wink).

There is, his AND yours.

Except that Joe is espousing more than opinions about inspections, licensing, etc., he is taking it personal to others. The casino owner says that's now how you play nice together.

Joe made a boast, he was told to back it up of shut it up, Joe backed down but did not shut it up, he just raised his ranting level.

Joe lowered the level to a whole new level - like that found on the NAXHI board (from what I remember of it). They seem to like down and dirty fighting, ranting and raving. Boasting about things and then not backing it up.

Here, we except more from participants than that. We expect the participants to be adults, at least most of the time.

Deleted Account · #96 (**permalink**) 06-02-2007, 02:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

There is, his AND yours.

Except that Joe is espousing more than opinions about inspections, licensing, etc., he is taking it personal to others. The casino owner says that's now how you play nice together.

Joe made a boast, he was told to back it up of shut it up, Joe backed down but did not shut it up, he just raised his ranting level.

Joe lowered the level to a whole new level - like that found on the NACHI board (from what I remember of it). They seem to like down and dirty fighting, ranting and raving. Boasting about things and then not backing it up.

Here, we except more from participants than that. We expect the participants to be adults, at least most of the time.

Funny, you lose the licensing argument, you are a pit boss who gets no respect from the players, and whats more you are powerless over me, what else can I say?

You even tried to conjure up Brian's spirit to save you from embarrassment all to no avail. I am now triumphantly (in your face) leaving this thread until Rob either meets my challenge or we get back to the topic of this thread... HI licensing, as you have proven yourself to be painfully unamusing and I am fresh out of insults.

Fearlessly,

Joe Burkeson

Jerry Peck · #97 (**permalink**) 06-02-2007, 04:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joseph Burkeson

I am now triumphantly (in your face) leaving this thread until Rob either meets my challenge

Joe,

(sigh)

You have no clue do you?

You are leaving with your tail between your legs as you have not yet said yes to Rob.

Not agreeing to Rob's deal makes any deal you are offering valueless.

(sigh)

Ol' Clueless Joe

Scott Patterson · #98 (**permalink**) 06-02-2007, 05:05 PM

It is apparent that Burkeson & Bushart (Harvey Hump...) know that their diatribe against home inspector licensing is not working outside of the NACHI realm.

Those that are against licensing do not realize that if they do not become involved in the process and help to write or attempt to have input on licensing legislation, that others will do it for them. Builders, Realtors and Trial Lawyers love to write legislation to govern home inspectors.

Deleted Account · #99 (**permalink**) 06-02-2007, 06:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scott Patterson

Those that are against licensing do not realize that if they do not become involved in the process and help to write or attempt to have input on licensing legislation, that others will do it for them. Builders, Realtors and Trial Lawyers love to write legislation to govern home inspectors.

Thanks for bringing this back on topic, it is obvious that Peck now has far too much time on his hands or his meds need adjusting.

Anyway. Those of who are opposed to licensing are truly cognizant that joining coalitions or discussing how "good licensing" might be implemented is plain and simple compromise and in the end compromise = licensing.

Once you open Pandora's box to the notion that the "pig" can be dressed up and made acceptable you in the end will accept any friggin' slop that is offered. A perfect example of this is FABI's endorsement of the current licensing proposal, most members will be far worse off if this licensing bill becomes law but that fact did not stop them from endorsing the bill hook, line & sinker. All of FABI's members will be lumped together with the lowest common dominator, the bar will have been lowered and FABI's members will step off the curb and gain equality with everyone else in the gutter. It will most likely lead to the demise of their organization as we know it now. Bravo for licensing.

#**100** (**permalink**) 06-02-2007, 08:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scott Patterson

Those that are against licensing do not realize that if they do not become involved in the process and help to write or attempt to have input on licensing legislation, that others will do it for them. Builders, Realtors and Trial Lawyers love to write legislation to govern home inspectors.

That scare tactic used to work, Scott, back in the early period when people thought licensing might be a good idea and believed the rhetoric as to how it was inevitable.

Now, after having seen it fail in so many places ... while efforts to stop licensing is succeeding in almost every state where it is opposed ... that dog just won't hunt, anymore.

Nice try, though.