Thread: (rotten, infested) MDF?

Originally Posted by Bill Kriegh

.

problem is that your stick for "kneecapping" isn't big enough.

.
Watch it Bill ! Argaaaa! Redirect Notice
* I'm down to One Cap.

This is a classic example of deteriorated pressed wood siding. Does not matter what brand it is, however there is at least one just going into litigation. (there are many) IT IS DETERIORATED PRESSED WOOD SIDING. I could somewhat see holes in the picture posted, but no frass and no nesting materials, or fecal matter were present. As a state pest inspector, I could not call insect infestation in this product (by photos provided) due to the lack of evidence. I could however call dry rot and deterioration in the siding product, which most likely involves the entire structure, including framing.

At this point I would direct the listing and buyer agents to contractors and multiple web sites to do there own research and walk away with a pay check. That is my job!

I have a hard time understanding how this got so out of control. It was a simple question, which needed a simple answer.

I actually enjoy this web site, but do get tired of bored people with too much time on their hands. Come on people, lets share information and not go down the dark side. PLEASE!!!!

Jim

Originally Posted by Jim Scott

. It was a simple question, which needed a simple answer.

.
Most Likely Composite Siding Identification by Siding Solutions, Inc.
.taken from Post #3
.

Somewhat reluctant to stick my toes into these waters, but what the hae.

Is it the taken position (referencing Florida Lic Law) that a description of damage using a comparison of appearance to that of damage caused by an insect as only a graphic description is prohibited by law ? The point being, that the description is an adjative and not a a noun. Not a definitive identification of an insect but a limited descriptive comparison if pref fessed as "similar to but not identified as" or something to that effect ?

Billy,
Per your "...Subpoena duces tecum..."
bring with you under penalty of punishment
All Kristi would have to do is cut it the area out and take it with her for presentation???

Originally Posted by Garry Sorrells

Billy,
Per your "...Subpoena duces tecum..."
bring with you under penalty of punishment
All Kristi would have to do is cut it the area out and take it with her for presentation???

.
If that is what your Attorney advised.
. post # 21 is informative.
.

Kristi,

Was the decayed wood the bottom plate of the framing or the siding?

I see what appears to be frass.

Further; curious as to the term 'fine'. A fine can be issued, but doesn't mean there is guilt.

How many fines are issued and how many of these fines are actually prosecuted? Is it a summary conviction offence were one has the option to pay the fine which acknowledges guilt or does the the person have the right to his day in court?

Does anyone know?

Originally Posted by Raymond Wand

I see what appears to be frass.

.
Good Morning Raymond,

I think that has been definitively answered in post #'s 59, 63 & 67.

* buy the way I love Canadians.
.

Uhhh.. what is "MDF"?

Cheers!

CaoimhÃ*n P. Connell
Forensic Industrial Hygienist
Forensic Applications Consulting Technologies, Inc. - Home

CPC I hope you where not setting us up with a come back but here you go: Medium Density Fibreboard

Originally Posted by CaoimhÃ*n P. Connell

Uhhh.. what is "MDF"?

Not what is shown.

MDF stands for Medium Density Fiberboard.

Originally Posted by Garry Sorrells

Is it the taken position (referencing Florida Lic Law) that a description of damage using a comparison of appearance to that of damage caused by an insect as only a graphic description is prohibited by law ? The point being, that the description is an adjative and not a a noun. Not a definitive identification of an insect but a limited descriptive comparison if pref fessed as "similar to but not identified as" or something to that effect ?

To make that reference you would need to be, you would be in effect be, identifying the organism which made the damage, so, yes, that would be prohibited by the Pest Control licensing folks for home inspector who are not either licensed as a CPCO or a WDO ID card holder.

The line is a fine line, think of it as the fine solid yellow line down the center of a 2-lane highway ... stay on your side of the solid yellow line and your risk of getting hit head-on are rather low, but ... cross that solid yellow line and your risk of getting smacked go up quite dramatically. You might be lucky for quite some time, but the more time you spend crossing the line, the more often you cross the line, is when you should start thinking of making sure your will and testament is current and updated, and your life insurance policy is paid in full ...

There really *is no need* for a home inspector to report the damage as 'looking like termite damage' when you that needs to be done is report the damage and that it needs to be repaired.

I'm not quite sure why there is all the fuss about following state laws - if your state has home inspector licensing laws, would YOU want non-licensed people to go around doing home inspections without a license?

The shoe needs to be able to fit both feet, don't try to find a way around what you don't like and you think is not necessary if you don't want others to try to find a war around what they don't like and think is not necessary.

Does your state have home inspector licensing? If so, do you grumble and complain about unlicensed home inspectors? Everyone needs to think about it and apply it to what they do and what they complain about.

If it's fit for the goose, it's fit for the gander ... or however that goes.

There really *is no need* for a home inspector to report the damage as 'looking like termite damage' when you that needs to be done is report the damage and that it needs to be repaired.

I don't know, to me it seems crazy that you can't even say there might be termites (or whatever) and that the client should get an expert in. If anything, you're sending work to the PCOs. Otherwise the client might repair the damage and leave the source of the problem untreated, and that doesn't seem fair to them.

Raymond (and everyone) there was decayed siding and I thought I saw evidence of tunnels there but can't be sure now. Just a few feet away was where the photo in post 4 was taken - that's of a wooden window sill. SO I may have been wrong about the siding itself showing signs of infestation...hey, I might have been wrong about the wood, too. But it bothers me that others say I was definitely wrong and that there were no signs of tunnels, based on a bad couple of photos.

This is a classic example of deteriorated pressed wood siding. Does not matter what brand it is, however there is at least one just going into litigation. (there are many) IT IS DETERIORATED PRESSED WOOD SIDING. I could somewhat see holes in the picture posted, but no frass and no nesting materials, or fecal matter were present. As a state pest inspector, I could not call insect infestation in this product (by photos provided) due to the lack of evidence. I could however call dry rot and deterioration in the siding product, which most likely involves the entire structure, including framing.

....I have a hard time understanding how this got so out of control. It was a simple question, which needed a simple answer.

(Jim Scott)

The photo in post 1 is deteriorated pressed wood composite siding. Yes, I know. I've known that all along. It doesn't surprise me that you can't see insect damage there because it's a photo of siding. That's what my question was about. I wasn't trying to take a photo of insect damage, and I wasn't asking a question about it.

And yes, Billy, I looked at your link the first time. It shows hardboard. And it's probably true that it's hardboard in this case, too. I was looking for options. Thank you Michael, for that! I couldn't really find much about Celotex siding. And thank you, Rick for the termite suggestion. That's a very cool photo, although disturbing, too. Those galleries are so fine, so delicate-looking.

Originally Posted by Kristi Silber

If anything, you're sending work to the PCOs. Otherwise the client might repair the damage and leave the source of the problem untreated, and that doesn't seem fair to them.

The CPCO is going to inspect anyway, if any inspections are done, a termite is the first one which would be 'required' by a lender or almost anyone else. ' 'Termite' inspections are basically a given, home inspections are not.

I've been on inspections where the termite company which had treated the house previously did the inspection for the sale and declared there was 'no evidence of', yet when I did my inspection I found live termites in the fascia.

The agent called the termite company, the termite company insisted there was no way there were live termites and that I did not know what I was doing ... so I probed the fascia again and collected some live termites in my hand, walked over to the agent and asked if they would hold this (whatever was in my hand, they didn't know what was there) while I get my computer out, they said 'sure', so I dropped a handful of live termites in the agent's hand ... ... you should have heard the shrieking and yelling ... but I got my point across.

Oh, by the way, the termite company was back out to that house within no more than 10 minutes ... 3-4 inspectors and the company owner too ...

Originally Posted by Billy Stephens

.
.
Not out her league at all just have to use caution to word, say, or not comment on some things that are observed .
.
.

Originally Posted by Kristi Silber

And yes, Billy, I looked at your link the first time..

.
Well alright y Then.

How about them Giants ?
* New England looks good as well.
** my Brother's coming over for The Game.
.

Post #21 [quote=Jerry Peck;187812]
- 482.021 
- - (22) “Pest control” includes:
- - - (b) The identification of or inspection for infestations or infections in, on, or under a structure, lawn, or ornamental;

Post #25 "...'damage was observed' or that the wood is 'rotted' (but not 'decayed'), but the home inspector is not allowed (unless licensed as a pest control operator or has an WDO ID card through a pest control operator) to "identify" termites,..."
Jerry,
I do tend to run the thin yellow line.
Not sure how something can be rotted but not decayed, but I get the idea.
So would you say that "damage was found and appears to be insect related in addition to other causes" ? The particular point is not identifying a specific insect. You can have damage from multiple effects in addition to insect damage at the same location.

If it is specifically water damage, you day get a carpenter. If it is water and insect you would say get a carpenter and pest control contractor.

By the same interpenetration a HI in FL can not say that the presence of rats or mice was found. Am I right?

Do you (or anyone else) know of any cases where a HI or a carpenter has been sited for a violation of the Florida Statute for Pest Control (or TN statute) ? Where there was an identification made of an infestation and a recommendation made for a licensed inspection was called for?

Originally Posted by Garry Sorrells

Do you (or anyone else) know of any cases where a HI or a carpenter has been sited for a violation of the Florida Statute for Pest Control (or TN statute) ? Where there was an identification made of an infestation and a recommendation made for a licensed inspection was called for?

Yep, you betcha. Minimum first-timers, first level of enforcement actions, strictly the last year, Florida reports linked below.

If you don't have a WDO you don't make an identification of the past or presence of a wood destroying organism - or you'll end up with a cease and desist letter (warning) request a hearing or not and/or a receive a fine at a minimum. If you're lucky you'll negotiate a small one, and learn your lesson, if not you'll be prosecuted further.

Some recent examples of warnings, with and without fines and negotiated lower fines can be found at the following links below (florida). Cases that have prosecuted further can be found in court records and in some cases references to suspensions of other licenses, involuntary dissolutions of entities, etc.

You can further research yourself, including Contractors licenses, HI licenses; entity and individuals; and the websites if still existing for the 'offenders'; web searches for published cases (apellate, etc.) in FL, and do your own regarding other areas, if you are so curious. Billy S., Jerry P, and Dom A. have also previously provided more than enough information for you to engage in your own quest to satisfy your curiousity. Statutes provide for the penalties involved when one engages in the unlicesened practice of pest control in Florida.

Your "question" quoted above when same has already been indicated from individuals in both states you inquire and yet another has volunteered similar in an adjacent seems to challenge the verasity of what has already been stated by others. Challenge no further, regards to FL, and review the last several quarters of Compliance Actions (enforcement activity) by (within) the branch of the Department itself (clickable links below):

last quarter 2011:
Bottom page 2, "Allied Building Inspection Services Inc., Miami; "Unlicensed Pest Control Operations - Advertising.

http://www.flaes.org/pdf/Memo_869.pdf

Prior quarters:

All-in-one Inspections of South Miami $500 settlement agreement and cease and desist:

http://www.flaes.org/pdf/Memo_866.pdf


National Building Inspections::fine & cease & desist
J Hampton Inc d/b/a/ J Hampton Home Inspections, Miami Beach
Unlicensed Pest Control Operations - reported WDO organisms, warning letter:

http://www.flaes.org/pdf/Memo_860.pdf

Next prior quarter report (1st qtr 2011):

http://www.flaes.org/pdf/Memo_859.pdf


There are other entities and individuals listed as well.

You can find more at: Division of AES, Bureau of Entomology and Pest Control, Published Memorandums - FDACS

That should be enough to get you started in your quest to satisfy your curiousity. You can look up licenses and entites via the appropriate departments, etc. via myflorida.com. Those are just the first level enforcement actions. No need to challenge what was shared/summarized by others, and not really germaine to the discussion, is it; since both you and the OP are far north and in differing jurisdictions, and neither of you are engaged in Home Inspection.

IN.net is an inspector to inspector board. We discuss technical topics as they pertain to the practice of home inspection, and for that matter the reporting aspect for same; not carpentry, and not field data gathering services for third party vendors to underwriting departments of insurers. Quite a few HIs are crossdisciplined/licensed where required in radon testing, WDO, pest control, engineering, electrician, plumbing, septic, contracting, roofing, pool service, etc. Many jurisdictions regulate these activities, amongst others.

P.S. the word is "cite" or "cited" or receive a "citation" to quote, or to reference, not "site" as in location.

Wow this thread got going... did it not.

Kristi, FYI, I am a licensed pest inspector also, Washigton State has a very progressive SPI (structural pest inspector ) program.

Moisture ants are a collective name that includes a number of ant species in two major genera. Another common name is cornfield ants.

here is a link on moisture ants-
http://cru.cahe.wsu.edu/cepublicatio...382/eb1382.pdf

Sheesh, 84 posts, I just saw that. How strange.

Don, thanks for the interesting article. I don't think we have moisture ants around here. The main structural pests are carpenter ants. Apparently there are termites in southern MN, but they aren't common anywhere in the state.

H.G.,
I give Jerry and others great validation on their comments, positions and views. My orientation was to get a little past opinion and personal interpretation of the law in FL. and its application.

What I was looking for was exactly where the person went wrong with their description of what was observed. From my research the disciplinary board does not publish their minutes or the details of a complaint, only the actions taken. No transcript that I can find to review. Most of the time it is not the words used but how they are used. The structure of the sentence and the context of the words.

Thank you on your correction on "site" and "cite" . My typing is at times is faster than my brain and I at times my proof reading is hasty..

As to questions or comments, for research or other purpose, from any person, who ever they are or what ever their background, that are presented in the IN.NET forum, is valid. Short of spam or some members disposition to use the forum for advertising agenda.

Many times a person from one local will either have something in their reference library or will know the quickest way to retrieve that information. Due to familiarity of that state or jurisdiction they understand the specific departments and their web sites.

When I wrote post #82)
"... Do you (or anyone else) know of any cases where a HI or a carpenter has been sited for a violation of the Florida Statute for Pest Control (or TN statute) ? Where there was an identification made of an infestation and a recommendation made for a licensed inspection was called for?"

It was not directed at you in particular and in no way was there a demand that there must be a reply. Nor is anyone even required to make any response. H.G., you have no obligation to provide anything to anyone. If you find that a thread or a post that asks for anything that you have an issue with, it is your prerogative not to respond. It is your right not to participate. Non participation at times can be quite valuable. The IN.NET forum,from my observation, is not myopic in the area of home inspections. Which makes it interesting to many.

Now, I would like to interject into the description of WDO the following for opinion/comment.
"
You are able to evaluate the wood damage from a “structural” point of view – (it’s damaged beyond repair, its structurally unsound, it’s damaged but still serviceable, etc.)

Yes, you could say that the damage is insect related and to consult a licensed pest control company. You can also indicate that there are water/moisture issues that has damaged the wood, you just can’t “identify” it as wood-decaying fungi.


As long as you evaluate the “percentage/amount” of damage from a structural/engineer/function point of view or indicating that it is some kind of insect damage, you should be fine. You just have to avoid indicating that it IS carpenter ant, or termite damage, or wood-decaying fungi.
"

Garry that's largely my position. The references made by HG, though interesting, are lacking in information. I am still not convinced that a Home Inspector, in Florida (and States with similar regulation), in the sole performance of his duties is not permitted to have an opinion as to the cause of damage. After all, the report IS his opinion, with many facts included some of which are used to support the opinion. The vast majority of the cases provided were against persons or entities described as PCOs operating without a licence or in violation of some aspect of their license.

I would still be happy to hear from any Home Inspector who sufferred some penalty - even including a 'warning notice' for having an opinion in his report stating, as you say, the observed damage was 'insect related similar to that caused by...' and should be refered to a licensed PCO for assessment and remediation. Just as you might observe rat or mouse feces in an attic and conclude its from a rodent and not a skunk.

Ian,
I am waiting for Jerry to weigh in on my last post.
FL law has created some restrictions and by understanding it, and the reasoning behind it, there may be a time that tailoring language used in a description may relieve potential litigation.

Originally Posted by Ian Page

Garry that's largely my position. The references made by HG, though interesting, are lacking in information. I am still not convinced that a Home Inspector, in Florida (and States with similar regulation), in the sole performance of his duties is not permitted to have an opinion as to the cause of damage. After all, the report IS his opinion, with many facts included some of which are used to support the opinion. The vast majority of the cases provided were against persons or entities described as PCOs operating without a licence or in violation of some aspect of their license.

Because if you express your professional "opinion" you are identifying a WDO. The agency doesn't want an HI to tell someone "...in my opinion this looks like termite damage..." because you aren't qualifed to make that determination. This is largely due to the fact that Florida has a huge termite problem, and unknowing home owners aren't aware that special skills and training are required to report WDO.

This has been hashed over and over for years here in Florida, and the point is well understood.

Call out the damage, say what you want (you keep using "opinion") about it; but don't imply, or expressly state, that it's WDO as defined by the State.

I would still be happy to hear from any Home Inspector who sufferred some penalty - even including a 'warning notice' for having an opinion in his report stating, as you say, the observed damage was 'insect related similar to that caused by...' and should be refered to a licensed PCO for assessment and remediation. Just as you might observe rat or mouse feces in an attic and conclude its from a rodent and not a skunk.

.

I doubt anyone will fess up to that on a publicly accessible BB. I know of 2 such instances involving other inspectors here in Florida. You're welcome to come down here and try it yourself, but seriously, it isn't really a big deal to word your report while maintaining full compliance.

Dom.

Originally Posted by Garry Sorrells

Ian,
I am waiting for Jerry to weigh in on my last post.
FL law has created some restrictions and by understanding it, and the reasoning behind it, there may be a time that tailoring language used in a description may relieve potential litigation.

Garry,

I didn't respond because I have responded to the same above by others who are also trying to get around the licensing laws in Florida for Pest Control Operators and inspectors.

There are just so many ways one can say "only licensed Certified Pest Control Operators and WDO ID card holder inspectors are allowed to identify termites and other wood destroying organisms".

No matter how one tries to skirt the law, and it is a shame to see so many here willing to try to skirt the law, the only real way is to NOT address, describe, identify, or imply termite/insect/decay/etc, and instead just report "damaged wood" and then add structural concern if the wood is a structural component (interior door trim and base is not a structural concern, but are frequently in need of replacement due to damage),

I don't see anyone trying to skirt the law here - most don't even live in Florida, and the laws vary around the country. The pest control lobby would be pretty strong down there, I suspect. But even if it did hold true everywhere, I think the point is that it is not against the letter or intent of the law to say, "There seems to be insect damage of some sort, get a professional in." You are not identifying anything in such a statement, nor are you acting anything like a PCO would, or taking business from them, advising a treatment...you are simply acting in good faith toward your client. To me that's what it comes down to: I would hate to have to hold my tongue about a problem as serious as insect infestation can be. HIs are not the ones to judge how extensive the problem is, and there might be damage far beyond what you can report. Florida law would have to be really messed up to prohibit recommending professional consult based on suspected insect activity. It would be in nobody's interest.

Originally Posted by Kristi Silber

Florida law would have to be really messed up to prohibit recommending professional consult based on suspected insect activity. It would be in nobody's interest.

Quite the opposite, the law encourages someone to recommend a CPCO to inspect a house for WDO. Those HI that don't carry WDO ID cards routinely tell buyers to get the house inspected, and it works fine.
Down here, its common knowledge by agents, title companies, and HI's etc. that a WDO needs to done by a qualified individual.

Dom.

How does the law itself encourage that? SOP down there may do so, but the law only says don't act as a PCO without a licence (oversimplification, I know).

I understand that hiring a PCO is commonplace, but we're talking about a particular situation here - or at least I am: an HI sees what he or she thinks is insect damage, and a PCO inspection is not planned, or has already taken place. If the situation were that an inspection is being done by an HI and will be followed by one by a PCO, the point is moot.

Jerry recalled a time when he reported live termites after the pest guys had been there. In such a case in FL should an HI just call it damage and leave it at that?

Originally Posted by Kristi Silber

Jerry recalled a time when he reported live termites after the pest guys had been there. In such a case in FL should an HI just call it damage and leave it at that?

As a CPCO, I could, and did, address the live termites.

Had I not been a CPCO or a WDO ID card holder, I would have called the termite company (or the termite I used, home inspectors in South Florida typically work with one termite company if the home inspector does not carry a WDO ID card) and tell them that there are something live in the wood where their guys said all was well.

To my knowledge, there is no law which would keep a home inspector from saying they saw 'something live' - of course, though, the home inspector would look a bit silly saying that to their client, but the CPCO they were calling would immediately understand what the home inspector was referring to and would immediately send someone out to find and identify what the 'something live' was.

Before I was a CPCO I was a WDO ID card holder I would not ... not ... have identified those termites as being "termites", not for anyone. You basically have to be a WDO ID card holder for 3 years before you can take the test to become a CPCO, i.e., you are required to have 3 years on the job experience before taking your test.

Thus, with me going behind the WDO ID card holder and finding live termites would be no different than me going behind another home inspector and finding things they missed ... or vice versa ... no inspector has a perfect record and no inspector has never missed anything - including termite inspectors, home inspectors, and code inspectors.

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

As a CPCO, I could, and did, address the live termites.

Had I not been a CPCO or a WDO ID card holder, I would have called the termite company (or the termite I used, home inspectors in South Florida typically work with one termite company if the home inspector does not carry a WDO ID card) and tell them that there are something live in the wood where their guys said all was well.

To my knowledge, there is no law which would keep a home inspector from saying they saw 'something live' - of course, though, the home inspector would look a bit silly saying that to their client, but the CPCO they were calling would immediately understand what the home inspector was referring to and would immediately send someone out to find and identify what the 'something live' was.

Before I was a CPCO I was a WDO ID card holder I would not ... not ... have identified those termites as being "termites", not for anyone. You basically have to be a WDO ID card holder for 3 years before you can take the test to become a CPCO, i.e., you are required to have 3 years on the job experience before taking your test.

Thus, with me going behind the WDO ID card holder and finding live termites would be no different than me going behind another home inspector and finding things they missed ... or vice versa ... no inspector has a perfect record and no inspector has never missed anything - including termite inspectors, home inspectors, and code inspectors.

Well, that's all dandy, but the question remains, what to say to the client in that case? "I just thought I'd call in the bug men again to have a look in case they missed something"? "Something live" does sound ridiculous. You can't even talk to the PCOs without doing it in code?

I guess we just have to accept that Florida has completely inane restrictions on recognition of pest damage. I wonder if California is the same - their pest control lobby must be pretty strong, too.

Kristi
We are permitted to have opinions in CA. 1st Amendment holds strong. I can also recognize the difference between insect infestation and mouse poop. All homes sold must have a 'termite clearance' by a State Licensed CPO so whether I see/find termites or other pests during an inspection is somewhat moot. Then again, no State license is required for Home Inspectors.

To all,
Post # 87 was a little deceptive in that it was not complete. I wanted to get a few opinions of the statement that I posted. There were two reasons for posting # 87.
-First, I wanted to get people's interpretation to see if there would be any contention on the wording.
-Secondly, I wanted to see if any might recognize how it was worded. Recognize in that the FL HI forum members through their experience, would agree that it was simular to how they were told (at some point in time) was the correct way to to discuss WDO as a non lic person.

I would not say that those that have posted have a desire to "...trying to get around the licensing laws in Florida for Pest Control Operators and inspectors...." (JP post # 91). Sorry if that was your perception. To often we all look at a law and intemperate it from our point of view rather than from an authoritative view of those that control the application of that law. Which is why I hoped to find the actual disciplinary meeting transcript as to then know what exactly was determined to be at fault.

No intention to tweak anyone's noise or sensibilities. Not saying anyone was wrong in part of any opinion that have been given. Not fighting over verbiage or semantics of past posts. Is about understanding and then extrapolating to other states and situations. An discussion and debate is an educational process.

Now, unless like former Pres. Clinton, we question the definition of " is " , we may come to an understanding or consensus, of some sort, on the topic. I as well as others had a hard time accepting that absolutely no reference could be made to WDOs in any way under FL law. Just seemed a little to harsh. Something " appears to be" or "similar to" rather than "is a ___ " definitively, makes a difference.

My post # 87 was a reply to an email requesting clarification of what a HI who is not a Lic WDO would be permitted to say under FL law. I would take the author as an authoritative source.
Here is the complete reply:

From: "Parker, Joe" <Joseph.Parker@freshfromflorida.com>
To: <sorrells@37.com>
Subject: RE: Home Inspection and WDO notification.
Date: Fri 02/03/12 09:49 AM


Mr. Sorrells –


You are able to evaluate the wood damage from a “structural” point of view – (it’s damaged beyond repair, its structurally unsound, it’s damaged but still serviceable, etc.)


Yes, you could say that the damage is insect related and to consult a licensed pest control company. You can also indicate that there are water/moisture issues that has damaged the wood, you just can’t “identify” it as wood-decaying fungi.



As long as you evaluate the “percentage/amount” of damage from a structural/engineer/function point of view or indicating that it is some kind of insect damage, you should be fine. You just have to avoid indicating that it IS carpenter ant, or termite damage, or wood-decaying fungi.



Hope that helps
Joe Parker
FDACS, Bureau of Entomology and Pest Control
c/o UF/IFAS, Mid-Florida Research and Education Center
2725 Binion Road, Rm A109
Apopka, FL 32703-8504
(850) 617-7997 main - (850) 528-5353 cell
Field office (407) 884-2034 Ext 105 - (407) 814-6186 fax
**NEW email address - Joseph.Parker@freshfromflorida.com


Please note: Florida has a very broad public records law. Most written communications to or from state officials regarding state business are public records available to the public and media upon request. Your e-mail communications may therefore be subject to public disclosure.

That certainly looks like GP Hardboard Siding. I made the mistake of covering a 3,000 sq ft home with it - never do that again...

Status of Class Action Suits involving Composite Sidings

Originally Posted by Billy Stephens

.

How about them Giants ?
** my Brother's coming over for The Game.
.

.
BTW I'm " The Good looking One."
.

Originally Posted by Garry Sorrells

To all,
Post # 87 was a little deceptive in that it was not complete. I wanted to get a few opinions of the statement that I posted. There were two reasons for posting # 87.
-First, I wanted to get people's interpretation to see if there would be any contention on the wording.
-Secondly, I wanted to see if any might recognize how it was worded. Recognize in that the FL HI forum members through their experience, would agree that it was simular to how they were told (at some point in time) was the correct way to to discuss WDO as a non lic person.

I would not say that those that have posted have a desire to "...trying to get around the licensing laws in Florida for Pest Control Operators and inspectors...." (JP post # 91). Sorry if that was your perception. To often we all look at a law and intemperate it from our point of view rather than from an authoritative view of those that control the application of that law. Which is why I hoped to find the actual disciplinary meeting transcript as to then know what exactly was determined to be at fault.

No intention to tweak anyone's noise or sensibilities. Not saying anyone was wrong in part of any opinion that have been given. Not fighting over verbiage or semantics of past posts. Is about understanding and then extrapolating to other states and situations. An discussion and debate is an educational process.

Now, unless like former Pres. Clinton, we question the definition of " is " , we may come to an understanding or consensus, of some sort, on the topic. I as well as others had a hard time accepting that absolutely no reference could be made to WDOs in any way under FL law. Just seemed a little to harsh. Something " appears to be" or "similar to" rather than "is a ___ " definitively, makes a difference.

My post # 87 was a reply to an email requesting clarification of what a HI who is not a Lic WDO would be permitted to say under FL law. I would take the author as an authoritative source.
Here is the complete reply:

From: "Parker, Joe" <Joseph.Parker@freshfromflorida.com>
To: <sorrells@37.com>
Subject: RE: Home Inspection and WDO notification.
Date: Fri 02/03/12 09:49 AM


Mr. Sorrells –


You are able to evaluate the wood damage from a “structural� point of view – (it’s damaged beyond repair, its structurally unsound, it’s damaged but still serviceable, etc.)


Yes, you could say that the damage is insect related and to consult a licensed pest control company. You can also indicate that there are water/moisture issues that has damaged the wood, you just can’t “identify� it as wood-decaying fungi.



As long as you evaluate the “percentage/amount� of damage from a structural/engineer/function point of view or indicating that it is some kind of insect damage, you should be fine. You just have to avoid indicating that it IS carpenter ant, or termite damage, or wood-decaying fungi.



Hope that helps
Joe Parker
FDACS, Bureau of Entomology and Pest Control
c/o UF/IFAS, Mid-Florida Research and Education Center
2725 Binion Road, Rm A109
Apopka, FL 32703-8504
(850) 617-7997 main - (850) 528-5353 cell
Field office (407) 884-2034 Ext 105 - (407) 814-6186 fax
**NEW email address - Joseph.Parker@freshfromflorida.com


Please note: Florida has a very broad public records law. Most written communications to or from state officials regarding state business are public records available to the public and media upon request. Your e-mail communications may therefore be subject to public disclosure.

Garry,

That is a departure from what Joe had told us in the past as continuing education seminars.

He, and others from the Department, have been VERY EXPLICIT in what home inspectors were and were not allowed to say, and that even saying "that the damage is insect related" was a no-no as you were identifying the fact "that the damage is insect related" and a non-pest control person is not permitted to make that identification.

I wonder how that would hold up when one was charged with performing pest control without a license and one stood up before the hearing board and said "Joe Parker said I could say that was insect damage." (that is what Joe said, and that is what the Department keeps saying a non-pest control person is not allowed to identify)?

Kinda makes one wonder how far one could go with that 'Get out of Jail Free' card ...

Jerry,
Thank you for hanging through the thread, I appreciate it. Know you and others were frustrated in representing your positions.

I do not know exactly what title or position Joe Parker holds. I sent him the email as a result of him being the contact person for questions as listed on the web site. I did make a brief attempt to pull up a directory with names, titles and responsibilities but failed.

I did not think you were just making it up as you went along as how to interpret the law.
"...That is a departure from what Joe had told us in the past as continuing education seminars. ..."
Was this in a Home Inspection seminar, Lic WDO inspection seminar or a combination of HI and WDO seminar?
Just wondering if he was preaching to the choir (Lic WDO Insp) and tweaking the noses of those who are not in the choir.

The law as it had been explained to you seems it would not allow an Entomologist with a PHD to identify a termite if that person was not Lic in FL. Even Joe Parker's email would infer that a PHD entomologist would not be able to use the word " IS " in the description if he were not Licensed.

I have hung in on this thread as it peaked my curiosity and intrigued me with how the law may be applied. The reason was as a learning experience for future understanding of how some might write and implement a law that may affect myself or others.

I would think that the "Get out of jail free card" would be valid since Mr Parker's email response is part of public record according to the final tag line of the email "...Please note: Florida has a very broad public records law ...." . The intent of my inquiry was to attempt clarification from an authority in the commission with no alternative purpose or design. Frankly I was extremely pleased but also surprised that I actually received a response at all.

If I had been able to obtain the actual Disciplinary Board's transcript of the actions that they have taken and how they argued their interpenetration and application of the law. I may have dropped it. But, it would have been interesting and informative.

Now the question is, what was verbally stated to you or what was written, establish a president ? I would think that Joe Parker's email being a reasonable and rational interpenetration should prevail and makes a good standard to follow. Though there may be, hopefully not, frenzied zealots at work in directing the interpretations of the law.

Consumer protection is at the root of the law. The Very Explicit interpretation by the department seems to rigid a stance and in a real court of law I think there would be room to argue a description that was not a definitive identification but a descriptive reasoning for suggesting that further interpenetration and action be taken would prevail.

I realize that few would push the question since accepting the explicit interpretation offered would be the easy path. Sometimes I just can not accept the party line being offered as the definitive answer. Especially when I feel that it is flawed.

A true case for " further evaluation is needed ".

Originally Posted by Garry Sorrells

Was this in a Home Inspection seminar, Lic WDO inspection seminar or a combination of HI and WDO seminar?

All of the above.

Those of us with CPCO or WDO ID cards were required to have continuing education, and Joe spoke as some of the seminars.

The issue is sooooo big in Florida that we asked, specifically asked, the questions in the posts above - and the answer were always that only pest control operators were allowed to perform pest control, which included "identifying" any of the listed pests. This was at pest control continuing education meetings.

Likewise, those of us who were also home inspectors had Joe, and others, from the Bureau of Entomology come to our inspector meetings and continuing education seminars. We asked the exact same questions there, and were given the exact same answers there.

Granted, I retired in 2006, so maybe the state has softened their stance some ... I doubt it, but it could have happened.

Now the question is, what was verbally stated to you or what was written, establish a president?

All of what I have stated in posts above.

I would think that Joe Parker's email being a reasonable and rational interpenetration should prevail and makes a good standard to follow.

I would not want to 'take that statement to the bank' as the state may end up taking five grand or so out of my bank account for practicing pest control without a license.

NOT a risk I would want to assume.

Consumer protection is at the root of the law. The Very Explicit interpretation by the department seems to rigid a stance and in a real court of law I think there would be room to argue a description that was not a definitive identification but a descriptive reasoning for suggesting that further interpenetration and action be taken would prevail.

Other have thought the same way and lost.

A true case for " further evaluation is needed ".

Nope. A case for "call a pest control company for identification of the cause of the damage", yes - but no 'further evaluation is needed' because the home inspector reported the damaged wood and said it needed to be replaced ... and it does. The pest control company just needs to kill the rest of the buggers who are hiding in the other parts of the wood.

The issue is sooooo big in Florida that we asked, specifically asked, the questions in the posts above - and the answer were always that only pest control operators were allowed to perform pest control, which included "identifying" any of the listed pests.

The key word there being "identifying." It's different saying something is an insect vs. something is a termite. Without identifying the insect, measures for treatment can't be taken.

...But back to siding. A very nice gentleman who doesn't participate in the forum because of the rudeness of some of the members sent me a PM suggesting the siding may be an LP product which is a form of OSB. And that fits what I noticed about this stuff: that it seems layered, it had some fairly large bits of wood in it, less dense than hardboard.

Originally Posted by Kristi Silber

The key word there being "identifying." It's different saying something is an insect vs. something is a termite. Without identifying the insect, measures for treatment can't be taken.

Not correct.

By saying that the damage was caused by or related to an insect means that you have just identified the damage as having been caused by an insect within the scope of pest control. You do not have to identify the type of inspect, nor the species of insect to have identified that the damage was insect caused or related.

...But back to siding. A very nice gentleman who doesn't participate in the forum because of the rudeness of some of the members ...

If that very nice gentleman would participate in the forum, the percentage of posts which offend him would drip because his posts would increase the percentage of non-offensive posts.

To each their own, but to me, that is not an acceptable excuse to not participate. Apparently he is reading the posts, so what he is saying is the he will take his share the learning but the he will not make his knowledge available to share with the rest of us. He will probably take this as being 'offensive' ... while this is not meant to be 'offensive' to him, sometimes the truth hurts, yeah.

A 'very nice gentleman' would share his knowledge too, or, if the forum was that offensive to him, he would simply not read it, which he is apparently doing because he followed the posts enough to PM you.

Sorry about that, Mr. Very Nice Gentleman, but your participation would help all of us.

Garry,

Your bugs must be so special that they need protection

I can not see how it is good for th home owner that if a HI can identify a big/fungi and report it then call for verification and remediation from a PCO. Now you have two sets of eyes evaluating the situation.

Out here in the wild wild west most of us HI's are SPI's (structural pest inspectors).

I have some PCO that rather have me identify and then they can come in and do the work. Then there is no issue of them identifying then applying the pesticide.

This is actually best for the public, well that is if the HI/SPI is doing his/her job.

Jerry,

What you state:
"....By saying that the damage was caused by or related to an insect means that you have just identified the damage as having been caused by an insect within the scope of pest control. You do not have to identify the type of inspect, nor the species of insect to have identified that the damage was insect caused or related. ...".

Goes against what Joe Parker had in his email. :
"...As long as you evaluate the “percentage/amount� of damage from a structural/engineer/function point of view or indicating that it is some kind of insect damage, you should be fine. You just have to avoid indicating that it IS carpenter ant, or termite damage, or wood-decaying fungi. ..."

I know -I know : that is what you were told in 2006. And being a card holder it sounded good to you, why rock the boat when it was to your benefit. Maybe it has changed.
This could be a " quest for truth " for a FL Hi to go on if they were up to yanking a few chains and pushing some peoples buttons.

Under the extreme approach to the Law, if a HI were to say in his report to have the damaged wood inspected by a Lic. CPCO or a holder of a WDO ID card the HI would have then expressed a determination/opinion that an insect of some undetermined kind may be involved. And thus be in violation of the law as you have been told.

That is possibly why the position as stated by Joe Parker is different from what had been expressed in you meetings from 2006. Even bureaucrats will change their mantra from time to time. Maybe as a result of a legal proceeding that did not hold for the extreme interpenetration by the commission staff.

Like I have stated I would like to see the transcripts of the disciplinary board.


If the same was true for plumbing a HI could not describe the water found as a plumbing leak. The client would have to ask for divine guidance as to were the water came from if in fact the HI could even say that the liquid on the floor was water.

Don,
I am not in FL nor do not think FL bugs are so special. Just think that stupidity is rampant in government. And we seem to be still trying to determine the definition of " is " is.

If we were in Iran they might have cut a few hands off as a result of the strict interpenetration of stealing work from someone else.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Always love a debate.

Garry, just a semantics question - by "interpenetration" do you actually mean "interpretation"?

Wiktionary defines interpenetration as

1. "The act of penetrating between or within other substances; mutual penetration."

And Wikipedia:

"Not to be confused with interpretation.

Interpenetration may refer to:

• Interpenetration (Christianity), a term in Christian theology (bka Perichoresis or Circuminsession) that refers to the mutual inter-penetration and indwelling within the threefold nature of the Trinity, God the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.
• Interpenetration (Buddhism), a concept of Buddhist philosophy proposed in the Avatamsaka Sutra
• Interpenetration, in computer 3D modelling collision detection, where two objects collide and become stuck"

For Your Reading Enjoyment.
.
PCOC | PEST CONTROL OPERATORS OF CALIFORNIA | MEMBERS
.
* results of a 45 second search. ( if you spent 1/20 the amount of time LOOKING instead of nay saying wonder what could be found?)
.
Added see # 6 Format Document
.
In California looks like you go before a Criminal Judge ( not a Civil Board ) CA Codes (bpc:145-149)

Originally Posted by Billy Stephens

For Your Reading Enjoyment.
.
PCOC | PEST CONTROL OPERATORS OF CALIFORNIA | MEMBERS
.
* results of a 45 second search. ( if you spent 1/20 the amount of time LOOKING instead of nay saying wonder what could be found?)
.
Added see # 6 Format Document
.
In California looks like you go before a Criminal Judge ( not a Civil Board ) CA Codes (bpc:145-149)

.
Taken from 1st Link ( just to be Clear.)
.
DO I NEED TO BE LICENSED? Under the Department of Consumer Affairs (Business & Professions Code), and under Cal-EPA Department of Pesticide Regulation Codes (formerly CDFA), ANY individual or company who practices pest control FOR HIRE must be licensed. Licenses are required to identify the presence or absence of pests, and for making recommendations for solving the identified pest problems. One must also be licensed if they chose to abate a pest problem. (With or without Pesticides). Lastly anyone handling pesticides must also be licensed.

The important words here are " ...for Hire..." and in the context of the code refers to for hire as a PCO, not misconstrued so as to mean anyone hired for some other purpose.

Originally Posted by Ian Page

The important words here are " ...for Hire..." and in the context of the code refers to for hire as a PCO, not misconstrued so as to me anyone hired for some other purpose.

(sigh)

Originally Posted by Billy Stephens

.
Taken from 1st Link ( just to be Clear.)
.
DO I NEED TO BE LICENSED? Under the Department of Consumer Affairs (Business & Professions Code), and under Cal-EPA Department of Pesticide Regulation Codes (formerly CDFA), ANY individual or company who practices pest control FOR HIRE must be licensed. Licenses are required to identify the presence or absence of pests, and for making recommendations for solving the identified pest problems. One must also be licensed if they chose to abate a pest problem. (With or without Pesticides). Lastly anyone handling pesticides must also be licensed.

Originally Posted by Ian Page

The important words here are " ...for Hire..." and in the context of the code refers to for hire as a PCO, not misconstrued so as to me anyone hired for some other purpose.

.
Ian,

The Important thing is to Read It.
If You do Any of Those Things You Need a License.

1. For Hire Yes Need a License.
2. Identify Presence or Absence of Pest. Yes Need a License ." Licenses Are Required to Identify Presence or Absence of Pest. "
3. Make Recommendations For Solving the Identified Pest Problems. Yes Need a License.
4. One Must Also be Licensed if they choose to Abate a Pest Problem ( with or without Pesticides. )
5.Lastly As In SEE THE ABOVE (Do I Need To Be Licensed?) Lastly anyone handling pesticides must ALSO BE Licensed.

Not and or but Any of the things Listed.

Not I handle Pesticides ( but not for Hire.)

Not I can Tell you How to Solve Your Pest Problem but not for hire nor do I apply.

Do Any of The Things Listed . Yes You Need a License.
.
.

Billy,
Most of the posts and discussion/debate has revolved around Florida Law and how it has been interpreted, right or wrong and now by who.

Now you are sounding like H.G.W.
* results of a 45 second search. ( if you spent 1/20 the amount of time LOOKING instead of nay saying wonder what could be found?)

Since the discussion was basically revolving around FL and not TN or CA . Each state has its own laws and regs. I have been focused on FL since Jerry is there with experience and in the discussion. And yes I did FL research and followed up with direct contact to a state authority for a determination (for what it is worth) of acceptable wording. Rather than argue personal opinion against Jerry and others understood state opinion on the topic.

Do you have any recognized document that makes a specific determination as to the acceptable wording, for a HI or any one else, that is acceptable under CA law ?
The difference being, not your interpretation, Ian's or general publilc opinion, but a court ruling (or something similar) that supports your position.

I will pass the Torch Of Enlightenment onto you and Ian to debate the issue as it pertains to CA. I do suggest finding a recognized authority to support your positions. Rather than just banter back and forth..... just an idea.

Please turn your attention to CA, I will follow with interest. Then , how about TN ?

As for me, I am just waiting for CA to slide off into the ocean and make the property that I purchased with the " Smothers Brothers " to become the new beach front. Which will make the entire question mute.

Originally Posted by Garry Sorrells

Billy,
Most of the posts and discussion/debate has revolved around Florida Law and how it has been interpreted, right or wrong and now by who.

Now you are sounding like H.G.W.
* results of a 45 second search. ( if you spent 1/20 the amount of time LOOKING instead of nay saying wonder what could be found?)

Since the discussion was basically revolving around FL and not TN or CA . Each state has its own laws and regs. I have been focused on FL since Jerry is there with experience and in the discussion. And yes I did FL research and followed up with direct contact to a state authority for a determination (for what it is worth) of acceptable wording. Rather than argue personal opinion against Jerry and others understood state opinion on the topic.

Do you have any recognized document that makes a specific determination as to the acceptable wording, for a HI or any one else, that is acceptable under CA law ?
The difference being, not your interpretation, Ian's or general publilc opinion, but a court ruling (or something similar) that supports your position.

I will pass the Torch Of Enlightenment onto you and Ian to debate the issue as it pertains to CA. I do suggest finding a recognized authority to support your positions. Rather than just banter back and forth..... just an idea.

Please turn your attention to CA, I will follow with interest. Then , how about TN ?

As for me, I am just waiting for CA to slide off into the ocean and make the property that I purchased with the " Smothers Brothers " to become the new beach front. Which will make the entire question mute.

.
Whatever,
Go Back to the start of the thread Read whats Posted.
* or you could just jump in at the end with a Lotta bla, bla.
.

.

If the HI identifies damaged wood as water damage, has he performed pest control by identifying the absence of pests?

Billy,

Do you have any recognized document that makes a specific determination as to the acceptable wording, for a HI or any one else, that is acceptable under CA law ?

Originally Posted by Garry Sorrells

Billy,

Do you have any recognized document that makes a specific determination as to the acceptable wording, for a HI or any one else, that is acceptable under CA law ?

.

* recognized by who? You.
** contact your Attorney
.

FWIW California PCO have pretty much the same rules as Florida so out here home inspectors don't use descriptive words like "dry rot", "carpenter ants", etc. We just say there was visual evidence of moisture or insect damage. Recommend retaing a state licensed PCO for further evaluation and treatment and move on.

Status of Class Action Suits involving Composite Sidings

Ah, but at least you can say there was insect damage!

Billy, what's up with the chip on your shoulder? How come you're being so sarcastic and nasty these days? Written law is one thing, how it's interpreted and enforced is another; Garry was asking about the latter, and I think it's a legitimate question.

Originally Posted by Kristi Silber

.
Written law is one thing, how it's interpreted and enforced is another;
.
Garry was asking about the latter,

and I think it's a legitimate question.

.
You answer those Legitimate Concerns.
.

Originally Posted by Darrel Hood

If the HI identifies damaged wood as water damage, has he performed pest control by identifying the absence of pests?

In many states ... probably ... but not in Florida because Florida pest control laws do not just address 'wood destroying insects', Florida pest control laws specifically address 'wood destroying organisms' and wood rot is an 'organism' and is thus addressed by pest control inspections, and that is why pest control inspectors are WDO inspectors ... not WDI inspectors.

Billy
You scored ony 1 out of 5 with the correct answer. I'll let you figure out which one after you read the CA B.P.C. sections in their entirety, in refererence to pest Control.

Hint...it's not 2, 3, 4 or 5.

Originally Posted by Billy Stephens

.
Taken from 1st Link ( just to be Clear.)
.
DO I NEED TO BE LICENSED? Under the Department of Consumer Affairs (Business & Professions Code), and under Cal-EPA Department of Pesticide Regulation Codes (formerly CDFA), ANY individual or company who practices pest control FOR HIRE must be licensed. Licenses are required to identify the presence or absence of pests, and for making recommendations for solving the identified pest problems. One must also be licensed if they chose to abate a pest problem. (With or without Pesticides). Lastly anyone handling pesticides must also be licensed.

Originally Posted by Billy Stephens

.
Ian,

The Important thing is to Read It.
If You do Any of Those Things You Need a License.

1. For Hire Yes Need a License.
2. Identify Presence or Absence of Pest. Yes Need a License ." Licenses Are Required to Identify Presence or Absence of Pest. "
3. Make Recommendations For Solving the Identified Pest Problems. Yes Need a License.
4. One Must Also be Licensed if they choose to Abate a Pest Problem ( with or without Pesticides. )
5.Lastly As In SEE THE ABOVE (Do I Need To Be Licensed?) Lastly anyone handling pesticides must ALSO BE Licensed.

Not and or but Any of the things Listed.

Not I handle Pesticides ( but not for Hire.)

Not I can Tell you How to Solve Your Pest Problem but not for hire nor do I apply.

Do Any of The Things Listed . Yes You Need a License.
.
.

Originally Posted by Ian Page

Billy
You scored ony 1 out of 5 with the correct answer. I'll let you figure out which one after you read the CA B.P.C. sections in their entirety, in refererence to pest Control.

Hint...it's not 2, 3, 4 or 5.

.
Wow Ian,

I can handle Pesticides without a License ?

I can do All Those Other Things Except for the 1st. which is For Hire ?
.
.

Yes Billy, you can....otherwise Home Improvement stores would have empty shelves. The regulation prohibits certain listed pesticides and further prohibits their use by persons FOR HIRE using them. In theory, the listed and controlled pesticides are not available to the general public unless you have a license, which must be shown upon order or purchase.

And basically you can (do all those other things) as long as you are not doing it while representing yourself as a PCO, FOR HIRE, or receiving compensation for performing duties as a PCO. As I said earlier...the operative words are 'FOR HIRE'.

Nothing in the regulations prevents any person from identifying insects, buying consumer available pesticides from any retail outlet and using them around their own property. No License required.

I ain't smart, I just read and digest regulations, as written.

Looks like a little information in the wrong hands can be a dangerous thing!

Originally Posted by Ian Page

Yes Billy, you can....'.

Nothing in the regulations prevents any person from identifying insects, buying consumer available pesticides from any retail outlet and using them around their own property. No License required.

I ain't smart, I just read and digest regulations, as written.

.
Wow Again Ian,

So in California You don't need a Drivers License to Roller Skate, Drive a GO Cart,
or even Cross The Street Against The Light.


.

Originally Posted by Jerry McCarthy

FWIW California PCO have pretty much the same rules as Florida so out here home inspectors don't use descriptive words like "dry rot", "carpenter ants", etc. We just say there was visual evidence of moisture or insect damage. Recommend retaing a state licensed PCO for further evaluation and treatment and move on.

Status of Class Action Suits involving Composite Sidings

So CA seem to be in alinement (for the most part) with what Joe Parker stated as acceptable. Thanks for the confirmation. Is there any written guide lines from the state (CA) as to wording?


Billy, Do you have any State (TN) produced suggested/mandated wording for anyone to report insect damage observed to a home owner ?

Originally Posted by Garry Sorrells

Billy, Do you have any State (TN) produced suggested/mandated wording for anyone to report insect damage observed to a home owner ?

.
Gary,

The State ( at least Here ) does not Issue Compliance Guidance on the Law.

Tennessee Law is Suppose to be non ambiguous, with Plain Language as to the Intent of The Legislative.
* you boys in CA are it early this AM.
.

Originally Posted by Garry Sorrells

So CA seem to be in alinement (for the most part) with what Joe Parker stated as acceptable. Thanks for the confirmation. Is there any written guide lines from the state (CA) as to wording?


Billy, Do you have any State (TN) produced suggested/mandated wording for anyone to report insect damage observed to a home owner ?

I have been at this gig full-time since 1995 and when I find termites I tell my client that I found termites or signs of termites and that they need to have a PC contractor inspect and treat as needed. With over 5000 residential inspections under my belt, I have never had a problem reporting them like this. It is what it is and they are what the are!

If somebody want to take me to court for telling my client I found termites then so be it, I would relish the time. I just can't see a judge telling me I can not tell my clients that I found termites.

In TN the home inspector license law does not tell use what we can't report on, but it does tell us what we need to report on. FYI, insects are one of those items we do not need to report on under our state law.