Bill M 220 — 2007 Home Inspection Act, 2007

This Bill provides greater consumer protection for home buyers by prohibiting persons from inspecting a home without a licence and setting out basic requirements for obtaining a licence. The Bill will establish a Home Inspection Board, which will be responsible for licensing home inspectors. The Board will also establish standards for the education, training and experience requirements for home inspectors, and adopt a code of ethics and standards of practice for licensed home inspectors.

http://www.leg.bc.ca/38th3rd/1st_read/m220-1.htm

Also

May 29, 2007
NDP Housing Critic Introduces Bill to Regulate Home Inspectors

http://www.bcndpcaucus.ca/en/ndp_housing_critic_introduces_bill_to_regulate_home_inspectors

And what do you think the odds of this passing are .
I think next to nothing at this time .
" 5 (b) an equal representation of members from the two major home inspection associations operating in British Columbia. " and NACHI is not one of the two.

Typical “liberals”. Have to regulate the free market for the benefit of all. Didn’t work behind the iron curtain and won’t work here. The only people to suffer ( aside from honest inspectors) will be the very people that big government is trying to protect; the consumer.
OH CANADA !:frowning:
</IMG>

I think it has a good chance, and NACHI has no presence out here so why would it be considered?

Ummm, George, Campbell is a Liberal, it is the NDP that put this forward.

Unlike the Campbell government, New Democrats care about protecting B.C. consumers as they make the biggest purchase of their lives – which is why we have introduced a Private Members’ Bill to regulate home inspectors and protect B.C. homebuyers," said Thorne.

Do the math… how many NDP members of parliament are there in BC at the moment?

On the principle of anything the opposition thinks is good we think is bad, what do you think the Liberals will do with this bill?

Well Jason1 is one is that a help

Jason

Who will represent your interests in BC? You do not appear to belong to any association?

I didn’t say I supported it, Roy.

I look out for my best interests :slight_smile:

OMG! ](*,) Just what we need some back bencher running amok with a half baked proposal that if it ever gets passed into law would be a worse mess then we have now. From all that I’ve heard about the Ont assoc being run by a closed group this proposal would make them look like angles. A board made up of 4 inspectors and 2 from two associations. In BC my guess would be The technologists and caphi. The proposal gives these nine the right to dictate everything. At lease here in Alberta the government is doing the research and will present that research to the stake holders before writting the legislation. The BC proposal is likely in responce to a few bleater’s that have the ear of the BC member. She should know better.

I guess the members in BC should make Ms. Diane Thorne aware of their presence.

If this get through the next three readings it will be proclaimed.
****%between%

Post her contact information.

102-1108 Austin Ave
Coquitlam, V3K 3P5
Phone: 604-933-2001
diane.thorne.mla@leg.bc.ca

Click to Email Diane Thorne

Ummm . . .Jason 1 if you read carefully you will see that I used the small “l” in “liberal”. Both N.D.P. and Liberals ( notice the big"L"?) are from the left side of the political spectrum and are both “liberals”. Get it? :roll:

Uh-huh.

NDP

No Dopes Please!

That about sums up the NDP.

No, they support legalized marijuana :slight_smile:

Do you feel that is good !