# Consumer Advocacy Group Announces Opposition to Missouri HB 2057!!! **URL:** \ **Category:** Legislation, Licensing, Ethics & Legal Issues\ **Created:** [March 3, 2008, 11:25am UTC](https://forum.nachi.org/t/consumer-advocacy-group-announces-opposition-to-missouri-hb-2057/25772 "2008-03-03T11:25:29Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![jbushart](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/919ad9/32.png) [@jbushart](https://forum.nachi.org/u/jbushart)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2008, 11:25am UTC](https://forum.nachi.org/t/consumer-advocacy-group-announces-opposition-to-missouri-hb-2057/25772/1 "2008-03-03T11:25:29Z")
Protect the consumer? The consumer doesn’t think so. > [@](#): > > [FONT=Arial][size=2] > > [http://by104w.bay104.mail.live.com/mail/SafeRedirect.aspx?hm\_\_tg=http://65.54.175.249/att/GetAttachment.aspx&hm\_\_qs=file%3Df3f51d72-4ee9-4e2e-82d9-7a64fdea9d12.jpg%26ct%3DaW1hZ2UvanBlZw\_3d\_3d%26name%3DVW50aXRsZWQuanBn%26inline%3D1%26rfc%3D0%26empty%3DFalse%26imgsrc%3Dcid%253aX.MA2.1204524995%2540aol.com&oneredir=1&ip=10.1.106.201&d=d2868&mf=0](http://by104w.bay104.mail.live.com/mail/SafeRedirect.aspx?hm __tg=http://65.54.175.249/att/GetAttachment.aspx&hm__ qs=file%3df3f51d72-4ee9-4e2e-82d9-7a64fdea9d12.jpg%26ct%3daW1hZ2UvanBlZw_3d_3d%26name%3dVW50aXRsZWQuanBn%26inline%3d1%26rfc%3d0%26empty%3dFalse%26imgsrc%3dcid%253aX.MA2.1204524995%2540aol.com&oneredir=1&ip=10.1.106.201&d=d2868&mf=0) > > To: Committee Members: > > I am President of Homeowners Against Deficient Dwellings, a national grass roots not for profit (501c3) advocating for the safe and sound construction of new homes. A home is the largest purchase a family will ever make. At this time, in the state of Missouri, there is no consumer protection for that purchase. Our organization would find it far more important to pass legislation that would hold a home builder accountable and responsible for shoddy construction than to license Home Inspectors who are the only neutral party working for the buyer in the purchase of a new or resale home. Every other person involved in the transaction has a vested interest in the sale. > > In the 15 years that I have been dealing with homeowners in Missouri I have never had a complaint against a Home Inspector. At the same time there have been hundreds of complaints about home builders cutting corners to add to the bottom line. The lack of window flashing, roofing felt, rebar in foundations, and improper grading, all of which allow water intrusion are issues that buyers count on Home Inspectors to find. > > I might add that I have heard numerous complaints from Home Inspectors that some Realtors refuse to add their names to lists they give to prospective buyers if the Home Inspector has ever found issues that killed a deal. Honest Home Inspectors and honest Appraisers need protection from Realtors and Mortgage Brokers who only list professionals who do their bidding, not the other way around. > > I am certain that the Attorney General’s consumer protection division would tell you that complaints against Home Inspectors are minimal as compared to other issues regarding home ownership like fraudulent appraisals, fraudulent lending, and shoddy construction. > > Please do not consider this legislation. At this time Home Inspections are affordable for purchasers. This legislation will certainly raise the cost and in my opinion will do nothing to protect the public since it seems to me that on this issue there is nothing to protect the public from. > > [FONT=Times New Roman][size=3]\*\*Because Builders Owe a Duty Beyond Cashing Your Checks > [Request for a Congressional hearing concerning accountability of the home buil](http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/322833272?ltl=1110496374) \*\*Nancy Seats, President > Homeowners Against Deficient Dwellings INC. ([HADD INC](http://www.hadd.com/)) > Member: National Alliance Against Construction Defects > A National Not for Profit Organization > Home: 314-909-1667 > Cell: 816-560-0030 > \*“Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful committed citizens can change the world. Indeed it is the only thing that ever has.” \*Margaret Mead > > _“The moment the idea is admitted into society that property is not as sacred as the laws of God, and there is not a force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence. Property must be sacred or liberty cannot exist.”_ John Adams [/size][/FONT] [/size][/FONT] ---
**Author:** ![gromicko](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/internachi/user_avatar/forum.nachi.org/gromicko/32/58172_2.png) [@gromicko](https://forum.nachi.org/u/gromicko)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2008, 5:12pm UTC](https://forum.nachi.org/t/consumer-advocacy-group-announces-opposition-to-missouri-hb-2057/25772/2 "2008-03-03T17:12:55Z")
Her key quote: > [@](#): > > In the 15 years that I have been dealing with homeowners in Missouri I have never had a complaint against a Home Inspector. ---
**Author:** ![jbushart](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/919ad9/32.png) [@jbushart](https://forum.nachi.org/u/jbushart)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2008, 5:38pm UTC](https://forum.nachi.org/t/consumer-advocacy-group-announces-opposition-to-missouri-hb-2057/25772/3 "2008-03-03T17:38:07Z")
Nancy tells it like it is. Some of you may have heard about the slaughter of several members of the Kirkwood, Missouri, municipal leaders at a recent public meeting. Nancy is a resident of Kirkwood and was there at the very next meeting holding the surviving members accountable for manipulating public sympathies for political gain. She is quite a lady and has her share of influence with several key Missouri politicians. We consider her decision to stand with us in opposition to HB 2057 as extremely significant. So much rhetoric has been spewed forth by proponents for these screwy bills as being “in the best interest of the consumer”, and now…for the first time in any state…a national consumer group directly related to the quality of residential dwellings stands up and says “NO” to home inspector licensing. This is major. ---
**Author:** ![jbushart](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/919ad9/32.png) [@jbushart](https://forum.nachi.org/u/jbushart)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2008, 7:09pm UTC](https://forum.nachi.org/t/consumer-advocacy-group-announces-opposition-to-missouri-hb-2057/25772/4 "2008-03-03T19:09:52Z")
While these arguments are hardly likely to be collected and referred to as “The Federalist Papers”, they do make it interesting for the readers of this newspaper as they learn that there is more to a home inspector licensing bill than just “protecting the consumer”. First, the paper published this: > [@](#): > > **Proposal would cost home buyers dearly** > > ``` > The Examiner > > ``` > > James H. Bushart > president, Missouri Chapter of the National Association of Certified Home Inspectors > St. Louis > > To the editor: > > In his freshman year, Missouri Representative Mike Parson of Bolivar was bold enough to actually send a form letter out to Missouri lobbyists - availing himself to meet with them. It is no wonder that, by 2007, he made the “Turner Hall of Shame” by being among the top 10 of all representatives accepting money from them (a total of $4,234 in 2007). > > As a lobbyist magnet, Rep. Parson has managed to sell himself to one of the largest of all lobbies in Missouri - the Missouri Association of Realtors. > > With the assistance of a very small group of home inspectors closely associated with him and the real estate lobbyists, he has managed to draft yet another bill he hopes to push through the legislature to help real estate agents to convince people to buy houses. HB 2057 creates an autonomous board selected by these lobbyists to control what home inspectors are and are not allowed to tell home buyers as they consider buying a home. > > Many real estate agents have complained that home inspectors, by virtue of uncovering and reporting defects in houses they are trying to sell, have cost them thousands of dollars in commissions. Parson has drafted a bill for them that they hope will help them sell more houses - at the expense of the Missouri consumer who is not paying him the same money that the lobbyists are. > > At a time when homeowners are suffering foreclosures and other injuries from a real estate industry that is totally out of control, the answer proposed by the lobbyists, through their favorite state representative, is to stifle the only objective voice in the process of selling a home. > > Say no to the lobbyists. Say no to the commissioned salespeople who will be reselling these foreclosed homes for additional commissions. Keep home inspectors independent of the Missouri Association of Realtors and their lobbyists. > > Let your representatives know that you oppose HB 2057 and want them to oppose it, too. Apparently, I raised the ire of some used house salespeople in the western side of my state. Soon, the following was published: > [@](#): > > **Inspectors, like real estate sellers, should be regulated** > > ``` > By Stacey Johnson-cosby | The Examiner > > ``` > > The Examiner published a letter from a home inspector, James Bushart, on Feb. 13 that included a lot of false information and scare tactics about HB 2057. As a Realtor - obligated to abide by a code of ethics or risk losing my license to sell - I am deeply offended that this inspector, who does not have to face a financial penalty should he make an error, would try to make the real estate agent the bad guy. How dare he! > > I’ve been licensed for 21 years and have represented many buyers as a buyer agent. In an effort to protect them and their investment, I always advise them to get their future home inspected by a qualified, thorough home inspector. Please keep in mind that buyers are not required to get their homes inspected. I go a step above to suggest they use a licensed structural engineer. > > Our goal is to help buyers uncover any problems so they can make an informed decision to either negotiate with the sellers to address any deficiencies or decide to move on to another house. Plenty of houses are on the market in this buyer’s market. We work on 100 percent commission, and typically our biggest source of business is referrals from past, pleased clients. Bushart wrongly states that we want to convince people to buy houses no matter what so we can get the commission, then move on. Our vision is long term. > > The inspector is a central, critical part of the transaction. Anyone can, on any day, wake up and decide to become a home inspector and be in business that very day. How can a buyer possibly know the person they are hiring is qualified and doing the best job possible? Currently, they can’t. We, as real estate agents, must get licensed and then constantly take continuing education courses. We simply want the inspectors to do the same. Put it in writing. Stand by your work and qualifications. > > If a home inspector makes a mistake and misses something major, and the buyer has trusted them, buys the house and then discovers the inspector missed the fact that the furnace does not work, guess who is stuck with no recourse? The consumer who trusted the inspector. > > Most inspectors have a clause in their contract that the buyer cannot sue them. The buyer’s only remedy is that the inspector will refund them the cost of the inspection, typically $300 to $400. They could be faced with thousands of dollars of problems because the potentially unqualified inspector didn’t know what he was doing, and is not held accountable by anyone. How is this fair to the trusting consumer? > > Thank goodness for Rep. Mike Parson and the Missouri Association of Realtors, who are really looking out for the consumer. Let’s make the inspectors accountable - like the rest of us - for the good of the consumer. Why not? > > Stacey Johnson-Cosby is a Realtor in Kansas City. I responded as follows, which was published today: > [@](#): > > **Real estate industry is making self-serving case on inspectors** > > ``` > By James H. Bushart | The Examiner > > ``` > > I would like to address the statements of real estate salesperson Stacey Johnson-Cosby, who wrote in response to my objection to HB 2057 (The Examiner, last Wednesday, “Inspectors, like real estate sellers, should be regulated”). > > She began by accusing me of making “a lot of false” statements, yet neglected to say what they were. Her statement that a home inspector is not responsible for his errors without some kind of legislation to say so is absolutely untrue. > > First, a search of complaints with the Better Business Bureau of Missouri and with the office of the Missouri attorney general will show that there have been fewer complaints against home inspectors than florists. Comparing that with the several hundred real estate sales people with complaints against them, we are doing exceptionally well. > > Still, any citizen has always had the Missouri judicial system to assist them as they do with any provider of services. Johnson-Cosby would like you to believe you need someone else’s permission to do that through legislation. Your rights regarding your relationship with your home inspector are no different than any other vendor you might contract. > > The bill Johnson-Cosby and some other long-term real-estate sales people have pushed state Rep. Parson to provide for them does little to protect the consumer. It protects the sales person. > > I will explain how it does that. > > Real estate sales people do not get paid if you do not buy the house. If I tell you something in my inspection report that causes you not to buy the house, the sales people lose all the time they invested in you in the hopes of gaining up to 7 percent commission. A $200,000 home represents to them a check for up to $14,000. > > HB 2057 provides the sales person with the opportunity to challenge the license of a home inspector for what he determines to be the quality of the inspection, the report or - and pay careful attention to this - how the inspector communicates the report to you. > > The law the real estate sales person is pushing would give control to the sales person over what I tell you and how I tell you. If the salesman does not like the way I “communicated” to you, I am dragged to Jefferson City before some board staffed by people selected by the sales person’s lobbyist and forced to defend my actions or lose my business. > > I do not blame Johnson-Cosby for being upset, for her association has paid a lot of money and spent a lot of time schmoozing these politicians in the hope of gaining a bigger edge in the market. Just remember that your home inspector needs to be independent and removed from the real estate salespeople and his lobby to be of any value to you. > > James H. Bushart is president of the Missouri chapter of the National Association of Certified Home Inspectors in St. Louis. ---
**Author:** ![jmckenna1](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/internachi/user_avatar/forum.nachi.org/jmckenna1/32/719_2.png) [@jmckenna1](https://forum.nachi.org/u/jmckenna1)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2008, 8:31pm UTC](https://forum.nachi.org/t/consumer-advocacy-group-announces-opposition-to-missouri-hb-2057/25772/5 "2008-03-03T20:31:02Z")
Why is E&O insurance so high if, on average, inspectors have so few complaints? ---
**Author:** ![jbushart](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/919ad9/32.png) [@jbushart](https://forum.nachi.org/u/jbushart)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2008, 8:36pm UTC](https://forum.nachi.org/t/consumer-advocacy-group-announces-opposition-to-missouri-hb-2057/25772/6 "2008-03-03T20:36:02Z")
> [@jmckenna1](#): > > Why is E&O insurance so high if, on average, inspectors have so few complaints? Here is a better question. Why do the providers of E&O hide and refuse to reveal the actual numbers of complaints that actually result in judgments awarded as a result of trial? I think that the fact that, to date, we have no non-profit corporations providing this service might have something to do with this.😉 ---
**Author:** ![jmckenna1](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/internachi/user_avatar/forum.nachi.org/jmckenna1/32/719_2.png) [@jmckenna1](https://forum.nachi.org/u/jmckenna1)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2008, 9:05pm UTC](https://forum.nachi.org/t/consumer-advocacy-group-announces-opposition-to-missouri-hb-2057/25772/7 "2008-03-03T21:05:16Z")
> [@jbushart](#): > > Here is a better question. > > Why do the providers of E&O hide and refuse to reveal the actual numbers of complaints that actually result in judgments awarded as a result of trial? > > I think that the fact that, to date, we have no non-profit corporations providing this service might have something to do with this.😉 I would be happy just to know how much their total cost is, regardless of how they settle the case (most don’t go to court, but still cost them money). Non-profit corporations? Help me. ---
**Author:** ![jbushart](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/919ad9/32.png) [@jbushart](https://forum.nachi.org/u/jbushart)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2008, 5:04am UTC](https://forum.nachi.org/t/consumer-advocacy-group-announces-opposition-to-missouri-hb-2057/25772/8 "2008-03-05T05:04:05Z")
The [carpet baggers](http://www.aitraining.com/homeinspectmissouri.htm) can hardly contain themselves. I hope that we are successful in disappointing them. ---
**Author:** ![dharris](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/34f0e0/32.png) [@dharris](https://forum.nachi.org/u/dharris)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2008, 2:39pm UTC](https://forum.nachi.org/t/consumer-advocacy-group-announces-opposition-to-missouri-hb-2057/25772/9 "2008-03-05T14:39:57Z")
> [@jbushart](#): > > The [carpet baggers](http://www.aitraining.com/homeinspectmissouri.htm) can hardly contain themselves. > > I hope that we are successful in disappointing them. Quality required HI training , not to mention any/all required training is good for the profession. Unless your afraid that other HI’s in your area may start knowing more than you, and get more business than some one with no HI training, why would you not want your competition to have required HI training ??:roll: :roll: :roll: \\\ ---
**Author:** ![jbushart](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/919ad9/32.png) [@jbushart](https://forum.nachi.org/u/jbushart)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2008, 2:48pm UTC](https://forum.nachi.org/t/consumer-advocacy-group-announces-opposition-to-missouri-hb-2057/25772/10 "2008-03-05T14:48:48Z")
> [@](#): > > People working in the field in Missouri are licensed to perform inspections for properties throughout the state. > [@](#): > > This is a fully approved licensing course online. Missouri does not have a licensing requirement and, accordingly, does not approve licensing courses. This is the carpet bagging entrepaneurial equivalant of a premature ejaculation. ---
**Author:** ![dharris](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/34f0e0/32.png) [@dharris](https://forum.nachi.org/u/dharris)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2008, 2:56pm UTC](https://forum.nachi.org/t/consumer-advocacy-group-announces-opposition-to-missouri-hb-2057/25772/11 "2008-03-05T14:56:19Z")
> [@](#): > > This is the carpet bagging entrepaneurial equivalant of a premature ejaculation. If you say so. Personnaly I cannot relate to that . If you have another example maybe I could see your point:mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: ---
**Author:** ![rbennett](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c6cbf5/32.png) [@rbennett](https://forum.nachi.org/u/rbennett)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2008, 3:08pm UTC](https://forum.nachi.org/t/consumer-advocacy-group-announces-opposition-to-missouri-hb-2057/25772/12 "2008-03-05T15:08:46Z")
Mr Harris Read and try to understand the web site. If you don’t see a problem then take their on line course I have high hopes for you. rlb ---
**Author:** ![dharris](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/34f0e0/32.png) [@dharris](https://forum.nachi.org/u/dharris)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2008, 8:31pm UTC](https://forum.nachi.org/t/consumer-advocacy-group-announces-opposition-to-missouri-hb-2057/25772/13 "2008-03-05T20:31:10Z")
> [@rbennett](#): > > Mr Harris > > Read and try to understand the web site. If you don’t see a problem then take their on line course > > I have high hopes for you. > > rlb Are you saying this course is not, and will not be endorsed by nick now or in the future, or if I complete this course it won’t qualifiy me for free nacho membership,:roll: :roll: ---
**Author:** ![rbennett](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c6cbf5/32.png) [@rbennett](https://forum.nachi.org/u/rbennett)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2008, 9:30pm UTC](https://forum.nachi.org/t/consumer-advocacy-group-announces-opposition-to-missouri-hb-2057/25772/14 "2008-03-05T21:30:19Z")
Dan No I am saying that you will not meet the educational requirments of the state of MO or FL So Go spend your money and get the education needed for a license in MO and FL from this company - FL and MO have no license requirments at this time and no eductional requirments Read their web site. I am sure it is my lack of understanding of the English language on my part and not yours If it is mine I am sure that the money you spend will help you obtain a license in these two states * * * Back to the point in question - licensing My dog has one - my car has one - I had three called city and county occupational licenses. They really protect the consumer We have a fine court system to protect the consumer plus the real big one called BAD PRESS. How about a 4 year degree in home inspection and state testing in all states? Some how I do not understand the making of a law when there is no need. Remember the HI pays a fee for the license the is close to what the costs are to the state to admin the program – he ups his total expence to his clients to stay in bus. Who gets it in the shorts?? THE CLIENT and that is who we are trying to protect. Look at it this way - If I make 100,000 a year before expences and real expences are 50,000 that means that for me to pay 100 dollars for a course or license that I must make an extra 200 dollars to break even Start runing the numbers on what 25 required CEs cost not you but your client. Trust me license is BS - it does not protect the client Just look at the local city the you live in and the local building department. So go spend you money Dan The education will be very worth while - you do need it rlb ---
**Author:** ![dharris](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/34f0e0/32.png) [@dharris](https://forum.nachi.org/u/dharris)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2008, 1:17am UTC](https://forum.nachi.org/t/consumer-advocacy-group-announces-opposition-to-missouri-hb-2057/25772/15 "2008-03-06T01:17:58Z")
> [@](#): > > Who gets it in the shorts?? THE CLIENT and that is who we are trying to protect. > > Start runing the numbers on what 25 required CEs cost not you but your client. 25 quality CE credits, considering cost of the CE and time off work, will cost apx $-3000-5000. 400 inspections per year = $ 7 -12 per inspection. Quality CE taught by professionals, will provide me additional knowelge to save my customer thousands . That alone is Worth it to me, to spend $7 -12.00 per inspection My customer, I’m sure they are willing to pay me additional $ 7-12 per inspection due to the additional knowelge I payed for. Of course I could always, spend $1 per inspection by paying nick $400 for him to tell the customer I am a certified master inspector, :twisted: :twisted: ---
**Author:** ![dbowers](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/internachi/user_avatar/forum.nachi.org/dbowers/32/59651_2.png) [@dbowers](https://forum.nachi.org/u/dbowers)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2008, 3:22am UTC](https://forum.nachi.org/t/consumer-advocacy-group-announces-opposition-to-missouri-hb-2057/25772/16 "2008-03-06T03:22:13Z")
Over the past 2 months I’ve seen several groups like this advertising to take an ONLINE 120 hr (???) course to get qualified for your Missouri HI License. Always 120 hrs - when we don’t even have a license. Seems like somebody is PLANNING on something. Wonder who? ---
**Author:** ![jbushart](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/919ad9/32.png) [@jbushart](https://forum.nachi.org/u/jbushart)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2008, 3:27am UTC](https://forum.nachi.org/t/consumer-advocacy-group-announces-opposition-to-missouri-hb-2057/25772/17 "2008-03-06T03:27:10Z")
> [@dbowers](#): > > Over the past 2 months I’ve seen several groups like this advertising to take an ONLINE 120 hr (???) course to get qualified for your Missouri HI License. > > Always 120 hrs - when we don’t even have a license. Seems like somebody is PLANNING on something. Wonder who? It’s going to be a real pleasure to disappoint them. They will have to recruit for students based upon the merit of their program. There will be not legislature mandating attendance in their classes this year, if we have anything to say about it. ---
**Author:** ![Brian\_A.MacNeish](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/90db22/32.png) [@Brian\_A.MacNeish](https://forum.nachi.org/u/Brian_A.MacNeish)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2008, 3:29am UTC](https://forum.nachi.org/t/consumer-advocacy-group-announces-opposition-to-missouri-hb-2057/25772/18 "2008-03-06T03:29:38Z")
> [@jbushart](#): > > Protect the consumer? The consumer doesn’t think so. From the letter: “\*I am President of Homeowners Against Deficient Dwellings, a national grass roots not for profit (501c3) advocating for the safe and sound construction of new homes.” \* This org is dedicated to fighting poor construction practices in \*\*new homes built by builders not HI’s. !!! What does this group have to do with HI practices??? \*\* \*“In the 15 years that I have been dealing with homeowners in Missouri I have never had a complaint against a Home Inspector.” \* Of course not! Why would anyone complain to a group fighting/advocating about poor construction practices by new home builders and that has really nothing to do with HI training, practices or regulation. This is letter is all a smoke screen and distraction from the real issues. Why she should have an opinion carrying more weight than anyone else is a distortion. Usually groups like this are privately and poorly funded by a small group of citizens who had problems with builders. SO…Who’s donating to her org to get her support? ---
**Author:** ![rbennett](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c6cbf5/32.png) [@rbennett](https://forum.nachi.org/u/rbennett)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2008, 3:30am UTC](https://forum.nachi.org/t/consumer-advocacy-group-announces-opposition-to-missouri-hb-2057/25772/19 "2008-03-06T03:30:34Z")
All Do we see something against the law here or am I just picking on someone?? rlb ---
**Author:** ![jbushart](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/919ad9/32.png) [@jbushart](https://forum.nachi.org/u/jbushart)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2008, 3:39am UTC](https://forum.nachi.org/t/consumer-advocacy-group-announces-opposition-to-missouri-hb-2057/25772/20 "2008-03-06T03:39:59Z")
> [@Brian A. MacNeish](#): > > From the letter: > > “\*I am President of Homeowners Against Deficient Dwellings, a national grass roots not for profit (501c3) advocating for the safe and sound construction of new homes.” \* > This org is dedicated to fighting poor construction practices in \*\*new homes built by builders not HI’s. !!! What does this group have to do with HI practices??? \*\* > > \*“In the 15 years that I have been dealing with homeowners in Missouri I have never had a complaint against a Home Inspector.” \* > Of course not! Why would anyone complain to a group fighting/advocating about poor construction practices by new home builders and that has really nothing to do with HI training, practices or regulation. > > This is letter is all a smoke screen and distraction from the real issues. Why she should have an opinion carrying more weight than anyone else is a distortion. Usually groups like this are privately and poorly funded by a small group of citizens who had problems with builders. SO…Who’s donating to her org to get her support? Home inspectors are quite regularly engaged in inspections related to new constructions. I don’t understand your confusion. This is a consumer advocacy group that represents the interests of people who have been victimized by Missouri’s unlicensed builders and unlicensed contractors…in counties where building codes are not on the books and/or are not enforced. These consumers, and the group that represents them, is extremely relevant to this argument. You really need to open your mind to facts and stop looking at your narrow agenda through such of a narrow perspective. [Next page](https://forum.nachi.org/t/consumer-advocacy-group-announces-opposition-to-missouri-hb-2057/25772.md?page=2)