Seems to me that more than 50% of states (actually 30) have HI legislation. Seems to be a trend developing!! Can all be wrong? There’s no need for HI legislation???
If all states and provinces adopt HI legislation, would there be any need for national associations at all? Hey…no fighting between associations…sounds good to me. Scary, isn’t it, Nick??
Not in Missouri.
Thanks for asking.
Brian,
Despite all the licensing, no one has ever proven the need for such legislation, or its effectiveness in helping the consumer.
Not a single time.
In fact, except for some licensing fees, I would bet that it COSTS more to administer the program, than monies collected.
Licensing is about CONTROL. Licensing is about MONEY. Nothing else.
Funny guy!!!
“I own myself the friend to a very free system of commerce, and
hold it as a truth, that commercial shackles are generally unjust,
oppressive and impolitic - it is also a truth, that if industry
and labour are left to take their own course, they will generally
be directed to those objects which are the most productive, and
this in a more certain and direct manner than the wisdom of the
most enlightened legislature could point out.”
– James Madison (speech to the Congress, 9 April 1789)
Thanks, but I was being serious.
I have learned that arguing against licensing with people who want to be controlled by their government…is like trying to teach a pig to sing. All I do is waste a lot of time and piss off the pig.
No consumer group has ever supported a licensing law. We now have one who has opposed a licensing law. The argument that licensing is a benefit to the consumer is without basis in fact.
**Below is a sample from one month’s issue of the TREC newsletter.
My question is this: ARE ANY LAWS GOOD AND WHY?
Below are public postings from the TREC website, but the private information has been removed.
I have not included a link because I do not want to cause harm to anyone.
XXXXXX
(XXXXXX); license #XXXX **
Agreed reprimand of professional inspector license, entered January 23, 2007; performed a real estate inspection in a negligent or incompetent manner, in violation of §1102.301 of the Texas Occupations Code; failed to report as in need of repair a food waste disposer wired directly into the structure’s electrical system, without a shut-off mechanism within close proximity to the disposer unit, in violation of 22 TAC § 535.229(b)(1) of the Rules of the Texas Real Estate Commission; failed to report as in need of repair a furnace improperly housed in a closet that did not allow for normal intake of combustion air and could cause carbon monoxide to enter into the home’s air distribution system, in violation of 22 TAC § 535.229(t)(4) of the Rules of the Texas Real Estate Commission; failed to report as in need of repair a gas line to the furnace made of improper material, in violation of 22 TAC §535.229(t)(6) of the Rules of the Texas Real Estate Commission; failed to report as in need of repair an extension cord hardwired into the furnace wiring; in violation of 22 TAC § 535.230©(12) of the Rules of the Texas Real Estate Commission; failed to report as in need of repair an exposed junction where the extension cord was wired into the furnace, in violation of 22 TAC § 535.230©(6) of the Rules of the Texas Real Estate Commission
XXXXXX
(XXXXXX); license #XXXX
Agreed 1 year suspension of professional inspector license effective, March 28, 2007; beginning September 28, 2007 remaining 6 months probated for 2 years; performed a real estate inspection in a negligent or incompetent manner, in violation of §1102.301 of the Texas Occupations Code; failed to report as in need of repair cracks in the mortar of exterior brick walls around windows, in violation of 22 TAC § 535.228(e)(1) of the Rules of the Texas Real Estate Commission; failed to report as in need of repair evidence of a water stain and a hole in two ceiling areas and failed to report locations of drywall cracks reported to be of structural concern, in violation of 22 TAC § 535.228©(1)of the Rules of the Texas Real Estate Commission; failed to report the depth of attic insulation, in violation of 22 TAC § 535.228(h)(10) of the Rules of the Texas Real Estate Commission; failed to report as in need of repair lack of properly functioning GFCI receptacles in the kitchen located greater than six feet away from the sink, in violation of 22 TAC § 535.230©(2)(G) of the Rules of the Texas Real Estate Commission; failed to report the type(s) of heating system and energy source(s), in violation of 22 TAC § 535.229(t)(1) of the Rules of the Texas Real Estate Commission; failed to report as in need of repair two malfunctioning furnaces, in violation of 22 TAC § 535.229(t)(2) and 22 TAC § 535.229(t)(3) of the Rules of the Texas Real Estate Commission
XXXXXX
(XXXXXX); license #XXXX
Agreed 1 month suspension of professional inspector license fully probated for 2 years, effective March 29, 2007; performed a real estate inspection in a negligent or incompetent manner, in violation of §1102.301 of the Texas Occupations Code; failed to report as in need of repair improper grading that sloped toward the house, which would allow water to pool near the foundation, in violation of 22 TAC §535.228(a)(of the Rules of the Texas Real Estate Commission; failed to report the type of roofing, in violation of 22 TAC §535.228(h)(1) of the Rules of the Texas Real Estate Commission; failed to report as in need of repair a flexible gas supply line to the furnace that was routed through the furnace housing, which is an improper connection because of the risk of damage to the line from the metal edge of the hole in the furnace housing, in violation of 22 TAC §535.229(t)(6) and 22 TAC §535.229(t)(6) of the Rules of the Texas Real Estate Commission; failed to report the type of branch circuit wiring, in violation of 22 TAC §535.230©(1) of the Rules of the Texas Real Estate Commission; reported an inspection on a form that deviated from the required TREC REI 7A-0 form by reformatting the required block of text on the first page such that much of the text was missing, in violation of 22 TAC §535.223© of the Rules of the Texas Real Estate Commission
Licensing can help, but only if it is done in the right way.
Remember, legislators don’t know anything about anything except how to get themselves re-elected. When the constituants complain about stuff, like bad construction, the legislators see that they have to act in order to get re-elected. It makes no difference that whenever governement gets involved the situation is usually made worse.
People, in large part, think that their problems can be solved by the government. This is false, but it makes them feel better (and allows them to pass their own responsibility onto others) to believe this.
If contractors (electricians, carpenters, plumbers, etc) are required to meet certain education and experience requirements and are tested (both by a paper exam and a practical exam) before they can get licensed, and are required to take continuing education, that can be a good thing. At least in means that there is some minimum level of verified experience and knowledge involved.
The same applies to HIs.
In Illinois, only roofers and plumbers are state licensed (BTW: To even sit for the exam, plumbers must belong to the union. Go figure.)
Electricians, carpenters, masons, HVAC techs and general contractors are usually required (by some local municipalities and/or counties) to be licensed, but the testing is not always regirous and there is no CE requirement.
Case in point. I know alot about electrical, but I also know that there is a great deal I do not know. Yet, I am a licensed electrical contractor. Sat for the test (open book) and paid my fee. But I would never consider myself qualified to wire a house. I have never worked as an electrician (except for some repairs I made to some of my own buildings) and would not feel right charging anyone to do electrical work for them.
But, according to most municipalities in Illinois (not Chicago. There you have to be union) I am legally qualified to do residential electrical work.
Go figure.
But, I would say that the contractors should be required to be licensed (with the above requirements) before HIs are. This is just plain common sense.
But then, state legislators have never been known for their common sense 
Just my 2 cents.
Will,
Good post. It would seem that if we point at incomplete laws we can find
the holes in the system. If done properly, some laws (for anything) do indeed help.
A lot of personal agendas get mingled into some laws, but that does not mean
that the intent of the law was wrong to begin with… it just needs fixed.
We are a republic (a nation of law). The dire warnings of how horrible things
will get if inspectors are governed by a SoP, enforced by law, are not as bad
as some would say.
Some laws are good and some are bad. Poorly written laws do not make all
law bad… IMHO.
I do not see InterNACHI’s existence threatened by regulation, because it offers
so many benefits that make it prosper in any state, regardless.
People get mixed up.
They believe that if someting is wrong, you pass a law.
They further believe that if a law is passed, the problem is solved.
But it is not.
The law against murder does not stop murder, it just makes procecuting someone for murder possible.
Likewise, police do not “protect” the public. They cannot do this, even if we really believe that they can.
Police can only find and arrest someone who they believe has violated a law and hand them over for a trial to determine if they really have.
Restraining orders do not stop, say, domestic violence, they just make it possible for the police to arrest, say, an abusive spouse who has a restraining order against him. But the restraining order does not and cannot stop him from going over and beating his wife.
Licensing laws do not and cannot stop bad contractors or HIs, they merely make it possible to hold these people accountable, and then, only in civil court, if they mess up.
So, licensing does not “solve” the problem, it only makes dealing with the people who violate it easier.
Hope I have been clear.
I have personally being dealing with and observing HI laws in Florida and following HI laws around the country for over a decade and I have yet to find in a single instance where the “public” is the ones pushing for a HI law. Another law enacted to force HI to do their jobs is just another layer of laws on top of already existing laws (lawS not law) that protect the consumer. It has always been groups who stand to make more money, shift responsibilities and liability, stifle competition or all of the above that push for these HI laws and unfortunately there are almost always HI who are more than willing to go along to get along with those parties and more often than not are heavily engaged (often covertly) in make the HI laws reality. We have numerous such HI right here in Florida and some of the same ones are sweating bullets because they helped to enact the proposed HI law here and now find themselves having to prepare for 2010 or go out of business. The costs right are going to be high yet there will still be incompetent inspectors doing business when it is all done. Others are standing in the wings waiting to scoop up all the money they can in the interim by selling the new requirements to the HI community.
Will, that sounds too much like “Socialism works if if done the right way and by the right people”
You may have trouble proving either is true.
There is a reason for that.
The public has more control over who stays in business than the government does.
The government can fine me, bar me, suspend me, and refuse to license me…and as many inspectors have demonstrated in many different states, I can still do home inspections.
But the public has the power. No calls…no inspections. Period. This is how the public determines who they will allow to stay in business or not.
All…virtually all…home inspection laws are initiated and supported by some group who feels that they will gain, financially, by it. A real estate salesman, an education vendor, or an inspector thinking he will thin his market…always someone with something to gain.
“We are doing this for the consumer” is a mantra that eases consciences but little else. Consumers don’t care.
Good point. Maybe state governments are such that they can’t do it right.
Is SoP better as a suggestion or a law?
In business, your standard operating procedure is how you describe to your potential client what your product is.
In an unlicensed state, the buyer has the ability to shop and choose what they feel to be the most appropriate. They can also negotiate with the inspector whatever modifications they feel they would like for him to make and he can set his fee, accordingly.
In a state where the SOP is mandated by the government, the potential client’s decision has already been made for him and the ability to modify or negotiate a change is limited or negated.
“Licensing” is when the government does the thinking for the consumer. Where it exists, it needs to be repealed.
James,
The Professional Services Rendered amount of the sale price of a property (6%, 7%, etc.) does not ALL go to a particular agent; most often the amount becomes split 4-ways between the listing brokerage, thier agent, the Buyers brokerage, and thier agent.
Therefore, the agent recieves little in comparison, per hour, that what is percieved the make. In-other-words, if that agent, who makes $4k on one transaction AFTER working several months on a property, do the math. AND if that agent does not have steady business, closings per month, that $4K that was earned was peanuts.
By-the-way James, it seems you don’t have many inspections?
YOU SPEND WAY-TOO-MUCH TIME IN THESE BLOGS! 
Yes, licensing does NOT make much sense either!
I have about all the inspections I can handle, really. I’m doing quite well, thanks.
I noticed that your site was disconnected, though. I hope things are going well for you in Florida.