Then you didn’t inspect according to the NACHI SOP, instead you made up your own SOP. If you didn’t report on any of the items that could or did involve WDO or didn’t have someone onsite who could, then there is no way that you could have followed the NACHI SOP. If you left out all those items and conditions then, in my opinion, you screwed your clients.
Thanks for the pictures and the statements though, others will be interested.
could some one spell them out for me please.
WSDA = Washington State Department of Agriculture (Department in charge of Structural Pest Inspectors. In order to report on WDO/WDI/CC, you must have your SPI license.
ICN = Inspection Control Number (A unique number issued by the WSDA to be included on all reports that mention the items below.)
WDO = Wood Destroying Organism
WDI = Wood Destroying Insect
CC = Conducive conditions. i.e. excessive moisture, leaks, wood debris in crawl, vegetation touching building, restricted gutters…and more.
I knew you’d threaten that Lewis. But like I said, you are too simple to get your mind around reporting something without referring to conditions and all. It’s been explained to you over and over again. I followed the NACHI SOP (which you don’t seem to be familiar with) and I didn’t break any laws, and my clients got a full report without missing out on anything.
Why is it so hard for you to understand?
It seems like the part you can’t get your mind around is reporting conducive conditions without reporting them conducively. Or something like that. You have your mind stuck in this little box and you just can’t get out of it.
BTW, if you go passing along this information to anyone and it’s the pack of lies you’re writing on here? You WILL be joining your friend George in a lawsuit and I am not blowing smoke. I’m po’d now. You guys are messing with my life so back off. I shouldn’t have to be afraid to join in the important threads on this forum for fear of just what you are threatening. I get slammed all the time for not participating and this is why. But no more Lewis, this is where the rubber hits the road. There is no current law in Wa state regarding this subject anyway, even if I weren’t handling it the way I am. That’s why the WSDA took off any and all references to stating that Home Inspectors are required to be licensed SPI’s off of their website. You should follow their lead.
Consider yourself warned.
thank you Stephen
I have a question for you Lewis.
What IF I had gone and taken the WSDA test yesterday like I was planning on? I had something come up and didn’t go. But if I had, then you would have been posting all this BS all over the business world and defaming me in front of potential clients (my current one read all your BS before hiring me) and you would have done a fair job of ruining my business without just cause.
So did you stop to think before opening your mouth today Lewis? I notice you haven’t been around for quite awhile and only came back on here to post this crap.
Wendy, check these folks out…they have some interesting materials you can use in your report on deck construction, and if you contact them, they will send you pamphlets about their deck brackets … cool stuff.
view the movie also … “DeckLok, The Movie”
I appreciate the constructive help.
If you had take the WSDA Test and passed you would have your license and could obtain your own ICN NUmbers, then you would have had no reason to ignore the NACHI SOP, if you had used a Sub Like you said you would you would be fine, either way you wouldn’t have sold your clients a partial Home Inspection like you did.
If you do not perform the WDO portion of your inspection yourself and you do not sub it out to a Licensed SPI, you are neither following the SOP or offering a Full Home Inspection to your clients, that’s not defaming, that’s Fact.
The way I read the SOP is that the standards it sets must be met, not just the parts you feel you can or want to do, either do the complete inspection or sub out the parts you don’t, or aren’t qualified to do, why have an SOP or advertise that you meet it’s standards if you aren’t going to give your customers an Inspection Report that meets those standards
Don’t post pictures of WDO Conducive conditions and damage unless you can say that you, or someone, reported those conditions according to the NACHI SOP. There are inspectors who use licensed Electricians, Plumbers, Roofers, etc. to perform parts of their Home Inspection, they don’t exclude them from their Inspectiorn or the SOP and they don’t force their clients to Hire the Electrician, Plumber, Roofer, etc. to perform Separate Inspections.
lower deck: less than 30" high needs no handrail. Can’t see but supports are probably set back a little and you’d see them looking inderneath.
Upper deck: Joists probably cantelever which, once planking is installed are pretty stable as far as no diagonal bracing at the posts. If the joists butt to a ledger against the home, diagonal braces should be installed.
From the NACHI SOP…
I. The inspectors are not required to determine:
[INDENT]A. Property boundary lines or encroachments.
B. The condition of any component or system that is not readily accessible.
C. The service life expectancy of any component or system.
D. The size, capacity, BTU, performance, or efficiency of any component or system.
E. The cause or reason of any condition.
F. The cause for the need of repair or replacement of any system or component.
G. Future conditions.
H. The compliance with codes or regulations.
I.** The presence of evidence of rodents, animals or insects.**
Now that’s funny!
Lewis, why do you care?
If she’s violating state laws, report her. Otherwise, let it go. It’s smacks of a vendetta at this point.
WDO is not only Insects, it also includes wood rot fungus among other things. Are you saying that if you find floor joists, sill plates, etc. damaged by insects you are not required by the SOP to Report the Damage to those structural members? There is a difference between reporting the presence of insects and the damage caused by Insects.
Do you Report Earth to Wood Contact, as Wendy’s photo showed? In Washington only a licensed SPI can report that, Wendy would be fine if she had used a licensed SPI as a Sub to report what she is unable to do because of the SPI Laws, but she didn’t use a Sub, but to exclude such conditions from her report, instead she told the clients that they needed to hire another inspector to do what she couldn’t, how then is HER HI Report Complete and in accordance with the SOP?
In the past three weeks I have seen 5 Inspection Reports from previous Inspections on Homes in the Spokane area I just Inspected, none of them were legal, all mentioned WDO Conducive Conditions and damage, although they all missed most of the damage, and none had the required ICN, and none had been performed by NACHI Inspectors so I don’t really give a damn about them, I can say that as a NACHI Inspector I have higher standards than these “other” Inspectors, Wendy on the other hand claims to perform her Inspections in accordance with NACHI Standards, but if an Inspector from another Association were to see her report the next time the home sells, he could say that its just another example of piss poor NACHI Standards, just like I can say about the five inspectors who’s reports I read, none were ASHI by the way.
There has been a big discussion on this message board over Regulation or Self Regulation, if an organization like NACHI cannot regulate it’s own inspectors as far as the SOP goes, then there isn’t much hope that Self Regulation will work, so I guess it’s up to the State to do the regulation, this thread will make that easier.
By the way, this is still on the WSDA website:
Kenton as a Nachi member we do have to comply with the code of ethics…
-Duty to Public…
10. The NACHI member shall comply with all government rules and licensing requirements of the jurisdiction where he/she conducts business.
So yes we do have to be licensed to report on the absence or presence of wood destroying organisms here, and / or conducive conditions. …like earth to wood contact.
Not that I really care one way or the other how another business owner decides how to interpret the Washington State law. And this individual is not even a competitor in my area…so why should I care.
BTW It is hard to tell from the pics…but it appears that there is no structural support beam on the deck. It appears that they just toe nailed the support posts to the rim joists…that is classic
Hey Lewis…I don’t think I have seen this one before. Has this one been published more recently?
This was a letter that was sent to Realtors, now it’s an appendix on the WSDA website, I hink it’s time for it to be sent again.
Nothing you wrote deserves my time.
That is old news that Lewis posted, and if you look at the current, up to date website you will see that they have dropped all of the references to Home Inspectors and licensing. Lewis just can’t let go.
Now there won’t even be a law, so he doesn’t have that to stand on.
I can’t post whatever pics I want. Doesn’t mean I have reported or not reported, or whatever stupid inference Lewis wants to make from it.
Lewis, It’s time you stood down. Also, read the NACHI SOP that states we are not required to report conditions conducive to mold or mold itself.
Go ahead. Find the stuff about Home Inspectors. Not old cached stuff. New, updated links.