HB 471 affects wind mitigation statute

For all you wind mitigation inspectors, HB-471 sponsored by Rep. Boyd was filed on 1-3-2014.

Here is a link to the bill:


See page 54 of the bill that relates to proposed changes 627.711 (the wind mitigation statute). Based on the language, it appears that the WCE’s never quit in their attempt to gain market share.

See attached PDF of page 54 of the bill showing proposed changes to wind mit statute.

Steve - thanks for sharing the proposed bill.

Now can somebody translate that 74 page legal document to layman terms for us slower folk?

So it appears they basically want it to be known that they will not be re-inspected(if they use a WCE) and the WCE is the final word. It is just putting into law what already has happened.

The WCEs will hire anyone who will do their bidding and THEY change the form as filled-out by the license holder.

John, you are correct. The “no re-inspection” concept has been in place for the mighty WCEs for some time now. The proposed changes to the statute officially sanction the concept and provide legal cover for the insurance industry to collude with the WCEs. This legal cover will surely harm the single operator inspector and/or small firms that don’t have a “quality assurance” program. Additionally, this proposed language will likely harm the Florida homeowner as well as the WCEs are really working for the insurance providers- rather than the homeowner- the homeowner is just paying the bill.

The whole reinspection thing has died down, this may not be as big of a deal as it was 2 years ago.

Yes, you are correct. If the WCEs are successful, all re-inspections will be a thing of the past. So will the single operators conducting insurance related inspections- unless of course, you work for the WCEs.

Aren’t re-inspections already a thing of the past is what I am saying. Who is still doing re-inspections? Anyone?

Quality assurance begins with the inspector. I suppose that if you have quality reports this won’t be an issue. If you are new in providing reports and they lack in quality then you will have issues. Still see reports that are absolutely horrendous from others. Not saying they don’t reflect what is actually there but just by appearance are sloppy. Bad pics, to few pics , lack of all important info etc.

Another motive for this may be that the Citizens WM auditing dept. (underwriters), want to downsize and just leave the decisions up to the internal QA program built into the inspection company. I believe that is the reason CIT is pushing the “endorsed companies”. They really don’t want to pay extra to audit or re-inspect WM reports.

I always include basically the same amount of verification that a WCE includes, only I “self audit” for my QA because I already know their guidelines.

I think you are missing the point. The issue really has nothing to do with “quality assurance”.

When we first heard of the WCE’s being “endorsed companies” by CIT, they had the “no re-inspection clause” in their plan. Somehow it got removed from the program before it was implemented. Now, they have managed to have that clause reinserted into the language. I guess we will see if it has any effect.

The term “quality assurance”, in this case, is really just a blatant attempt by the WCE’s lobby to steer business to the WCE’s and away from the independent single operator.

What is the point then? The reason CIT uses these WCE’s as endorsed companies is because they have QA and the delivery software approved by CIT. QA (auditors) is supposed to be an independent, third party entity, but most are internal.

See post 13.

The WCE’s may have lobbied a bit for this, but I don’t think that is the entire reason. Kind of a conspiracy theory, don’t you think…

Sure. I am a professional home inspector. We are typically cynical by nature.:slight_smile:

I have an opinion about that. :wink:

this is why we attempted to have a nachi wce but got pushback from members

Nowhere in the statute related to wind mitigation inspections (627.711) is the term “WCE” or “wind certification entity” mentioned. “WCE’s” or “wind certification entities” were born or created by non elected government bureaucrats and special interest lobbyists to provide favor for a select few companies while circumventing the statute. This crony capitalism was accomplished through these unelected officials making “rules” or “policy” outside or over and above the enabling statute. As many of you know, the statute clearly spells out who is licensed and authorized to conduct wind mitigation inspections. I do not believe that "WCE’s are one of the entities listed in the statute. Consequently, to gain market share, the WCE’s have colluded with the unelected bureaucrats to develop language in their polices and/or rules to provide favor to the select few. The language in this proposed bill seeks to codify this special favor in the statute.

NACHI may have tried to become a WCE and may have gotten push back from some members. I guess some may go with the "if you can’t beat them- join them mentality. From where I sit, I do not want any WCE with their hand in my wallet or their boot on my head forcing me to work for them just for the privilege of doing a wind mitigation inspection -(That would include NACHI).