My only request is that you leave out the tool specifics statement. I had a client the other day asked me why I used a marble instead of the high tech level that he saw used by another inspector. I think that this opens up a door for a law suit just because we did not use a high tech tool. Just my 2 cents.
Mark, where is that?
I think he may be referring to the recent proposal, and not the actual SOP.
You are right James, That is what I get for not finishing my 2nd cup off coffee before I post. Nick, I like the wording in the original SOP. I understand that you are wanting to up date the SOP. I just meant for my comment on the possible SOP update. Sorry for the confusion.:mrgreen:
I would judge the response to the suggestion of changing the SOP to be quite underwhelming, to this point. Every thread addressing such a possiblity is lying dead or dormant.
You could look at it that way. I don’t.
I expected to see the lack of response. The membership just witnessed the dogs lift their legs and mark their perceived territory as they chastised, belittled and slayed others who had opinions.
Who in their right mind would want to get involved with that?
A man willing to stand behind an idea he actually believed in, perhaps. It happens every day on this message board.
A provision should be added that the SOP cannot be modified or disclaimed by the inspector just to get around State or Local Laws or to omit portions of the SOP because the Inspector is not “qualified” to report on those portions. Every NACHI Inspector should be qualified to inspect and report on all portions of the SOP, otherwise why are they “Certified”?
No mention in the SOP about a signed contrat or HI’s name or ID #.
I would like the limitations and exclussions first.
What do the SOP committee members think about all of this Nick, or is that link out of date?