I agree with the 10 year minimum…it must be proven by owning a corporation in the state that performs inspections or a business license in a county or city in Florida for inspections for at least 10 years with that persons name on it (not a business he or she bought). This can be easily validated at any county level tax assessors office records or the Fl divisions of corporations records.
In regards to con-spectors if he or she meets the qualifications above it should not matter. If he or she has been inspecting that long their allegiance should lie with the inspectors.
I vote for a “17 year” minimum! :mrgreen:
All good questions. And important that we get the answers before proceeding.
If there will be a board, and it looks like there may:
- Majority of board must be a licensed HI. they can hold other licenses.
- No more than 1 rep from insurance, 1 from RE and 1 from other such as PA, mortgage broker, etc.
- no requirement for years as a HI - we are all relatively new licensees or requirement for number of homes inspected - that is self defeating. Many of the current guru’s have not inspected a home in years (multi-inspector business operators) unless you want to eliminate them as potential board members or allow them to claim 500 inspections a year when, in fact, they are not doing them? What about the token realtor - must have sold 50 homes a year?
- I would like to see a board member with a background in education such as a developer of distance education for an accredited university. don’t know who is in charge, but I take courses at UNF often and they have a premiere program for distance and short course curriculum. I have renewed API licenses, IAQ courses, etc. they are geared for folks like us.
- Board members should be tasked with one primary goal: Increase requirements for eligibility to obtain a license!!! No more 120 hours BS. 4 yr degree + 3 yrs OJT or 2 yr degree plus 5 yrs OJT or 10 yrs documented and verifiable trade experience, i.e., licensed GC + 2 yrs OJT. their secondary goal should be to eliminate inspecting ovens/microwaves/dishwashers/refrigerators and the upright vacuum in the closet.
Next goal should be to allow HI’s to assess/sample mold. they should have a training program which allows them to get there other than the current MA program. it should not be easy and it should require dedicated study/testing. no one needs a 4 yr science degree to take a Z5 air sample but I applaud the MA’s for protecting their backs.
Last but not least, HI’s need an avenue to discuss these issues other than the internachi MB as these messages are only reaching one member of the whateveritiscalled group. the other members would not be caught dead reading this mb and they hate internachi as much as nick gromicko hates them.
William great points. All of the other organizations are getting the info out to their members the best they can, via different means. This message board is for the members of the chapter and just to make it transparent, I post it here for all to have input, or at
least those who want to have input.
Again, folks are making up the criteria for a “licensing board” but so far I have not seen much on what is the Charter of said Board? If and again this is a big “IF” a board is to be formed, there will need to be more than “we need a board to protect us”. A licensing board by the very name implies that this board will somehow have something to do with licensing. That is NOT in the law. The law would have to be modified or changed and we all know how well that has worked in the past. A group can not just decide what is needed and form it. You are dealing with State agencies and statutes. This all sounds great and lofty but until someone comes up with a cogent plans and mission statement as to the purpose of the board and outlines what it is for you have about as much chance as a chicken in hobo camp of accomplishing your goal. Some of the elements of the board composition are sound; going for more rather than less experienced inspectors, but limiting your members by having educational experience is like trying to sell a house with a moat. You are going to a extremely limited number of people who could meet that requirement. It is too easy to get off into the weeds on this thing and you end up picking the fly s**t out of the pepper. WHAT is the role of the board. To “protect our interests” is far too vague.
First, it is my understanding that the DBPR does not want to perform the functions of the board, so there is support from that end. Second, other HI organizations are in support of a board also. Without a board there is no technical knowledge of home inspection in Tallahassee. When they have a question the ask whoever they feel would give a good answer, that includes WCEs, CILB, Realtors and any individual they see fit. Who do you want to direct our profession? We all know the devil is in the details.
some suggestions
A board could function to develop rules for the HIs like SOP and Ethics
A board could approve continuing ed classes and requirements.
A board could hear any complaints on inspectors.
A board could help develop requirements for needed inspections, like insurance, and balcony.
I pose the questions again, if not a board, who will direct our profession? Koening? AAA construction school? Realtors? Citizens? ID?
The council? or maybe somebody who knows nothing about inspections.
Seriously, when you miss contaminated drywall on a four point or home inspection who will decide your fate? The courts?
Any ideas?
Seriously, a board is the only answer.
The State loves boards because of the reasons John just listed. We need to get in front of this and steer it in the best direction.
I suspect then that what is wanted is not a licensing board but more likely a Professional Review Board or Professional Development Board. Totally different animals. I am NOT questioning whether an assembly of some kind is not needed but if I am not mistaken DBPR does not have the option of not wanting to do this. They did not want HI licensing in the first place, it was thrust upon them but I believe they are tasked with investigating and monitoring the profession just as they are with all the other professions under their purview. I once did a home inspector for a DBPR investigator who specialized in construction oversight. They are severely undermanned or were at that time. Having to take on the Home Inspection profession just adds to their workload but this was one of the factors pointed out time and again during the run up to licensing.
Just “who” is seeking to form a board? Just because all the other organizations want to form a board does not mean DBPR is going to go along with it. Getting the home inspectors in FL to agree on where the sun rises is a major evolution let alone trying to seat a board. Good grief, talk about rice bowl diplomacy! Everyone has their own agenda and just like what you see here on a tiny scale is what you can expect when you get thousands of inspectors inputs on the board composition.
Ironically, there used to be an organization in FL that had and did all you say you want but could not get the backing of the FL inspectors. They buried their heads in the sand because there was no licensing then and no one saw the value or the “need”, especially if it was going to cost them anything. It is great if you can get together 20 guys in here discussing this but just gander at the number of responses to the two polls…almost zero interest.
DBPR and the coucil have expressed interest.
Again if not a board WHO? Or do NOTHING?!
Who the hell looks for contaminated drywall on a 4 point. :roll:
No one needs to get defensive here. Its frustrating isn’t it. Not pour salt in a wound, but I thought, or at least what I was told at the time by many, that good old “licensing” was going to take care of all these problems and concerns. Now we see it hasn’t taken care of any of it. In every other case around the country, licensing hasn’t solved a damn thing except permitted thousands of new inspectors to jump into the profession and created a whole new plethora of problems. Now the FL inspectors get to enjoy the joys of licensing and start to see why others were so vehemently against it.
see my point, if you did not know that how would you know?
I was against licensing.
I was also.
Lets get everyone together and get rid of it.
I’ll help that cause 
I know. So was I and lots of others who have been in this profession and fighting it for years. It was not necessary and now we see there are now more problems than there ever was before licensing. GFL getting rid of it now. Government never gets rid of any programs, they just expand them. Only thing keeping things in check is lack of money in the State. Too bad, this was a great profession before it started getting “regulated” by people who can’t even tell you what it is or does.
Confused, you say a person can be on the board with no Home Inspection experience in #3. So the number of years and the number of Home Inspections is self defeating? Please name a “guru” who hasn’t been on the job in a long time. I know of none.
Then in #5 you want damn near a PhD.
So is 10 years as Home Inspector good? What if they did no inspections in those years? I know people who have a home inspctors license and have never completed a single home inspection and still have the license.
How do we verify the number of years? How do we know who went on the inspections and who didn’t? Who verifies this? Then GC is considered experience, what about RC? I know a TON of GC’s who never step foot on a job and their supers do everything.
Just a confusing post and I typically agree with most that you say, but people claim all kinds of stuff. Number of years, number of inspections, it goes on and on…I have a guy in my area that has since 1974 on his site. What does that mean? Was he born in 1974? Did he turn 18 in 1974? There are no verified records of him owning a business since 1974. So people just say what they want. Just like you said the self proclaimed gurus that have not done an inspection in a long time. Can you please provide names, I know of none and all the owners are in the field even as multi inspectors firms.
You are dead wrong on that one, on many occasions other orgs have quoted messages from here. If you think they do not read our messages you are crazy. That is one reason I asked for a private Fl section. We had to make our own.
Many other orgs covet our message board on classes, why do you think Nachi is the biggest. I have even talked to many about joining our org.
Confused, you say a person can be on the board with no Home Inspection experience in #3. So the number of years and the number of Home Inspections is self defeating? Please name a “guru” who hasn’t been on the job in a long time. I know of none.
I don’t necessarily mean “no home inspection experience”. they would have to have some to meet licensing, don’t they? They do the 3 class inspections! I know of two “gurus” who only go on an inspection to update videos. The point, Russell, is the board needs professionals who recognize the business interests, the educational issues and the long term interests of the profession more than someone who claims 50,000 inspections. That person obviously has a lot to offer and I respect that but that should not be the primary qualifying criteria. We need someone who can focus on improving the quality of the profession more than someone who is a proven inspector/marketer at this point.
Education. I am not implying only a GC would qualify - it is an example. If you notice, almost every single “trade” profession from appraisers, project managers, purchasing agents, x ray techs and on and on, have significantly increased education requirements to attract people who can at least read and to control the mass infusion of new practictioners in order to protect the salary range of the profession. Chiropractors and dental hygienists are a great example. There are many ways to look at this but increasing quality of new entrants should have been done prior to the licensing law and that little oversight is borne by those who wrote the licensure law - what were they thinking?
anybody can read the nachi board and anybody can say what they want. from my experience, I have not spoken to one FABI or ASHI member who speaks highly of Internachi and almost without fail, they all reference the arguments found on the mb and how they think it is damaging the profession - and they all mention The Meeker. Mike, you are famous.
No matter what I say, Russell and John will find an argument and that is fine.
I find argument? I sent every single word you said about the SOP to the lobbyist and the board. I think most of the time your spot on. Just because we disagree does not mean I find no value in what you say.
Want to know why the standards are so low? Look from within and you will find the answers. This is a no win situation. Those who want high standards and looked at as trying to “minimize” the competition. Those who want no experience are looked at as those who could care less about quality and the consumer.
Hence that is why I put stuff on this board to see what the “majority” of people want. Usually it’s only about 15 people who speak up. But of that is all I have, then so be it.