John Shishilla!

In December of 2014 I was elected to the Board of directors for the Florida Association of Building Inspectors, a small group of mostly home inspectors whos’ sole intent is to provide an elevated level of home inspections through continuing education and higher standard of practice. The association is small for a reason, that it represents the best inspectors in the state. Later that year I was asked to be the Legislative Chairman of the Association, something I took as an honor. The Association wished to “reconnect” with the state at various levels, including the DBPR.

We, myself and the president at the time Robert Dees, set up two appointments with Rick Morrison that got canceled. It was a little frustrating that we couldn’t meet with them for us to express our intentions. So, I took the bull by the horns and drove up to Tallahassee to stand in front of the DBPR and announce ourselves. But I didn’t have a motive, nothing to bring to the table to show that home inspectors were a vital part of the state’s construction industry and irreplaceable. This was an issue.

This is where the inachi forum comes into play. There was a post a while back about roof geometry and what is actually defined as the “roof system perimeter”. Mr. Shishilla was confusing home inspectors on how to interpret this definition with nothing that was verifiable or made sense. Why is this important? If you can’t prove through either authoritative documents or documented research why your position is correct, you are exposed liability wise. This puts them at a disadvantage and makes the profession look ridiculous.

So I out set to write a uniform manual on how to determine roof geometry based on the modeling software insurers were using. Specifically, the Touchstone® software used by Citizens and produced and updated by the AIR. This was my in. Through my contacts at the AIR, I was informed that my best chance of speaking with anyone was to attend a public meeting with the Florida Commission on Hurricane Loss Methodology. This was in August of 2015. So I drove up to meet with a gentleman named Robert Lee who was the OIR actuary. I know my document would be just thrown in the trash, but it was a chance for FABI to reconnect with people at the OIR, so I went.

I went to the meeting for 4 hours to get 2 minutes with Robert Lee, but he wasn’t really interested in anything but my knowledge on building code. Even more interested was a gentleman named Jack Nicholson who has soon since retired. He was head of the Florida hurricane Catastrophe Fund. He was deeply concerned that insurers where not properly assessing their risk when it comes to wind damage. He asked that I come back 5 days later and show how the building code wasn’t being enforced, how inspectors were not even following their standards of practice to provide insurers on when/where a structure was damaged, and what could be done to fix the situation.

I spent over $2,000.00 of my own money to do this. I went back to the Commission and showed them a presentation on how the building code wasn’t being enforced and how “inspectors” (not just home inspectors) where not providing all of the information insurers needed to properly assess their risk during the next storm. If these forms are not being used to assess risk, why wasn’t I corrected at that point? Because they are using them to assess risk. The intent of the presentation was to show that insurers were overexposed because the building code wasn’t being enforced.

Myself, as a licensed home inspector, was bringing awareness to both the state and insurers that the building code was/isn’t being enforced and that insurers were underestimating their exposure. Absolutely nothing on the fact that home inspectors should be removed from the form or that they were solely to blame. This was John’s position, not mine. My work is strictly related to building code enforcement and how it exposes insurers to underestimated risk. That’s it. Could John please show otherwise or admit that he is a liar? Everything I am doing is discoverable and public record.

I highly encourage you all to attain the transcript and minutes for the last Florida Hurricane Catastrophe Fund meeting to discover the context of my work and to who it pertains. Again, as a licensed home inspector, I was showing how insurers were exposed to underestimated losses due to the simple fact that the building code was not being enforced properly. My purpose is specific and definable, to protect the families of this state.

Everyone knows that after the storms of 2004-2005 over 13 insurers went out of business, that they underestimated their exposure and folded up shop leaving families to defend for themselves. People who had paid their premiums religiously and had been left out to dry. THIS is what happens when insurers underestimate their risk. People and families get hurt.

John Shishilla and I always had communication that was cordial and professional. He can attest to this as he approached me in June of 2015 to help inachi to set up a wind mitigation course. The reason was that I had exposed severe flaws in their course and Nick Gromicko himself wanted me to be involved. But if you ask John, he changes the reason daily as to why he asked me. I turned him down and gave reason, that if I was going to produce a course, it would be for FABI. This happened about 2 months before I went to Tallahassee in October.

In December John decided that it was time to stop communicating professionally and to try and shut me up by smearing my name. He made up lies about the intent of my work at the state level simply because I was using facts and verifiable authoritative documents to refute his positions on wind mitigation. He never once even remotely considered the information I was providing him. His only argument was that my work would affect “home inspectors’ livelihoods”. Never, not once, has John uttered the statements “to protect the public” or “for the safety of the public”. You can all check this yourself……review anything he has ever said and decide for yourself if he has the interests of the public safety or strictly his own financial benefit.

Make no mistake, as a licensed home inspector myself, how is it viable or even conscionable that I would belittle or discredit the profession to which I am licensed? Wouldn’t I discredit myself by doing so? John couldn’t handle that he was being proven wrong, he couldn’t defend his positions the way I could with verifiable information and instead took the low road to smear my name. Is this a person who represents home inspectors or himself? He has been proven wrong multiple times and even refuted by his own members.

John is a person who will lie and smear a home inspectors name simply to defend his position. He says that he cannot work with people who can’t agree, so he put together a group that only agrees with his positions so he wouldn’t be forced to defend them. Florida law 627.711(2)a is specific and states that the 1802 must include “insurance, construction, and building code representatives” in its’ production. This is Florida law! But John won’t tell us who’s in his group, it’s a secret. Does his group contain a representative of each one of the licenses listed under FSS 627.711? If not, why?

John is dangerous, he’s dangerous because he’s greedy and self-serving. He doesn’t teach because he wants to better the profession, he teaches so everyone will do it the way he does. Need proof, he smeared my name simply because I was refuting him with facts and verifiable authoritative documents. He made up lies about me and my intentions to discredit me as a home inspector. Who’s next? You? What happens when John decides you are too difficult to refute and wants to shut you up?

My work is specific and focused, that the building code is not being properly enforced and potentially exposing Florida families to unsafe conditions and insurers to underestimated risk. As a home inspector, how does this degrade or insult the profession? There is not one other individual making these claims, no other profession is as vocal or committed to bringing this information to light at the state level. I will show that the home inspection profession is a needed commodity within the state, that we have a voice and a purpose that is irreplaceable. We make a difference and we protect the families of this great state.

I’ll do so even as another inspector is smearing my name and making up lies about my intentions.

But I have questions about John and his group? Who are they? Who do they represent? Do they plan on changing how the form is produced without representation of all licensees and conflicting opinions? Are they following state law in the production of rules for a form that requires representation by all of the licensees listed as qualified to complete the form? Most important, are they producing these rules to protect the public or the inspectors who complete them? Why can’t we see them? What is the intent of these rules?

It’s been John’s position that I am the most dangerous inspector in the state even though everything I do is public record, then he creates a group in private to influence the way inspectors operate without any overview or vote. He won’t tell you who’s in the group or what they are doing. Is an individual who will fabricate lies about another home inspector because he can’t defend his positions a proper representative of the profession? Or is he influencing how inspectors will complete the form for the same selfish reasons he tried to smear my name, because he doesn’t want to hear facts that may require him to admit changes are needed?

I provide facts and verifiable information with my statements that are reinforced with authoritative documents my positions and show that it isn’t just my “opinion”, that it is a defensible position that any home inspector can use to show how they reached their conclusions. This elevates the profession and establishes us as a needed resource within the industry. We should be in control of our industry, we should be showing the state how we are a valuable and irreplaceable resource that is part of the system of checks and balances put in place to protect the public.

You will not elevate the profession by trying to protect your revenue stream, that is not how it works.

John has spread lies about me more than once, he says he can’t work with people unless they agree with his opinion. He will reduce the 1802 to nothing more than a permit verification and essentially worthless at assessing risk. At all times he has sought one agenda only, to ignore the facts and protect his personal interests at the expense of Florida families. This is dangerous for the state and dangerous for home inspectors.

When it comes to completing insurance inspection, home inspectors have an advantage. We inspect the entire home. This provides home inspectors with the opportunity to produce detailed and precise insurance documents above all others, and in less time. If you are already performing a home inspection, you already have more information than a competitor who only performs insurance inspections. This is a HUGE advantage. You lose the advantage when instructors lower the methods of completing the forms so that anyone can produce them with a 15 minute inspection. Do you wonder why insurance inspections are now going for $65…….think about it.

It’s not rocket science people, it’s just facts.

Sheppard!
Has anyone ever told you you were a narcissist!
Let me be the first! Narcissist!
Just knowing you have anything to do with FABI just turns me off.
Your credentials don’t make you a inspection God! Just a friggin’ chump!
Grow up and get off the tit ( which I’m sure you are still suckling) and talk to us like a gentleman and professionals.
You are the reason I have never joined FABI. Yep!
Grow some or just leave this board.

Respectably
Roy Lewis
1st Pro Inspection

You’re not the first.

Robert’s feelings are hurt because everybody kicked him out of the sandbox.-(-(

What happened to sticks and stones Robert???

I think it’s important to clear the air, to get everything out in the open truthfully and with all details

Sean, you were curious as to what and why I was going to Tallahassee. You were also inquisitive on why nobody seemed to know what I was doing or who I was speaking with. There was a reason for this. When the FABI board approved John’s membership it was agreed by the entire Board shortly after that I would work to get home inspectors a Board at the state level. But the entire Board, including the current leadership, agreed that John Shishilla should not know our intentions. It was even stated that the membership shouldn’t be notified to keep John out of the loop.

This is why the only way I would discuss what I was doing was at the FABI meeting. The Board didn’t trust John and didn’t want any part of him representing FABI at any level. So I kept that promise…even while john was smearing my name. He had no knowledge of this, but he can certainly verify it this weekend at FABI. Things are never what they appear to be, and I keep my promises to the Board and FABI, even when I’m being attacked.

Well the respect level for FABI just dropped down around my ankles.

Just curious, why do you and/or FABI feel the need to establish a “Board” for home inspectors at the state level? Additionally, if you don’t mind answering, who would serve on this board and how would these board members be selected?

He is not representative of Fabia or most of its members. I have found some great inspectors there and some good friends. I encourage every Florida inspector to attend their conferences. Pay attention to the education there are some really great classes.

Robert are your reports this complicated ?

Hey Bob,you missed one.:wink:

:mrgreen:

Reminds of a song you sang in that TV show …“Troll Toll”

Licensing solves nothing, who knew? :roll:

:mrgreen:

Slander can prove be a very expensive hobby.

Can anyone "in the know " answer the above for us regular guys/licensees?

just an fyi.
Spoken is Slander
Written, as in a newspaper/magazine or a post on a message board is Libel

As most issues in life &business if you really want to know the real issues you need to learn to do one thing: "FOLLOW THE MONEY ! "