LMAO

https://www.flrules.org/gateway/ruleno.asp?id=61-30.801

Thought so…What is he to do now?

Bless his heart

Oh boy :frowning:

Probably try again until he realizes a pattern is evolving.

If he hasn’t realized that by now, he never will.

You know what I always thought was interesting? Your position that insurance inspection legally exempt a home inspector from their standards of practice. After all, the DBPR has stated multiple times that the standards of practice were written “for the performance of home inspection services as defined in Section 468.8311(4)”. They have actually stated it 3 different times and it’s written into the Administrative Code that each approved course must have “a written statement that explains in detail how the course relates to the practice of home inspection services as defined in Section 468.8311(4), F.S” to be approved.

61-30.503 Course Approval, Prelicensure and Continuing Education.
(1) Prelicensure and continuing education courses shall be valid for purposes of the licensure and continuing education requirement only if such courses have received approval from the Home Inspection Unit before the course is offered.
(2) The department shall approve education courses for two years from the date approved when the following requirements are met:
b) The course provider shall submit to the department the following for course approval before the course is offered: an application, a detailed course outline describing the course’s content and subject matter, and a written statement that explains in detail how the course relates to the practice of home inspection services as defined in Section 468.8311(4), F.S.

“your” course has this…….so, when you stand in front of a group of home inspectors and give them legal advice on how they are exempt from the law because “you say so”, you are influencing inspectors to break the law. I didn’t submit those DC’s for me, I did it to protect home inspectors from you and your lies about the laws that pertain to their licensure. What you are teaching is false and making the profession look ridiculous, just like the Sanibel strap that doesn’t require a nail into the truss even though your new course only has pictures with a nail into the truss. You are also putting Florida families at risk by promoting the unregulated practice of the profession…STOP! You are making the profession look ridiculous AGAIN.

(4) Continuing education courses must address one or more of the eight components of a home and shall not involve the promotion or sale of any products.
(5) The following criteria shall be considered when approving continuing education courses:
(a) Previous approval by the Construction Industry Licensing Board, the Board of Professional Engineers, the Board of Architecture and Interior Design, the Building Code Administrators and Inspectors Board, or the Electrical Contractors’ Licensing Board, so long as the courses pertain to one or more of the eight components of a home;
(b) For general continuing education courses, course topics concerning home inspection services or the components of a home, including the limited visual examination of the following readily accessible installed systems and components of a home for the purpose of providing a written report of the condition of the home:

  1. The structure,
  2. Electrical system,
  3. HVAC system,
  4. Roof covering,
  5. Plumbing system,
  6. Interior components,
  7. Exterior components, and
  8. Site conditions that affect the structure.

Thanks for proving my point……have a nice day :cool:

p.s. I posted that statement to my company FB page over 2 weeks ago, it says the same thing as the declaratory statement submitted by one of your fellow inspectors who you give wind mitigation training with. You know, this one:

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Department of Business and Professional Regulation has declined to rule on the petition for declaratory statement filed by Jon D. Tremper on December 11, 2014. The following is a summary of the agency’s declination of the petition:
The petition fails to identify a particular set of circumstances about which a declaratory statement can be issued or how the petitioner is substantially affected. Moreover, the Department declines to issue a statement of general applicability or to initiate rulemaking.

His question? He asked the DBPR to excuse home inspectors from their standards of practice during the completion of insurance inspections…whoopsie…

Thank you Nick

Don’t forget this one: https://www.flrules.org/Gateway/View_notice.asp?id=15859420

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Department of Business and Professional Regulation has declined to rule on the petition for declaratory statement filed by Jon D. Tremper on December 11, 2014. The following is a summary of the agency’s declination of the petition:

The petition fails to identify a particular set of circumstances about which a declaratory statement can be issued or how the petitioner is substantially affected. Moreover, the Department declines to issue a statement of general applicability or to initiate rulemaking.

Mr. Sheppard, I understand your thought process and logic, however, for the sake of respectful discussion, to what standard of practice would a licensed contractor- or any other person performing an insurance related 4pt inspection (other than a licensed home inspector) be required to perform? To the best of my knowledge, the contractor statutes do not have any standard of practice with respect to performance based inspections. Additionally, as we currently still have a free market, an insurance company currently has the right to send anyone they want to conduct an inspection on their behalf- including a non licensed individual if they so choose. With that said, to what standard would the non licensed individual be required to report their findings? Under the current scenario, there would appear to be a level or uniform playing field as all inspectors, including licensed home inspector, contractors, and any unlicensed individuals that the insurance industry deems qualified would complete the report based on the individual insurance company’s form or standards. If that is the case, then it would appear that your endeavor would put licensed home inspectors conducting 4 pt. insurance inspections at a market disadvantage as well as requiring licensed home inspectors to be held to a higher standard. Again, I am just trying to gain an accurate understanding of the issue.

Excellent questions:

I do not know of any “non-licensed” individuals who complete these forms. That being said, if you can provide me with an example of such I will be glad to comment.

As for the other inspectors authorized to complete insurance inspections, they all have “rules” attached to their licensure. FAC 61-30 is a “rule”, just like the Florida Building Code. As such, with respect to contractors, they are required to operate at minimum to the Florida Building Code. NO EXCEPTIONS! To be clear, inspectors have rules that are adopted and enforced by the department for each license. A few of the Boards have already commented on this subject. Specifically, the FBPE (Florida Board of Professional Engineers) for Engineers stated the following about the completion of insurance inspections as a licensed Engineer:

***Then, by signing, dating and sealing the form all of the applicable practice requirements found within Florida Statutes 471 and Florida Administrative Code 61G15 come into play and must be satisfied.

Therefore, it was the opinion of the FBPE that when an engineer serving as an engineer or in an engineering capacity produces a deliverable to be filed for public record, as in the case of the Uniform Mitigation Verification Inspection Form, then that engineer will be required to sign, date and seal the form in accordance with F.A.C. 61G15-23.002. Further, it is the opinion of the FBPE that the same engineer will also be required to comply with any other applicable engineering practice requirements found in Florida Statutes 471 and Florida Administrative Code 61G15.


I think you are confusing lack of enforcement with exemption…

It is not a viable or accurate defense to state or imply that you may be excused from the requirements of your licensure simply because you don’t understand how another licensed individual will comply via their respective licensure. You are accountable to your licensure……period! What is being encouraged is illegal. Call Rick Morrison at the DBPR, ask him “can you can be excused from the legal requirements of your licensure in the court of law when completing insurance inspections?”.

Having rules attached to your licensure that you must legally follow does not hinder your ability to be competitive in an open market, it ensures it. Case in point: Home Inspectors have the advantage over every other authorized licensee to complete these forms. This is typically due to the fact that you are inspecting the home as part of the “home inspection” first. Your ability to collect data to complete the form is part of the normal inspection process.

The only way you would be non-competitive is if insurance inspections were exempt. If that were the case, anyone could do them in 15 minutes……like what’s happening now. Reducing or eliminating the requirements of licensure to complete the forms actually takes money out of your pocket by encouraging individuals to perform these inspections to no standard and essentially check a box and be done.

This is what they are teaching people to do, and it takes away any advantage home inspectors have in the industry. What you are being taught is wrong and illegal. If you happen to find yourself in a tight spot, such as a lawsuit, this will come back to haunt you and you’ll pay dearly. It would be better if they said nothing or didn’t comment, but to comment on the subject and teach licensed inspectors to perform below their legal requirements is dangerous and reckless.

At a recent workshop, it was actually stated that a certain inspection company doesn’t use “home inspectors” to imply that the information they provide insurers is accurate and (quote) “unimpeachable” because they use “contractors and building inspectors” only. What you are being taught is being used against you, this effects your ability to be competitive in an open market.

Do this: Call any licensed contractor (Electrician, Plumber, Roofer, Mechanical) and ask them to come to your home and inspect each system. They will charge between $200 and $250 just to walk in the front door. Yet how is it that a contractor will walk into your home and inspect all 4 systems and components for $65? This is what one of the largest inspection firms just negotiated with State Farm. Can you compete with that?

Now ask yourself this: Is this possible due to the standards that apply to each licensee being followed or ignored? Good question, huh? When’s the last time you saw an Engineer complete a wind mitigation and sign it? You are being lead down a road that will make you obsolete and non-competitive. And inspection companies are laughing all the way to the bank. Every advantage you have as a licensed home inspector to complete these forms is being stripped away from you.

4 weeks ago I was contacted by a major insurer. Not an underwriter, agent, or insurance office…but an actual large insurer. They saw me speak on a panel in front of insurers and asked if I would perform their 4-point and wind mitigation inspections for them in south Florida. THE ENTIRE COMPANY which represents two large insurers. The reason? They wanted information “on building code compliance in the forms”. Fast forward 3 weeks later and another insurer releases a 4-point form requiring inspection for building code compliance.

This makes you competitive and gives you an advantage over inspection companies!

Nothing I am doing will get home inspectors removed from or excluded from completing these forms. That will be done by instructors teaching inspectors the wrong information. They can’t and won’t change because it would be admitting they have been wrong all along. At this point, it’s no longer about protecting the public and more about protecting egos and pocketbooks. Thiers.

](,)](,)](,)](,)](,)](,)](,)](,)](,)](,)](,)](,)

:|.):|.):|.):|.):|.):|.):|.)

Bless his heart

As requested:

Bless his heart
Bless his heart

:mrgreen: