Maybe I should have said that the 3 complaints that I am talking about were complaints that were heard at a government level.
Ray is right there is probably more that are dealt with before they reach the highest level. This is business and it is good to see that some people realize their mistakes and pay for them up front and end the story. I honestly do not have a problem with this because we are human and make mistakes. The difference is can we admit it and deal with it or not.
Again the stat I heard was for Alberta. The numbers may be different for Ontario. Keep in mind that the Alberta Government has located 186 HI business in Alberta. I do not know the number in Ontario. If you know some stats maybe the percentage is the same???
The split of membership is as follows: (not sure when numbers where complied maybe 2003)
Ø Ontario: 525 members 51% (Ontario is at 793 total members as of today)
Ø BC: 253 members 24%
Ø Quebec: 123 members 12%
Ø Alberta 70 members 7%
Ø Atlantic: 35 members 3%
Ø Saskatchewan: 20 members 2%
Ø Manitoba: 11 members 1%
Licensing does not raise a bar. It lowers the bar.
A common argument for licensing says “Well, all it takes now to be a home inspector is a business card”.
That’s kind of true, but not really true, for it takes convincing people that you are capable …and then get them to invest actual dollars in you…to be ins business as a home inspector. To do this, you must be able to demonstrate that you have whatever your competitive market requires.
But licensing takes that away. In a licensed state, all inspectors are considered to be equally competent and qualified. Whatever competitive edge you presently market as an advantage to someone hiring you is immediately lost in the eye of a consumer who is led to believe that all who have a license have what is necessary to provide them with a good home inspection. From there, it is “Who can provide this inspection for the lowest fee?”.
Today, it is almost impossible for a boy in his twenties to get work as a home inspector in an unlicensed state…but when a license requires that he pass a test, obtain “X” number of hours of training, pay “x” number of dollars to the state…the boy instantly becomes as much of a man as all the others in the state holding the same license.
And as the study that was done by the Ohio Real Estate Commission showed, licensing was a “dumbing down” of inspectors in states that adopted it.
Was it because of the immediate increase in inspectors that some deny even happens, or some other reason, the average number of inspections per inspector is considerably lower for inspectors in licensed states than unlicensed states.
In a very unscientific NACHI poll it was shown that, in states that are liecensed…32% of them (almost a third) were “unhappy with the law”. (53 were okay with it, 17 were not).
Of those in unlicensed states, twice as many - 64% -said they prefer no licensing laws in their state.(35 were against a law and 20 were in favor).
As I stated in my first post, a careful study of the transition of the profession in those states adopting licensing laws would probably convince the majority of people who presently favor it to change their minds.
Those having an agenda…that being the sellers (or teachers) of HI education that would use the law to mandate a class full of students…will feel differently. So would the brand new inspector who would see how a license would immediately increase his stature among his competitors.
The remaining home inspectors…those who would see the competitive edge they have built and marketed for themselves…diminish to nothing the day the law was signed, would be sorry.
Some will be happy at first, thinking a “raised bar” would thin out the herd…until they saw the stampede after stampede running out the doors of HI schools, waving their licenses and their $125 specials.
It’s just a bad idea…a bad idea with a clearly marked history, for anyone willing to take the time to study it.
Licensing is the wrong thing to do. It solves nothing.
It solves the fact that self regulation has not worked within Canada. There are just too many horror stories and the various associations have had the opportunity to clean up their acts but have failed to do so. The only recourse is licencing.
As to pricing and competitive edge I don’t believe it. If that were the case electricians and plumbers and hair dressers would be in the unemployment lines.
I fail to see where you draw your conclusion home inspectors fees would drop if licenced. Can you point to a source? Entry requirements would hinder entry keeping prices high.
I’ve never seen this addressed in any Canadian discussion for licensing (provincial or national), so I will share it.
You may or may not be aware that the United States has national standards for home inspectors…at least, for those who inspect for certain government loans.
HUD is a good example. You need to attend a five day class, pass a test and have conducted 150 or so inspections. That’s it. And here is the kicker. When the government wants a building inspected, it is put out for bid to the lowest bidding approved inspector.
That is the most dramatic example as to how a government standard holds down fees.
The second government inspection standard comes through USDA who will allow a state to set the criteria. In Missouri, an inspector belonging to ASHI or NACHI is eligible to do an inspection for the USDA Rural Development Program.
There is a four page (two pages front and back) checklist. The checklist mainly focuses on environmental issues (insulation, weatherstripping, etc).
There are no lower bars established…and no fees too low…than for those who participate in these programs.
Fight licensing like you would fight communism. Both have the same potential effect upon you, financially.
Don’t seem to have that problem here, Ray. With such a small # of members and not much money in the pot, it’s hard to steal or hide much (or anything). I’m not into the inner circles here but am more of a critic at the edges pushing for better training, more stringent standards, better control and knowledge of what’s really going on in the field with complaints/lawsuits/settlements, etc.
I don’t think people should get too excited about BC licensing at this stage because the political process has not moved very far compared to Alberta which will probably be the first province to establish licensing for home inspectors, and they will be lucky if they manage it by the end of this year.
One thing people can do is stay in touch with what is going on and write to your member of parliament, to make sure that they include you in the consultation process.
Also, as I mentioned in an earlier post, the National Occupational Standards has just been re-written in draft form and you will have the opportunity to assess the baseline that is outlined in this document. It is likely that licensing will at the very least use this document as a reference, even if they don’t adopt all of the ideas.
If you don’t like licensing, then find reasons to back up your stance and let the politicians know. If you do like the idea, find reasons to back up your stance and let the politicians know.
Whatever you do, don’t do nothing.
The more noise made by those in the profession, the more attention will be given by the law makers.
Thats what I have found in my area. For example I know hair dressers who are licenced and work for good salons or own their own salons make a nice salary and are not unionized.
I know well drillers who must be licenced and do not belong to any unions and make a good living. Ditto licenced well techs.
I also believe that electricians who operate their own businesses do not belong to unions, but stand to be corrected on that. They make an excellent wage. I also know some electricians who work more than others because of their reputation and reliability and honesty.
Exactly! Its also an excellent opportunity to seek limits of liability, which you cannot get through self regulating bodies. You can only get that limitation through legislation.
Exactly! Its also an excellent opportunity to seek limits of liability, which you cannot get through self regulating bodies. You can only get that limitation through legislation.
