I don’t know Jim, your pretty sharp. I think you’re disagreeing for the sake of a discussion…
If we sit on our cans and do nothing it has a better chance of becoming law than if we work towards not having the state putting its hands where it should not be.
The FCC regulated the two way radio profession for years. I know because that is how I raised two kids. It took years to show them that they were wrong and to get them to deregulate. If they had not had deregulated your cell phone performance would be that of tin can and a string
Regulation is not needed.
No amount of required schooling will protect the client from a problem that does not exist. And no amount of schooling will stop a bad inspector
All you people in areas that are regulated - can you show that the quality of inspections is up in comparison to areas that are not regulated??
When the above can be shown then I will think about regulation.
And if insurance is required and the insurance co’s will give a discount for education and testing then we will have something
Until then lets not see unregulated areas make the same mistakes that the regulated ones have
rlb
Licensing makes us equal only at the State level. Being, we all have a license which requires the minimum.
As any profession, marketing separates those who buy a Lexus rather than a Toyota.
What potential client is going to base the decision on who will inspect his house solely on the fact that a State License is held?
A simple question, like “how long have you been doing this?” will begin to set inspectors apart.
I think that your phone skills have a greater bearing on if you are hired than about anything. Do you “sound” like you know what your doing?
I think I posted this in the past, but when you go to the doctor, how many of us look at the license and collage degree hanging on the office wall? We ASSUME (due to the State Regulation) that anyone who says they are a medical doctor have been screened and are monitored by the state. We base our decision on which doc by another whole set of standards.
It works in theory, that “we are now all equal” and that “the bar is being lowered” but I don’t think it is “Reality”.
Are there bad Doctors working out there? Sure!
Will licensing prevent any of us from doing a bad job? I think not.
As for the number of competing Inspectors before and after licensing, how can we state if the growth rate is from licensing? We don’t know how the rate would have been if there was no licensing. I sounds to me that there is an increasing growth rate across the board in states with or without a license requirement.
I would agree that someone considering going into the HI field would be more inclined to enter a licensed field than one without. It is most likely for the same reasons that a client would hire a licensed over an unlicensed inspector.
Licensed Inspectors would be expected to demand higher fees, therefore unlicensed clandestine Inspectors would be the clients choice when shopping by price. How many unlicensed contractors (handyman) are out there working and offering lower price for the same work? They are handy men working on the homeowners “license”, not general contractors. However, HI licensing is not demanding higher fees because we are all in the same boat now. No one can be a “handyman” Inspector, so we just lowball each other. So, expecting our fees to go up just because we are now licensed is preposterous. We still have so many Inspectors out there that want to remain as “Generalists” instead of “experts” of the field.
So in effect you guys are correct in assuming that Licensing “Lowers the bar”, “Lowers our pricing”, “Increases enrolment of new Inspectors” therefore increasing competition, and does not protect the consumer. This is because many of us are on the forefront of this licensing movement and have to deal with the past, present and future of the industry. Change is not going to be automatic for us. It will take time to work out. We have to change the perspective of our clients to accept that HI’s are professionals that earn their fees.
Many of the seasoned Inspectors here are overqualified for the position of “Licensed Home Inspector”. We feel slighted because the State is opening the door to Inspectors with less experience. Many of the existing new and less experienced Inspectors feel slighted because the bar may be raised too high and may put them out of work. So what is licensing to do? Where is the bar to be placed? What side of the bar you are on will dictate your answer.
Most Inspectors that oppose regulation are under qualified, but there are several that just don’t want to be “controlled”. Both have good reasons.
Most Inspectors that are for licensing, have a license or have had licenses required of them in their past lives.
There is crappy state legislation out there with crappy people behind it.
It is our responsibility to insure that licensing, which will reach us all at some time, is not influenced by this crappy stuff. This is where our efforts and resourced should be, not just opposing for the sake of opposition.
Nick appears to be against legislation, but has founded NACHI which is a form of regulation. We all must take a test ect… Is NACHI good, is Licensing good?
Nick is setting a new standard for Home Inspection, as should we.
In time, things will reach equilibrium. The old HI’s will take up fishing and go away! The new HI’s will begin to find a level playing field. You can not expect a HI that has 20 yrs in a trade to lower himself and you can’t expect a new inspector to match a 20 year veteran. This is the basis of this conflict.
But, through natural nutrition the field will become leveled and will slowly stabilize. As with all “self-employment” newcomers will come and go. To expect legislation to drastically change or alter the HI Industry one way or another is delusional. A HI Law that does less, will do more in less time. As with any change, initially there will be those that will be drastically effected from both extremes. By “lowering the bar”, this gives the field a chance to slowly stabilize. We should be considering the important issues at hand. This is what NACHI is doing through all of us today, to set the Standard.
Some of us have been licensed and felt nothing more than the additional fee charged by the state. This is an example of a Good Law. What do these laws read like? The Code of Ethics and Standards of Practice that many of us have been using for years. Added, is a governing body that can take action against the offender to defend an injured party of the general population (gives thoes outside of the industry a warm and fuzzy feeling).
From my perspective, I feel that if the state acts responsibly and is properly funded to hear and investigate complaints against HI’s, the HI is gaining an arbitrator. I find that the most complaints from clients originate from “failure to read”. First, is filing a complaint without understanding the “Standards of practice” that were used in conducting the inspection. They expect more than they are entitled to. Second, interpretation of the Inspection Report (because they didn’t read it) is incorrect or overlooked. If I receive a complaint, I reiterate the Standards, Inspection Contract, and Report. If they still don’t get it, they have the option to go to the State who will, hopefully arbitrate the issues. Will this not reduce the number of claims against E&O Ins? Does this not set a Standard for all to follow? I get crap from lawyers that is so far out from what the (former) accepted Standards of Practice is, it is evident that they can’t read either. I am hoping the folks at the State will help them better understand what we do and what is expected of us. This remains to be seen, but I am hopeful.
All NACHI members reading this have agreed to perform to the “Standards”. If the State Law is those Standards, does this not effect us at all? Is it not better that all newcomers are required to accept these Standards rather than Hope they will do it voluntarily?
As we all get on the same sheet of music (all states are licenced), we can then expect our insurance rates to change in our favor. Insurance companies are National and look at us all as a whole.
NACHI is doing this as we speek!
As Members , we are afforded opertunities as someone is showing them that we are self regulating and are a better risk group.
Licensing makes us equal only at the State level. Being, we all have a license which requires the minimum.
As any profession, marketing separates those who buy a Lexus rather than a Toyota.
What potential client is going to base the decision on who will inspect his house solely on the fact that a State License is held?
A simple question, like “how long have you been doing this?” will begin to set inspectors apart.
I think that your phone skills have a greater bearing on if you are hired than about anything. Do you “sound” like you know what your doing?
I think I posted this in the past, but when you go to the doctor, how many of us look at the license and collage degree hanging on the office wall? We ASSUME (due to the State Regulation) that anyone who says they are a medical doctor have been screened and are monitored by the state. We base our decision on which doc by another whole set of standards.
It works in theory, that “we are now all equal” and that “the bar is being lowered” but I don’t think it is “Reality”.
Are there bad Doctors working out there? Sure!
Will licensing prevent any of us from doing a bad job? I think not.
As for the number of competing Inspectors before and after licensing, how can we state if the growth rate is from licensing? We don’t know how the rate would have been if there was no licensing. I sounds to me that there is an increasing growth rate across the board in states with or without a license requirement.
I would agree that someone considering going into the HI field would be more inclined to enter a licensed field than one without. It is most likely for the same reasons that a client would hire a licensed over an unlicensed inspector.
Licensed Inspectors would be expected to demand higher fees, therefore unlicensed clandestine Inspectors would be the clients choice when shopping by price. How many unlicensed contractors (handyman) are out there working and offering lower price for the same work? They are handy men working on the homeowners “license”, not general contractors. However, HI licensing is not demanding higher fees because we are all in the same boat now. No one can be a “handyman” Inspector, so we just lowball each other. So, expecting our fees to go up just because we are now licensed is preposterous. We still have so many Inspectors out there that want to remain as “Generalists” instead of “experts” of the field.
So in effect you guys are correct in assuming that Licensing “Lowers the bar”, “Lowers our pricing”, “Increases enrolment of new Inspectors” therefore increasing competition, and does not protect the consumer. This is because many of us are on the forefront of this licensing movement and have to deal with the past, present and future of the industry. Change is not going to be automatic for us. It will take time to work out. We have to change the perspective of our clients to accept that HI’s are professionals that earn their fees.
Many of the seasoned Inspectors here are overqualified for the position of “Licensed Home Inspector”. We feel slighted because the State is opening the door to Inspectors with less experience. Many of the existing new and less experienced Inspectors feel slighted because the bar may be raised too high and may put them out of work. So what is licensing to do? Where is the bar to be placed? What side of the bar you are on will dictate your answer.
Most Inspectors that oppose regulation are under qualified, but there are several that just don’t want to be “controlled”. Both have good reasons.
Most Inspectors that are for licensing, have a license or have had licenses required of them in their past lives.
There is crappy state legislation out there with crappy people behind it.
It is our responsibility to insure that licensing, which will reach us all at some time, is not influenced by this crappy stuff. This is where our efforts and resourced should be, not just opposing for the sake of opposition.
Nick appears to be against legislation, but has founded NACHI which is a form of regulation. We all must take a test ect… Is NACHI good, is Licensing good?
Nick is setting a new standard for Home Inspection, as should we.
In time, things will reach equilibrium. The old HI’s will take up fishing and go away! The new HI’s will begin to find a level playing field. You can not expect a HI that has 20 yrs in a trade to lower himself and you can’t expect a new inspector to match a 20 year veteran. This is the basis of this conflict.
But, through natural nutrition the field will become leveled and will slowly stabilize. As with all “self-employment” newcomers will come and go. To expect legislation to drastically change or alter the HI Industry one way or another is delusional. A HI Law that does less, will do more in less time. As with any change, initially there will be those that will be drastically effected from both extremes. By “lowering the bar”, this gives the field a chance to slowly stabilize. We should be considering the important issues at hand. This is what NACHI is doing through all of us today, to set the Standard.
Some of us have been licensed and felt nothing more than the additional fee charged by the state. This is an example of a Good Law. What do these laws read like? The Code of Ethics and Standards of Practice that many of us have been using for years. Added, is a governing body that can take action against the offender to defend an injured party of the general population (gives thoes outside of the industry a warm and fuzzy feeling).
From my perspective, I feel that if the state acts responsibly and is properly funded to hear and investigate complaints against HI’s, the HI is gaining an arbitrator. I find that the most complaints from clients originate from “failure to read”. First, is filing a complaint without understanding the “Standards of practice” that were used in conducting the inspection. They expect more than they are entitled to. Second, interpretation of the Inspection Report (because they didn’t read it) is incorrect or overlooked. If I receive a complaint, I reiterate the Standards, Inspection Contract, and Report. If they still don’t get it, they have the option to go to the State who will, hopefully arbitrate the issues. Will this not reduce the number of claims against E&O Ins? Does this not set a Standard for all to follow? I get crap from lawyers that is so far out from what the (former) accepted Standards of Practice is, it is evident that they can’t read either. I am hoping the folks at the State will help them better understand what we do and what is expected of us. This remains to be seen, but I am hopeful.
All NACHI members reading this have agreed to perform to the “Standards”. If the State Law is those Standards, does this not effect us at all? Is it not better that all newcomers are required to accept these Standards rather than Hope they will do it voluntarily?
As we all get on the same sheet of music (all states are licenced), we can then expect our insurance rates to change in our favor. Insurance companies are National and look at us all as a whole.
NACHI is doing this as we speek!
As Members , we are afforded opertunities as someone is showing them that we are self regulating and are a better risk group.
This is not an assumption. It is demonstrated, openly, in most licensed states.
Licensing solves nothing.
In my state, it requires that the SOP and COE, that you and I have agreed to follow through association with NACHI is adheired to by all entering this field.
I would say that is something.
One should not equate a voluntary association with state control through licensing.
Your membership in NACHI suffices toward that end. No license required.
That is our opinion.
That is not the opinion of all.
Thus more and more states are working towards licencing.
Stand your ground. I commend you for that. Just be sure to stand for good cause.
It seems that even within our industry, someone thinks there needs to be a standard. So how can we stand here and oppose regulation when we support self regulation? The law makers are saying it is needed and we are supporting their cause. Yes, there is a difference between self and government regulation. That is my point. But these guys are lawyers. They don’t think like that. All they see is that we are regulating ourselves and it further supports their claims that the industry must be regulated, and you know that they won’t let us do it ourselves.
I am just playing devil’s advocate here. A view from a different perspective may help your cause.
There is very little that the government has their hand in that helps or makes things work better.
There is inevitably going to be some bad to come of it all. But don’t look at just all the bad, it may save your skin someday.
On this we mostly agree except I might change “very little” to “nothing”.
Let’s avoid that inevitability then.
How would it “save my skin”?
I have read one particular bill that is presently being considered in a northern state that, if approved, would actually limit the inspector’s liability for an inspection to the amount of his fee.
Now, I am sure that the real estate lobbyists and the trial lawyer lobbyists will empty both barrels on this in committee and it hardly has a chance of ever seeing the light of day…but is serves as an example of “how”. At least in the “drafting” stage.
As is often the case, this bill is unlikely to find its way to the floor for a vote in a recognizable form. Those who drafted it and pushed it may very well be, just like those in Florida last year, leading the attack to have it defeated.
Nice thought but in Wisconsin we are specifically not allowed to limit our liability in this manner in our PIA.
IMHO anytime licensing comes to a state a limitation of liabilityclause should be part of ANY licensing bill but the lawyers and realtors just don’t seem to like that. What a surpise!
BTW-what northern state are you refering to?
Since competition is key to maintaining quality it seems to me that the state should provide as little control as possible. To do this license only those Hi’s that meet the standards set out by the various associations. NACHI ASHI Etc. If an HI is certified by his Assoc he gets a license. The only control by the state would be to approve the associations that have high enough standards to provide competent inspectors. Competition will take care of the rest.
Todd -
I just saw something interesting in the news last week. In my area if you have been convicted of a felony, you can’t serve as a Mayor or run for an elected office until 4 years or more after the conviction.
Got to thinking about it and it occurred to me over the years I’ve seen or read about doctors, lawyers, political figures, movie stars, etc make some sort of mistake - pay for it - and then go back to their chosen profession. Is this different in your state?
That’s because it isn’t terribly constitutional to prevent someone forever from being able to support themselves and their families.
All people have the right to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness. We are guaranteed this in the Constitution.
Once a felon has paid his debt to society, then he is allowed to pursue a chosen profession and protected by the Constitution, in his quest to pursue life, liberty and happiness.
“BACKGROUND CHECKS”
I don’t care what the “Constitution” says…I would not want a convicted pedophile or rapist conducting a home inspection in the same house with my daughters in law or my Grandchildren, as ***they are usually repeat offenders. ***
There are many Clear & Documented Laws where convicted rapists and or pedophiles cannot even go near a school much less “Work in one.” Apparently common sense does come into play every now and then.
Pedophiles and rapists can go pursue their liberty and happiness somewhere else.
Frank -
You’re right. I wouldn’t want a convicted pedophile, serial killer, terrorist, or realtor in my house but I think what Wendy was referring to was the other end of the scale. If we really put our minds to it, most of us could come up with a bunch of things that people have done and made a simple or stupid mistake years ago and paid for it long ago, such as:
The “Tim the Tool Man” type, Ollie North, someone down in Tennessee that helped Uncle Buck peddle moonshine when they were in their 20’s and they’re in their 40’s today, the athlete that took steroids, the college kids that stole a car to go joy riding 18 years ago, the Vietnam War draft dodgers that would be in their 60’s today, the doctor that helped pregnant girls have an abortion 30 years ago when it was illegal in his state.
Oh, by the way - at a recent legislative meeting I attended at the state capital, one of the lady representatives told us that under our state laws if a 19 year old soldier got arrested for being with a hooker or soliciting one, they would have to register as a “sex offender” for life. That is both scary AND one of the most ridiculous things I’ve ever heard of.
If I read Wendy’s post correctly thats what I thought she was referring to.
When you commit one those crimes you should have given up your constitutional rights. Shame that will never happen, there are too many do gooder’s in this world who say they deserve a 2nd chance
My home was burglerized about 6-7 years ago. The a-holes who did it were all repeat offenders, the ‘head’ a-hole also worked as a plumbers helper. he just happened to work for the same company that repaired a broken water line in my laundry room a few months before the robbery. The only reason they were caught is because of a security camera in a pawn shop where my husbands camera equipment was sold, and another robbery victim of his, recognized him as the one on her own personal security tape.
Anyway, moral of the story… I think ALL licensed professionals should have a background check. And speaking from a victims point of view, they should not be given licenses for ANY prior convictions involving robbery, rape, assault, (sexual or otherwise) and fraud. The reason I included fraud, was because during the robbery, personal papers were taken and then sold to a ring of a-holes who sold identities to illegals. I am still seeing activity on my SS# after 6-7 years.
Oh, btw - the convicted a-holes spent less than 90 days in jail for the robberies.
So, my opinion is no second chance. The legal and justice system gives them enough second chances.
If you have been convicted of any of these crimes, you do not belong in someones home performing a ‘service’.
off my soap box now
Carl -
You talking about the Ollie North or Tim the Tool Guy type OR the pedophile?