At one time we here in Florida (2004) an HI licensing bill was proposed containing the following language.
This clause would have made frivolous lawsuits commonplace because under the unfair trade practice language you would be able to sue for a dollar, and if successful you would then be able to collect all the fees expended to win that dollar, which could in fact be hundreds of thousands of dollars. Thankfully this bill never saw the light of day and was dismissed out of hand.
Joe,
Nice post, and you’re correct. Sometimes, even the most innocent of language in a bill can be interpreted and administrated in ways never intended.
I know you have a strong lobby in Florida that continues to fight for a bill, Joe. I hope that the opposition remains strong and that they can be as inspired by their 15 years of continued success as others are.
Last year was a very close call.
The 2005 bill came really close, required a veto from the Governor. In 2006 most home inspectors and HI associations were united against the bill even if it were for opposing reasons. That bill was so poorly written that no one could get behind it.
2005 set the tone for future licensing considerations and it is something that will have to change for HI licensing to become viable again.
It is an election year, the three government players that influenced HI licensing in the past are…
Senator Nancy Argenziano (Not in my district)
Senator Tom Lee (Not running for Senate re-election, running for State CFO)
Representative Bob Allen (Not in my district)
We will have to see what 2007 brings, but I don’t see anything being pushed by home inspector associations, the downturn in the housing market looks to decimate our profession more then any licensing bill ever could. Things have dramatically changed between 2005 & now, the builders inspectors & Realtors have all switched over to survival mode leaving limited funds for political influence.
Isn’t that the truth!
It doesn’t matter if it’s removed or not. They throw about when you get court.
State regulation does not dictate the type of report or what will be said in the report. There is a minimum of what will be said in the report describing construction details and how inspections were conducted, however a licensed home inspector is free to exceed any state home inspection sop. So who is controlling your freedom of speech here? I am sure some folks would like to control what we say, however the home inspection law doesn’t do that for them, though that might be their intention for supporting such legislation.
I don’t believe inspectors see it as limiting competition. I do however see a lot of home inspectors that are irate from non licensed home inspection companies operating in their area without following the law (most likely resulting in under priced home inspection fees because they do not have to deal with the overhead costs of license inspectors). And I’m sure that they feel because these individuals do not comply with accepted standards that they are most likely conducting their business in an unprofessional and unqualified way (which hurts the overall home inspection industry of the area).
I feel that most home inspectors that feel strongly against home inspection legislation are more focused on the fact of the state governing their daily lives and the loss of their personal freedoms. This is a viable concern and warrants continued monitoring.
So far this poll seems to elect the response “sets a minimum standard”.
The one positive thing that state legislation appears to do to help a home inspector is set a minimum standard. In the past I have been sued for saving the lives of a family with two small children from an electrical fire which occurred during a Re-Inspection where initial electrical deficiencies were not repaired. I was also was listed as being a racist towards that family in the same lawsuit! At the time there was no licensing in place. Another home inspector came in and said what I should have done! The listing agent was a lawyer! The results of the lawsuit is up to the perception of the jury. As there is no standard, they can make up their own as they go along, based on interpretation of 12 members of society. If that lawsuit originated today, the standard of practice is law. If there are no elements of proof indicating the law was not followed, there is no case. So, even though I don’t like to be told what to do by the state, like many of you out there, I hopefully see some protection to the home inspection community from the existing legislation. By the way, the limitation of liability clause in the inspection agreement was thrown out in the first court session! Just because someone signs a piece of paper, does not mean you have an enforceable contract these days!
After 90 days of having a state license, I don’t really know if I would support or oppose licensing if a bill was being introduced today. Time will tell us that answer in the future, probably two years as lawsuits drag on forever! I do feel that home inspection industry as a whole is viewed as a more professional organization because it is licensed. I base this on responses from clients and Realtors. I hear a lot less from General contractors stating that a home inspector doesn’t know squat. Our home inspection licensing law eliminated general contractors from doing home inspections without a home inspection license (General contractors could conduct AHJ inspections where private home inspectors could not inspect new construction). I had numerous general contractors attempt to keep me off of their property without proof of insurance in hand (likely a ploy to avoid home inspection). They no longer make this request because state license ensures insurance compliance. I do feel more protected by the state having an sop rather than by having a limited liability clause on an inspection agreement. I do like having the option of potentially telling a client with an unwarranted complaint to contact the state with their complaint. Lodging a home inspection complaint is a mouse click away for my client. I would rather have the state with several NACHI members sitting on the board, reviewing the complaint then dealing with an unemployed lawyer trying to make a name for himself.
The one thing that didn’t come out of home inspection licensing yet is the increase in home inspection fees. This is most likely from unlicensed operatives. Our liability and expected professionalism exceeds that of real estate agents, however we do not make 6%.
Just some observations from this side of the border.
…and it also establishes, in the minds of the buying public, that the “minimum standard” (aka “licensed”) equates to proficiency. And, when in the eyes of the buyng public all other things are equal (Inspector A and Inspector B are both “licensed”, thus equally proficient), next comes finding the lowest fee.
This is the evolution now taking place in Arizona and other licensed states.
Socialism does not work.
Getting your unlicensed inspectors out of your equation will probably not result in an increase in fees. It is more likely to result in licensed Tennessee home inspectors competing against each other in lower fees instead of higher qualifications…just as it has in the other states.
Jim,
I think it is happening everywhere, regardless of licensing. There will always be new companies charging $150.00 for an inspection. When they go out of business another one will be born.
They don’t affect me, but it is sure hilarious to hear someone tell you they just got a quote for $150.00 and don’t know why, wondering what we charge.
At least with licensing each individual has a minimum standard to follow. Kind of like the IRC, build it to the minimum standard or have someone custom build it using premium craftsman.
A situation similar to licensing is going on in St. Louis among those who market through real estate salespeople.
In St. Louis, a real estate agent will only refer an ASHI member. To get on the list, you gotta be ASHI.
Now, the list of ASHI members, to get the client, must underbid each other.
You can get a home inspection in St. Louis for $150 or less if you hire an ASHI inspector.
The agents love it. The clients love it. It cracks me up. In one small St. Louis suburb, there is a Director of Public Works who will tell you that an inspection by a NACHI inspector may cost a bit more than an ASHI inspector, but no one is complaining. How’s that for poetic justice?
Just like this list published by real estate agents, licensing becomes the great equalizer. Since they are all licensed and equally qualified, pick the cheapest one.
Sounds like a good state for not marketing to Realtors.
In Arizona, I have found just the opposite though.
Members of NACHI are the low-ballers here.
Here and elsewhere on this message board, several well meaning people have argued the need for minimum basic standards as offering some kind of remedy for existing problems or as protection, of some sort, for consumers of our product.
Many actually believe this - while several who publicly state this argue, behind the scenes, that they see a license more as something they can effectively and easily take away than make difficult to earn.
In reality, the basic minimum standards are already in place…as established by the market…who recognizes the value of an inspector who is accountable to an association for testing, continued education, ethics, SOP, etc. Inspectors who do not adhere to these minimum basic standards that are already there rarely perform home inspections, anyway, and are soon to be excreted by the market without any need for laws or further socialization of the profession.
Just for clarification, minimum standard that I’m referring to is not a performance standard between home inspectors. It is a standard the general public can expect to receive from all home inspectors. Basically it is the NACHI or in my case ASHI standard practice. It appears that our state has adopted, but does not mention its origination “AHSI” as the standing operating procedure.
In other words, it informs the public what a home inspector must inspect and what a home inspector is not expected to address (such as latent deficiencies hidden behind walls, below personal property which is not required to be moved, behind panels that must be dismantled for access) etc.
I see you have started another thread James.
The an itinerary you are working on today?
Good luck with whatever it is! 
It is probably a good subject to discuss. I think there is a lot of misinformation or should I say misinterpretation out there.
At this point in our states licensing, I simply see it as a mandatory sop which has been a voluntary thing for most of us for many years.
When have you ever heard the “general public” being involved with or otherwise having anything to do with home inspection legislation? The “general public” could care less.
In fact, in the interest of the 'general public", last year the governor of Florida vetoed a home inspection law that had been pushed by home inspectors.
If the “general public” knew that increased inspection fees (although, they are seldom realized) and decreased competition is the driving force behind the majority of these efforts…they would be lobbying against every home inspection bill there is pending, and working to repeal the laws where they are presently in effect.
In fact, I plan to work closely with my own contacts with the media in my state to alert them to the fact that greed is what is behind an attempt at licensing and let the media launch their own crusade against it. It should be fun to watch.
James this is the truth the way I see it,
We have a self appointed group here In Canada who are trying to pull of this scam .
Many home inspectors can see thought it but they did manage to get some Government money from the previous Government.
They have lined up a large group of home Inspectors all from the Canadian Association This association is about 10% ± of the Canadian HIs
NACHI and the Independents make up 90 ±%.
I and others have tried to get information from This secret society and they refuse , their answer is trust us well I tried that and when I was a member found out that we ( The members ) could never find out how the Association
money was being spent.
Roy Cooke . Royshomeinspection.com