Yes, you are correct…I have been forewarned and I will refrain from any further references to such. :mrgreen:
Funny… the highest attendance at my classes come from licensed states and
the lowest has been in an unlicensed state. It really means nothing, but
I know that already.
Nick and I have asked you to provide solutions, but so far, all you keep
saying is nachi is not providing the solutions and you won’t tell us either.
Perhaps it is you who are in survival mode, not the entire industry.
John,
In the last hour and a half since you have been a vendor, I would venture to say that your very few and limited experiences have been far from indicative of what has been happening in other places.
Adding to that is the fact that the states you have been in that are licensed states…also require CEUs, do they not? Re-read my post and understand my frustration with your continuous irrelevant responses.
I have no duty to provide you with anything. Nick has asked for and has been provided what I propose as a solution. It is nothing that is within NACHI or ASHI’s ability to provide. If we see it at all, it will come from an association that does not exist today.
The licensing issue does not cause successful inspectors to fail. I just
don’t buy it. Too many thousands prosper in licensed states. Here
is a newbie that does… http://www.nachi.tv/episode11
Only the inspector can break the immoral temptation to write soft
reports for the realtor. It is an individual choice.
Only the inspector can raise his fees. BTW… one of the reasons
so many fail, is because it is so easy to get started. ‘Easy in’ makes
for many who will be ‘easy out’. They try it for a while and then
they try something else.
When it is too hard to approach inspecting on a casual basis, then
you will see less failures.
Not true in Illinois.
The State HO board approves courses, but also adjudicates the HI law discipline actions (in truth, the board adjudicates and sends their recommendation to the Director, who rules and sets the fine, but the Director very rarely over rides the board’s recommendation).
As to changing the law.
Most states, like Illinois, have a administrative rules board (in Illinois, it is called JCAR. Joint Commission on Administrative Rules). These commissions take the recommendations from the HI board, after the Director has seen them, and go over them for changes. There are currently changes, for Illinois, that are in the pipeline for higher CE requirements, more pre-licensing requirements and a lot of other stuff. Could this also include, say, a requirement for E&O or some such? Sure.
But I do not see the problem. I cannot think of any decent HI (ethical and professional) that would not already have E&O.
If we see ourselves as a profession, and not just a trade, then we must accept the responsibility (fiduciary) that professionals have.
Doctors, Lawyers, SEs, Architects all have E&O. Why not home inspectors? I tell my clients that, since my primary job is to protect them from liability, my first duty is to ensure that protection by protecting them from any liability that my mistakes would place on them.
Just my thoughts.
Good thoughts.
BTW, Illinois really, really, really, needs to up their CE requirements. IL is almost as bad as AZ.
And while we’re on the subject of Illinois CEs and getting state approvals… http://www.nachi.org/moreillinoislicenses.htm 
Look, before a lot of guys start slamming me, I am not saying that E&O should be a requirement or anything. I just see it as a good business practice and something that any real professional would have to better serve their client’s interest.
Our state HI board is very professional, balanced and fair. The new CE requirement wil, most proably, 18 hrs per two year license, with 12 “basic” (i.e., plumbing, electric, roof, etc) and 6 “elective” (i.e., thermal, green, mold, radon, etc.) They will also start requireing X number (between 5 and 10, not yet set) “inspection events” (less than a full inspection but more than a ride along) for licensing.
That is iNACHI’s next challange. Providing these “events” to new guys at a fair and low price rather than have them ripped off by some of the predators around here. One company charges the new guys $1000 for 10 ride alongs. That is just obsene!
And, I know, Nick. I wrote a lot of them, remember? :mrgreen:
Will has done a huge amount of labor for the CE needs of inspectors. Thanks.
Is there a precise definition of what is considered an “event”?
We need State CE’s Nick, like the Federals need Badges. 
Most CEU’s are lame. 
:mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:
Will -
I think Jim B. / myself / Paul Sabados all respect your thoughts. Please however understand that what 1 state may require, others don’t…
NOW - in Kansas and Missouiri there is no mandatory state wide licensure of builders or contractors; there is no mandatory state wide building codes; we don’t have mandated code inspections in 3/4 of the state; my attorney and doctor carrry E & O **OR **mal-practice as a business practice - not because the state laws require it (they don’t); engineers, appraisers, realtors, lead paint inspectors, septic inspectors, asbestos inspectors, etc, etc ARE NOT required to carry E & O for their license in OUR STATE.
Therefore, our thoughts** ARE simple**, if they don’t why should we.
Nick,
Sorry I’m getting into this thing a bit late. You wrote:
Ummm… Depending on the power given to the board by statute, they may be able to change the law considerably. Your statement is, in fact, not accurate.
This is the fear.
Illinois doesn’t license or require those either. As for as mal-practice insurance, the doctors are leaving Illinois in record numbers thanks to all of the lawsuits, especially in certain counties such as Madison and Cook, which have become known as judicial hell-holes.
How could it be possible to require Home Inspectors to be licensed then?
It will be just a matter of time before the feds move in on this one. Too much variance in laws between states. Just because you are a member of the state bar does not make you a good lawyer. Just because you have a driver’s license does not make you a good driver. Just because you are a certified/licensed electrician does not make you a good electrician. Home inspection licensing is, and will be, the same. There will always be good inspectors, and some not. Does not make any difference. Realtors know this. They want the licensing so they can hire newer, uneducated inspectors to get them to approve the sale. AND, the realtors can, and will, perform their own inspections, for free, and not under state law. Then, licensing will not matter. There will no be inspectors to license. Everyone should read the whole bill. E&O will increase, due to the fact that you cannot find any under $100k. They will raise it anyway. Board members will not matter. In the end, the realtors will only keep the inspectors they want. And, most will be realtors, engineers, or modular salesmen, who will not be governed by the law. Everyone on this thread is right. And wrong. Licensing is not needed. E&O is only needed if the inspector is scared, and uneducated. The consumer can sue here in Kansas for any reason anyway. No matter. I figure I am out of business in a month or two, when realtors and engineers perform all of the inspections anyway. I have performed thousands of inspections over 8 years, and never been to court. You have to be business educated, repair educated, mechanically and business inclined. If you have never replaced a roof, electrical outlet, hot water heater, poured concrete, framed a home, fixed a leaking faucet, cannot talk to people and communicate, etc., get out now.
Again, my position is that a board can’t change a law. The law may have given a board latitude to adopt or modify its rules, approve or not approve CE, or investigate consumer complaints, but that isn’t changing the law, that’s housekeeping. And that isn’t my point. My point was that none of the decisions a board makes can be designed to harm some inspectors and not others. These rule changes you’re worried about may be harmful, but the harm will be applied to all inspectors equally.
Anyway, Kansas hasn’t changed my anti position on licensing, but if you have to have a licensing law… one that permits inspectors to limit their liability to $10,001 and prohibits suits after a year seems like a law you should be pretty pleased with… that is the law… and no, the board can’t change that.
Nick,
When am I going to see NACHI listed on this site as a continuing education provider??