Originally Posted By: khamilton
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
OK, I just sent the following to my state representative in Harrisburg:
***************
Dear Mr. Maitland,
Thank you for taking the time to read this. I wanted to speak with you in person, but since the Legislature is currently in session, I was afraid of the delay. After you are up to speed on the subject, I would be happy to talk with you, if you wish.
As you know, there has never been a governing body overseeing the Home Inspection industry in PA. The current Senate Bill #928 addresses this issue:
<http://www2.legis.state.pa.us/wu01/li/bi/bt/2003/0/sb0928p1209.pdf>
Up until the last 2-3 years, the two main Home Inspection professional associations, ASHI (American Society of Home Inspectors) and NAHI (National Association of Home Inspectors) have enjoyed a bit of a monopoly on the home inspection (HI) industry. ASHI in particular has become the 800 lb gorilla of the group, spending a great deal of time and money lobbying to arrogantly establish themselves as the definitive authority on the subject of HI.
Since they were the main game in town, they were able to establish HI ?doctrine? and guidelines around the country. Because of this effort in promoting themselves as the HI ?experts?, many locales simply adopted ASHI?s standards outright, or used them as a basis for developing their own. In fact, many of the proposed provisions in Bill 928 are, not-surprisingly, similar to ASHI?s standards which were drawn up over the years to: A) Make it extremely difficult for new inspectors to start a new business and B) to generate income for the association.
For example, for someone attempting to become certified in one of these organizations there are fees to study for the test, fees to apply to take the test, and fees to take the test. Then once the test is passed, the ?candidate? still is not authorized to perform HI until participating in the association's ?mentoring? program, where the candidate must pay additional fees to accompany a ?full? member on 250 field inspections in order to be considered qualified to perform HI himself. Then there are pretty steep annual fees that must be paid to continue membership, not to mention the fees paid for the required continuing education required each year.
The entire process from applicant to ?full? member generates, literally, thousands of dollars for the association.
Currently, PA is considering Bill 928 that contains a number of qualifying provisions that must be followed for one to be registered (licensed) in PA. There is one in particular, which is an offshoot of the ASHI requirement, that I, personally, have a problem with.
Using myself as an example; I am in the process of starting a HI business in Carroll Valley. I am almost 50 years old. I started when I was 13 -14 years old working in my dad?s construction company. I was a licensed contractor in Maryland for many years. When it comes to houses, there isn?t much that I don?t know. I have the experience, the knowledge and the desire to make a great home inspector, yet if 928 is passed as written, I will just not be able to obtain the 100 ?ride-alongs? in order to qualify to start my part-time business.
The following is part of something I wrote this morning on the NACHI (National Association of Certified Home Inspectors) web forum. This is the professional organization that I belong to (<http://www.nachi.org/>):
?My basic problem, I guess, is with the entire requirement to get 100 ride-alongs. I can think of no other profession, except for physicians having to work as interns, that requires "ride-alongs" in order to qualify. You pass an exam (basically) and you're in. You pass the Bar and you?re a lawyer. You take a test and you're a Real Estate Agent. You take a test and you're a builder. You take a test and you?re a Professional Engineer. You take a test (election) and you're an elected politician...
Heck, if you pass a test, you are a Building Inspector.
Not to say that the experience gained in the ride-along program isn't valuable and in the long run might make the individual a better inspector, but it could be said that if after passing the Bar exam, a lawyer had to participate in 250 trials before hanging out his shingle wouldn't make him a better asset for his/her clients either, but that isn't done. You pass the qualifying exam, and you're in.
I think we can agree that the theory behind the "mentoring" concept was PURELY a revenue-generating tool used by the "established" HI associations (ASHI/NAHI) loosely disguised as a QA program.
At the time it was to their benefit, financially and from a control aspect, to make the profession difficult to get into.
Given the history behind the ride-along program as a moneymaker for the associations and an obstacle for the candidate, I sure don't see why we have to proliferate it and legitimize it now by being ok with it?s becoming the law of the State. Saying that "ASHI currently has a 250 ride-along requirement, and the law will require only 100 and that's a good deal" is absurd.
That's like saying a tax increase of only 75% when a 100% increase was planned is a good thing!!!
I'm taking this personally because I am your canary in the cage. Some of you older (longer in the profession) guys may not care. You're already in the "Club". This proposed legislation is hitting me directly between the eyes. It virtually slams the door on new inspectors getting into the profession. It is not necessary and it is not fair. Inspecting a house is not rocket science.
The qualification exam (and the individual's insurability) should be the determining factors for entrance into the profession, as it is in SO MANY other professions. And one certainly at least ought to receive credit for work in a related field. Like I said, if your township was in need of a Code Enforcement Officer, you could take a test today and start to work tomorrow.
The 100 ride along requirement is the vestige of a dying association put in place by them to keep new people out. We should not be "ok" with it just because that's the way it's always been. And an "injustice" cut by 60% is STILL an injustice.?
Mr. Maitland, I agree that it is important to protect the public from unqualified individuals passing themselves off as Home Inspectors. I also agree that in the past when, lacking any state-wide uniform standards for participating in the business of HI, that perhaps it made some sense to have a ?candidate? inspector demonstrate his/her proficiency in the field for X number of inspections (certainly not 250!).
But I think now that the State is stepping in to lay down some regulations and set some standards that A) An applicant should be given credit for work in related fields but (more importantly) B) The test itself should be stringent enough so that if one passes it, then they have demonstrated sufficient knowledge to work as a home inspector in PA and should be allowed to pay the registration fee and go to work.
Thank you very much for your time an attention. Is there anyone else you could suggest that I contact in regard to this issue?
Kip Hamilton
Valley View Home Inspections
642-9239
<www.ValleyViewHomeInspections.com>
