Should a warranty managment company be HI licensed?

Many here are aware of my company Cascade Builder Services. We manage the builder’s one year limited warranty and perform their new home orientations/pre-closing walk throughs (punch list creation).

More specifically, after a homeowner closes and moves into their new home, they call us, rather than the builder, to verify that a problem is covered under the terms of the warranty and we send it out to the appropriate trade contractor that did the original work to come back and fix it. Keep in mind, we aren’t seeking out problems just simply providing an administration and verification service to builders.

At the new home orientation, the home buyer is the one responsible to bring defects to our attention, we’re simply documenting the items that they have found and communicating them to the builder for repair.

Should a company such as mine be required to acquire a home inspector license?

Dominic and Larry-Sorry about the lag. I posted a response to Larry over an hour ago. Basically, it was brought up at a licensing board meeting today so I’m curious about everyone’s opinion.

No, as a Sub to the Builder you are acting as the Builders QC, and or scheduling center.

Clever Home Owners should hire there own Independent Home Inspector to assist them in finding any defects in their new home.

I wouldn’t think so, off hand. Whay do you ask?

Does Washington license home inspectors? If so, what is their definition of a home inspector?

Yes, as of 9/1/09, Washington licenses home inspectors.

I’m just curious what the overall opinion is on this question as I heard it was brought up at the licensing board meeting today. Apparently, one of the board members thinks a warranty management company such as mine should be licensed as a home inspector.

Larry, Washington just started licensing in September.

Kevin, I don’t see how any of what you’re doing comes even close to an inspection. All you’re doing is making phone calls. Why would you think you need an HI license?

Maybe the board member who thinks I should can speak up and defend his position.

Kevin…you know as well as anyone how your WA licensing board was born out of and is driven by greed…for power and money…and is committed to eliminating competition wherever it can be found. If they can find a loophole in the law to exploit, they will…but worse than that is that once a law is in effect, it takes very little to amend it to cover what might have been missed, if you know what I mean.

Be prepared to fight the special interests in order to keep the cancer that is now growing in WA limited to the home inspector. Protect your interests and your consumers from the greed that attacked our profession in your state.

I’d like to hear how mandating a warranty management company to get a home inspector license is “protecting the consumer”. :roll:

In any case it should be a 3rd party.

If home inspectors are licensed in any state, that state should mandate that anyone involved in any real estate transcation be licensed. This includes the inspectors, agents, contractors, repairmen, appraisers, mortgage lenders, etc. What is fair is fair. They all should then have insurance, education, and abide by all state rules.

Our freedoms are dwindling. Free enterprise is an outdated term.

Gary you forgot about the gardners, lawn maintenance, snow removal, roofers, and many more trades. I also just remembered what about toodlers driving around in those electric toys / cars or jeeps etc.? Should toodlers be licensed to drive electric cars?:mrgreen:

It has something to do with how putting a realtor on the Kansas HI Licensing Board protects the consumer.

All of the “consumer protection” arguments are related by the fact that they are all BS designed to dupe legislators into supporting bills that favor special interests.

Gary, I’m not asking if I should have a “warranty management license”. I’m asking if I should be required to have a “home inspector license”.

I want to know the inspectors that serve on the boards of real estate assoctiations. James, the word should be “flavor” and not “favor”.;):mrgreen:

Steve, I forgot about those guys who mow the grass at the home that is for sale. They also should have insurance, licensing, education, and training for mowing. Should the sellers be licensed, insured, and educated about the issues in sellling a home? A disclosure from the seller is almost always incorrect. Sellers should also, then, be licensed, educated, and insured when selling their own home, listed on MLS or not.

I don’t see a home inspection license being required for this type of service. It has noting to do with home inspections in any shape or form. If you read the statute what you are doing is not listed as an activity of performing a home inspection.

Now, I could see this type of service requiring a type of contractors license depending on your states requirements. But even that would be far fetched.

Kevin, I thought you were also inspecting homes and that you had a home inspectors license already.

Got any meeting minutes or a link we can read to flesh out this thread Kevin???:slight_smile:


I’m still inspecting but probably only until July 2010. I haven’t convinced myself yet to justify the cost of getting a license.

I’ve heard through the grape vine that it was Mike O.'s argument. Your thoughts Mike?

I was at the Home Inspector Advisory Board meeting where this was discussed. One of the Board Members brought this up and read from portions of an Active Rain profile or description. The name of the individual or company was redacted out.

I think the wording in question is from Kevin’s profile. The item that brought the most attention was:

**Identify incomplete, broken, missing, or otherwise damaged areas, along with confirming the overall product meets and or exceeds your specifications along with Industry Standards for workmanship and performance.

**Confirm operation of all appliances, doors, and windows, locks, plumbing fixtures, electrical sockets, and other systems and or mechanisms.

There was about 20 minutes of discussion and the item was referred to the Business Practice Committee. They will meet on Tuesday, November 10, 2009 to discuss this and other items. Place and time to be determined and posted on the Home Inspector Website for the DOL.

Some of the discussion touched on the fact that subcontractors of the builder are licensed when required. i.e. plumbers, electricians, hvac techs. If that is the case, why wouldn’t a company like Kevin’s, also a subcontractor, that performs the duties above that are performed during a home inspection and are part of the State SOP, also require a license like the other subcontractors. I guess if he was an employee of the Builder, it would not be an issue.

There were at least 2 Board Members that felt this was not an issue as those performing this function are normally not inspecting but taking claims from the buyer as items to be fixed under the warranty. Not inspecting, but merely taking information from the buyer. The wording that Kevin has is on that fine line. Do the words “identify” or “confirm” become interchangeable with inspect? At least “identify” is used commonly in the NACHI SOP.

Discussions continued with information about Oregon law that says if you inspect a certain number of items noted in their SOP, it becomes a home inspection. A single item would not qualify. That language is being looked at by the Committee to see if new codes or even laws would be needed to enact something similar.

It usually takes a couple weeks to get the minutes posted. The last meeting had the audio tapes available in about a week if I remember right. It was one of the more interesting Board meetings that I have attended.

Best to all.