Here are two interesting articles about Home Inspector liability:
Interesting articles. Said it before, will say it one more time. Most problems are in states without licensing or standards. The basic problem with licensing, after reading through all the arguments, involves the forces at work in all the states still considering licensing. Liscensing only becomes threatening when legislation is written to “thin the ranks” and favor certain groups. It’s not complicated to write legislation that is not punitive to independent practitioners, and it is not unreasonalble to expect a certain level of education and experience…and by experience, I don’t mean having to serve an ‘apprenticeship’, lest I be misunderstood.
For the guys in unlicensed states: It will eventually come. Just make sure that the legislation in your state doesn’t reflect certain other groups’ ideas of what constitutes education and experience.
I wonder why many of those who have been Inspecting for a long time are not pushing licensing.
They seem to think it could not be a Good idea.
I too feel that licensing is of no advantage.
Missouri is an unlicensed state. We have very, very few complaints against home inspectors with our BBB. I have been searching for months, in preparation for the fight against HB 978, and can find no record of any lawsuits against home inspectors that have been filed, disposed of or pending.
Things are so good here that the real estate salespeople have to be the one’s to push the licensing bills in an attempt to have a hammer over the “deal killers”. While real estate salespeople are threatened by our reports, the consumers love us.
All of the television sting operations televised by our local news channels have been targeting state paid code inspectors who do 150 inspections per day, and our unlicensed contractors who have failed to fulfill their agreements.
No sir, being an unlicensed state does not reflect at all on our work.
I live to learn…others from unlicensed states? All opinions respected, all facts/statistics appreciated.
Reply to A Smith:
As a National Home Inspection Trainer with 28 Yrs experience doing home inspections, expert witness and training for contractors, engineers, home inspectors, etc I’d like to comment on the article you recently wrote.
Overall, It was a good article BUT as I’m sure you’ve already heard from others, several issues the buyer felt the inspector should have caught were not part of what a home inspector would typically inspect. Specifically the mold and examining inside an electrical meter box (normally clipped shut by the utility company) are not within the parameters of the home inspection industry standard of any of the 3 major inspection associations (NAHI, ASHI & NACHI). NOR are they included in any state standards that I know of that has licensing of home inspectors. More than likely, that’s probably the actual reason an attorney won’t jump on it ……….
Bet money these type of exclusions were also in the inspectors “Inspection Agreement” that the client signed.
Dan Bowers, CRI
ASHI Member, #1038
Certified Member NAHI
FHA Compliance Inspector
Code Certified Inspector
But the lawyers don’t sue because they see a chance to win at the SOP debate… they throw in all the other things, with a couple simi-valid points, in order to enhance the fear factor, so the INSUARANCE de-factor payment will be made when the first threatening letter arrives.