Thanks Terry, I plan to send the Statement to TREC early next week. Don’t get your hopes up, it will likely have no effect on our E&O requirement but at least we will be officially on-record with a position.
Just curious Michael what is the objective of this letter?
The position statement on the SOP commentary addressed an issue that was fully under the jurisdiction of TREC. Their decision could be directly influenced by your well articulated argument. However, E&O is not an issue that TREC has any more direct control of than we do. It was written and signed into law by our legislature and Governor. TREC is merely charged with administering the requirement. So even if the letter finds a sympathetic ear in TREC what can they do?
Is it in hope that TREC will be able to influence the legislature in the next session? I’m not trying to poo poo the thing, I think it’s well worthwhile to give voice to our opinion with TREC, I just don’t foresee it prompting any change in the situation.
Thank you once again for being the ears and voice for us TX NACHI inspectors.
I have to agree with Chuck. The chance is slim the requirement would be repealed. Who with any influence would champion such a cause? Also, I have to admit, the $1400.00 fee is palatable but the high cost for newbies makes yet another nifty “barrier to entry”.
Chuck, you are correct, like I stated in post #21, I doubt it will do much good but it does go on-record with our position. Here’s the bigger picture…TREC has a new administrator and he is really stirring the pot there at TREC. He wants more input on the workings of TREC, at least in the inspector portion. Now, we all know that Texas inspectors don’t all speak with one voice and this is just one way for our 300 Texas INACHI members to have our voice heard in somewhat of an official manner. There are around 2500 active inspectors now in Texas and much less than 1/2 of them belong to any trade organization and the other half don’t seem to care too much for the political end of our business. OK, I’m rambling but bear with me. TREC is starting a long term strategic planning session soon and they are wanting input for a variety of topics. I think anytime we as Texas inspectors and INACHI members can take a stand on a controversial issue then we should and this is simply one of those times. TREC would be a great ally to have on our side whenever possible. If it appears that a stand against mandated E&O was taking traction then the next step may be to partner up with a state representative or senator to look into a bill this session to eliminate the need for mandated E&O. To obtain that traction the other trade associations will need to state their positions as well and then we all begin to speak as one. I’ll be sending the statement to the other associations with encouragement to do one of their own then maybe we will begin to speak as one and TREC is just one avenue for that voice to be heard. Remember, we don’t have the financial or lobbying resources that TAR has so trade associations are the best we can do at this time. Again, I don’t hold any false hopes this particular statement will change anything but I also don’t want to just give up and walk away or ignore the possibility. At this point INACHI is the only trade organization willing to even state a position.
Well, Rep Brian McCall championed for it 3 years ago. He had influence apparently.
If that is the position of the majority of Texas INACHI members then I’ll abide by that and not pursue this position statement.
No doubt, who would be his exact opposite?
Mike, C’mon now, you know I don’t speak for the majority. Just thinking out loud. I didn’t mean to kick dust on yer boots.
No, no, no…all is good :D… I just want to do what the majority thinks is right. I’m not PO’d or anything. You speaking up may get others to chime in pro or con and that’s good.
Thanks Mike, just wanted to make sure I understood your bigger picture
Oh, and the part that I forgot to include was that the new TREC Administrator was the one that suggested another statement might be in order. During the last IAC meeting we were chatting in the hall during a break and he made it clear that now might be a good time for an E&O position statement. Maybe he knows or suspects something is in the works behind the scenes or he was simply saying to inspectors in general to take a stand and speak up. My thought is that the statement will do no harm and may do some good in the long run. Still, John has a good point, some inspectors favor the mandate for various reasons and if, collectively, we do not agree that E&O should not be mandated but rather a private business decision then we shouldn’t go on-record with the statement. I’ll reword it a little to make it clear that we do not expect TREC itself to be able to or even be inclined to change the law.
While it does serve to reduce competition somewhat, I’m certainly not willing to endorse needless regulatory constraints that harm the industry in order to exploit it. IMO: The E&O requirement should go the way of the TRCC.
Being a relative newcomer in this discussion, I hope not to offend anyone.
With that said, I feel trying to limit competition by way of financial burden is really counterproductive to the benefit of the organization. We’ve all seen children given businesses, or money enough to buy their way into something, and then watched as they fail due to lack of skill. Usually, some of the collateral damage is a loss of overall respect by the general public for the profession involved because of said incompetence.
Conversely, we’ve all seen individuals excluded from an endeavor they were suited for due to lack of funds. Again the profession suffers, but this time from lost opportunity through having a good competent member excluded.
I’m damned proud of the 40+ years I’ve spent in the construction industry. I’ve served in nearly every imaginable position, from laborer to foreman to superintendent to estimator to Contractor. I’ve been on both sides of inspections countless times. The most dismaying times were not when something was wrong with the project, but when the inspector was inadequately trained or lacked the skills to prosecute the inspection correctly.
Far better to raise our required level of expertise than to incur needless expense as a means of limiting our competition. If you want to keep the “burger flippers” out of the business, then raise the knowledge and skill requirements to do so.
E&O Ins is just a band-aid placed on an owie that probably shouldn’t have happened to begin with. Fewer claims due to a better skilled membership should result in reduced premiums and eventually no insurance needed at all.
But the real benefit is the increased level of respect from colleagues and the general public.
Due to a perceived lack of consensus and, more importantly, a lack of approval from iNACHI HQ, then this E&O Position Statement will be mothballed and not shared with anyone outside of iNACHI at this time.
Sorry to hear. I was not picking up on any lack of support for the position.
Thank you, just the same.
I think you’re onto something really beneficial here, Mike. Hate to see you drop it. I’ll support you all the way on this issue.
Me neither from the msg board but I’ve had some private e-mails and several verbal discussions with other iNACHI inspectors that don’t frequent the board. Seems like maybe 10-20% like the E&O requirement for it’s apparent competition limiting abilities. Depending upon what transpires at the TREC Summit at TAMU next week then I may bring the position statement back up front but let’s wait and see how that pans out.
Seems like maybe 10-20% like the E&O requirement for it’s apparent competition limiting abilities.
Talk about Hen House Ways…
G
Not sure I get your meaning. What-chu talking 'bout?
In preparation for next week’s TREC Inspector Summit I would like to know what you think are the top 3 issues we face as inspectors in Texas. Here’s my take so far…
TREC Summit Top Issues.pdf (87.9 KB)
Not all at once now guys…ease up a little :mrgreen:
I haven’t seen much regarding unlicensed inspectors. Is that much of an issue in some markets? Maybe this market is just too big for me to notice… As a corollary, it would be good for TREC to clarify what is a home inspection vs. non-HI / non-TREC governed inspectors (e.g., stucco specialist, pool specialist, HVAC specialist, Well/septic inspector, etc.) who also get involved in Real Estate inspections and are not subject to TREC regulation (perhaps they should only be brought in if there is also a TREC inspector also performing an inspection). Would like to see TREC spell out what liability the HI has for specialist inspectors when they are brought in, particularly for errors and omissions by these people when they are/are not coordinated by the HI. Particularly considering that the HI receives no compensation for bringing them in.
Curious as to TREC’s opinion regarding liability for conduct of the client and client’s entourage when in attendance at the inspection. Fewer and fewer agents take the time to be present during the inspection and the inspector cannot reasonably “supervise” the client and people that the client may bring to the inspection and conduct a competent inspection at the same time.
I agree, raise, don’t lower the testing standard for Professional inspectors. I would like to see them do away with the requirement to have E&O for apprentice inspectors. The apprentice must work under direct supervision of the inspector anyway. The Inspector’s E&O already protects the client.
Simplify and streamline the SOP. Do not let the commentary become a separate enforceable document. It will simply make it more difficult for inspectors to avoid being sued (do some of the committee members have a conflict of interest, drafting an overly complicated SOP on one hand and testifying against inspectors as expert witnesses on the other?)
I would like to see TREC be more proactive in enforcing this “Each inspector licensee must also uphold, maintain, and improve the integrity, reputation, and practice of the home inspection profession.” provision. I’m tired of seeing all of the “Is your inspector blind” and all of the other negative crap on inspector websites, in advertising, etc. which only harms our collective reputation. TREC should be especially aggressive in going after the ones that claim inspectors with numbers greater than xxxx are inexperienced and inferior, blah, blah blah. These claims are basically stating that TREC is licensing people who are incompetent to perform inspections. TREC could put an end to this damaging practice by fining a couple of the worst offenders. You don’t see Reeltors pulling this crap against their own.
Would like to see agents and brokers subject to the same prohibition from giving or soliciting fees or other forms of compensation or consideration of any type (including: purchasing advertising; sponsoring meals, events; donations; etc.) for referrals, inclusion on preferred lists, etc.