This is a much better and more effective approach. It would be more effective yet, coupled with professional lobbying.
Wendy, I took you off ignore just to see your response, once again youdemonstrate your stupidity.
I know that Soldano nominated you last spring to take his place and that the Board would not even consider it seeing as you had only been “in” the business for a month or so, had never done an inspection, and that you had no knowledge of of the dynamics of history of the home inspection business in Washington State or any where else (that’s the polite version).
How can anyone advise or represent a Home Inspection Organization without any experience in the industry, how could yu have represented anyone when your excuse for the past year for not obtaining your WSDA license has been that you can’t travel to Olympia or Puyallup to take the test because of your kids, how were you going to make it to the Board meetings once amonth , which were all day and even farther away?
As far as Domagala goes, like I just asid, he doesn’t Represent me, Nick pays him to Represent NACHI, which also doesn’t represent me, as far as I know no NACHI Member had any input into nominating Domagala or any of the other NACHI Members who were on the Advisory Board, Nick chose them, or at least he chose Jerry, so Jerry must be Nick’s Representative. Its not a “snide” remark when I point out that a paid NACHI Representative should be keeping the members informed of what he was doing to be paid for, but the agreement of the board was to keep everything under wraps until they were ready to release their recommendations, now they have, but their recommendations still aren’t mine.
When the board was first created the number of ASHI and NACHI members were equal, other than Soldano no other NACHI Member nominated a replacement when they dropped out. The imbalance at the end then is the failure of NACHI members.
I was asked a month or so ago not to stir the pot until I saw what the Board recommendations were, now I’ve seen them, most I don’t agree with. I will contact the Board with my objections and my proposals, just like every other Washington Inspector should do, and at the same time I will contact Senators Spanel and Kohle-Welles, like every Washington Inspector should do, along with contacting their oun Senators and Representatives.
The Board did include mandatory insurance, not as much as I would like, but enough to get my support, the mentoring idea is BS, it won’t, and hasn’t worked anywhere as far as I can see, I could support a Peer review where say every few years an Inspector would be required to conduct a supervised Inspection and to submit copies of his Reports to the Board for review, the grandfathering clause and the number of required inspections is designed to eliminate the new guys and is far way to restrictive to be fair, passing the NHIE or other approved test is fine, CE Requirements should be included, having a State SOP is good, and doing away with the SPI Requirement is great, those who want to keep their SPI however should be allowed to do so, this would allow them to market their Pest Inspection as an added benefit or to perform the WDO Inspection for an additional fee. I do find it funny how the ASHI guys got their favorite word “Candidate” included.
One thing that should be added to the Grandfather Clause is that those who claim experience as a Washington State Home Inspector shuld have to prove that they have been Licensed as a WSDA SPI for all of the period they claim.
If the Board’s proposal, as written, was to go the the Legislature today, or if it does so at a later date, I will Oppose it, if it goes with some modifications, I will support it, even if it were to pass as written, I could live with it, I wouldn’t like it, but then I don’t like the mandatory WSDA License requirement we have now either, as written it will save me a lot of money just on my E&O, although I might decide to keep my SPI License.
Back to Jerry Domagala, the Advisory Board wanted to keep things under wraps until they were ready to go public, now they have, Jerry said he doesn’t like to post on the NACHI Message Board, but now that the proposal is out its time for him to come on board and tell us what is going on, if Nick pays him to represent NACHI members, then its time he does.
You’ve just answered everything for me.
1)They didn’t refuse me because of lack of experience, they refused me because I had a different point of view and would have shook up their little club. Why do you think they didn’t want you to rock the boat? They asked you to shut up and it worked didn’t it?
2)Wouldn’t have another NACHI voice on there been better than NO NACHI voice on there and what has happened now?
3)The WDO requirement would NEVER fly Lewis because they can’t hold inspectors to a standard that will be proven to be crap.
Exactly. And this points out what I have believed all along, that one does not need to be nominated to an exclusionary committee who certainly wouldn’t want someone on there who would definitely swing the vote in meetings against them. (Them being primarily ASHI members and those who claim to be independant).
Why would a board of Home Inspectors want someone with absolutely no experience who had never done an Inspection to be an "advisor? Why would any member of NACHI want a totally inexperienced Inspector who has demonstrated they know little of their own States Laws to represent them? And who are these “Several” inspectors who asked you to lobby fior them, someone else asked you that earlier.
And like Stephen asked, how long are you going to “wait” to do an Inspection before you get you SPI License, according to you it’s been months already.
Where are those three court cases you claimed had taken place where HI’s in Washington went to Court and defeated the WSDA, who doesn’t know anything about them?
The WDO Standard has been around since 91’ Wendy, many disagree with it but no one has gotten rid of it either. Tell us oh Wonderful Wendy how you will prove that the WDO Requirement is Crap. Give us all that great legal advice. Just because its in this proposal, it doesn’t mean that WSDA will agree to give up its power
It wasn’t anyone on the Advisory Board who asked me not to stir the pot yet, it was someone else who has the same interests as me who convinced me to wait and see what the Board’s proposal was. Now I’ve seen it, some good some bad, I’m against it as written, but I could live with it if it was passed, could you?
If you have problems with the proposal contact Domagala, I had nothing to do with it. You can find him on NACHI’s “Find an Inspector” or here:
He also appears on the Featured Inspectors List.
If you want to rally bitch about the SPI requirement then why don’t you call or email Dr. Soumi at the WSDA, tell him who you are, the name of your business, and that you think the requirement is crap and you refuse to be licensed, when he has your business license revoked, take him to court.
Dr. Dan Soumi 360-902-2044 or firstname.lastname@example.org
Go For It Wendy
Having a “NACHI voice” on a make believe “coalition” is not to solicit your input, but to enhance the illusion that the “coalition” actually represents the views of all of the members of all of the associations at the table. Your voice at that table would be no more relevant than if you were to shout out your window, right now.
Ask Jay Schwartz in Florida. He sat at the table of a “coalition” that is recommending to his state that all people pass a drug test to get a home inspection license. How ridiculous is that? Do you think his objection, or NACHI’s, is heard by anyone?
Not having NACHI represented is a plus, for now it is even easier to convince the state that the world’s largest association had nothing to do with that goofy proposal.
Won’t need to Lewis. It’s going to be taken care of for me. It’s obvious that everyone is realizing what a mistake it is.
Boy, you sure you have this much energy to get into such a hissy over me. You sure are wasting alot of typing on me.
I actually agree with this. Looks like things worked out for the best after all.
You are hilarious Lewis if you think anyone can have my business license revoked for NOT performing any home inspections while NOT holding a SPI license.
Yep, he’s really gonna be able to get me for doing draws and stuff eh?
Not to mention, he isn’t who has the power to revoke a business license. He can request it, but has no power in and of himself to revoke it.
The SPI requirement came into effect back in 91’ or 92’ Wendy, this Proposal is just a proposal, if you knew anything at all about Washington State bureaucracy you would know that no agency or department is going to willingly give up any of its power, and if you actually looked at the poll at the top of this post you would see that the majority of us want to keep our SPI License, that’s probably because we want to drive other inspectors out of business, those who don’t choose to have a license right?
Who is “everyone” Wendy? We’re still waiting for who the “Several” Inspectors were who wanted you to be their Lobbyist…who were they again?
Then call him. If you aren’t doing Home Inspections, how are you going to meet any grandfathering requirement and why does your website continue to say you do? If someone were to book an Inspection from your site, what would happen?
If you are not doing Home Inspections then how do you claim to be a Home Inspector and why should any Inspection Regulation concern you? You may have nearly 5000 Posts in less than a year, but that doesn’t make you NACHI’s “Voice”.
And Soumi does have the power to have your license suspended, if not revoked, and he also has the power to levy a Fine against Inspectors Operating in violation of Washington Law, your business license can be suspended until the fine is paid and then an Inspector charged can challenge the Actions of the WSDA in court, but that’s about it. Soumi is the WSDA “cop”, he is the one who investigates complaints against inspectors, give him a call Wendy. Or are you going to continue to tell us about what the WSDA is doing without ever talking to them, its obvious you know nothing about the subject, but hey, that never stops you does it.
I took you off “Ignore” just to see the asinine comments you would be making about licensing, usually I only do that to see how many “White Knights” I can get to rise in your defense, but that doesn’t happen very often any more.
Probably true, but you should look upon it as a blessing, membership can only lead to compromise, and your point of view is much better expressed outside of any group then from within it.
If you are against licensing, it would be much better off to organize outside of any group that is already dedicated to licensing, attempting to convert those who have already drank the kool-aid is a fool’s errand and a waste of time.
First, let’s talk about the board as it has been refereed to in previous postings.
I was invited to join the board a little over a year ago because of my interest in regulating home inspectors in the state of Washington. As one member out of about 16 I had input but no control of decisions that were made by the board.
A couple of early decisions were to limit the members of the board and to not release any work in progress to anyone without the groups approval. Even though I did not agree with these decisions I had to follow them if I wanted to remain on the committee.
At the last meeting I was the one who recommended we release the points that have been listed on this site and have just gotten a meeting scheduled to try to get the SOP’s and COE’s released.
It seems like everyone thinks that ASHI ran the process and that is really not true. Every person at the meetings had input to what was written. I don’t think any one member agrees with everything but we all agreed at the start to let the majority rule.
Before convicting the people who have worked to try to come up with something that can be lived with I would suggest going on line and reading Senate Bill 6229 that was submitted by Senator Spanel last year. Then try to imagine trying to convince the Senator to change what she has already written.
I would be happy to discuss the issues with any of the NACHI members. My number is 360-715-8745 and my email is email@example.com. I very rarely go to these boards so if you want to contact me either call or email.
After reading some more of the postings I realized that some people think that the legislation is coming because the “board” has recommended it. That is not the case. The “board” approached Senator Spanel with our recommendations after we found out that she intended to submit legislation this session. Before we received word that a law was being submitted are goal was to develop model legislation that we all felt we could live with and then decide whether to find a sponsor to submit it or to hold on to it and give it to someone like Senator Spanel after she decided to write her own. The decision was taken out of our hands.
I never said I was against licensing. I am in favor of it but I want it to be reasonable.
We have a 30 mentored HI requirement here in AZ.
It seems to have worked out well.
The best part of my formal HI training was the mentored HI’s. And if you are fortunate enough to mentor a new HI your education is even better.
Looking at pictures of slate roofs, ice dams, and octopus heating systems blew.
How about seeking the Senator’s opponents in the House and supporting them to defeat her bill? All politicians have political foes.
I think you may have caved in too early. The threat of proposed legislation does not necessarily require alternative legislation. The third option of “no legislation” will also have support among many of your state senators and congressmen. Has that been explored?
How was the Mentoring set up in Arizona, who selected the mentors, and how did Inspectors from rural areas find someone who would mentor them?
I don’t really have anything against mentoring, but who pays the cost, how did the State insure that the Mentors weren’t just signing off on their buddies nephew or something? How did the state convince Inspectors to train their competition?
To me this proposal looks like it was set up to be an “Income” prodcer for some “senior” inspectors.
An Idea that I like better is for all new inspectors to have to submit to 3 to 5 Peer Evaluations, walkalongs, in his/her first year, and for everyone to have a Peer evaluation every 3 to 5 years. Plus the submission of randomly selected reports each year for review by the Board, submitted by all Inspectors.
I’ve seen a lot of opposition to ride alongs in my area, I just don’t see how the mentoring will work, unless the State is footing the Bill.
If I actually owed you any kind of explanation Lewis, I might respond to all this, but I don’t, and nothing you say applies to me. I don’t operate illegally and it is none of your business.
I totally agree. That is why I didn’t pursue it when I was told that Andrew’s nomination was declined.