How so?
Hi Kevin,
I didn’t say that you must; I said that you might. I don’t know if that’s the case because I haven’t been to your site. But don’t worry, I don’t think you have to worry about the board or DOL skulking around trying to catch folks; they are only interested in getting folks through this transition period as quickly and as smoothly as possible.
ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!!
Mike
Kevin,
I imagine that once the realtors begin to get word of the licensing from those “bitter” types, you might get asked. Or just keep hoping that the realtor’s that are referring you now, stay busy.
Rob
Rob, I don’t need to “hope” for anything. I enjoy inspecting, that’s the only reason I inspect. If I don’t get a referral from an agent that isn’t properly informed about Washington state law, good riddance.
CBS takes care of the bills and much more.
BTW, since Stephen was unable to provide a source, is there a documented source for this new advertising requirement. I don’t doubt the meeting took place and this was discussed, however, is it not safe to assume we need a documented source to have any credibility? If someone were to file a complaint against an unlicensed inspector, they better damn well have a law or some sort of ruling to quote.
Washington inspectors have used this message board for years to pass on fabricated “scares” to would-be competitors.
Remember the lie where you were told you needed to be a licensed SPI to inspect a house? This message board is the only place you would have found that in print.
Please put your reading glasses on and read the first sentence of the initial post.
Again, where is this documented? Is this a documented requirement or a legend passed down from inspector to inspector? I dare someone to try and submit a complaint starting with “since I heard that…”
I got the information directly from the Department of Licensing. No middle man. Since you never seem to believe anything that is posted that does not fit your agenda, whatever that is, you can perform your own due diligence. That is why Board hearings are open to the public and those in charge of the program are normally available during business hours.
James, you’ve proven once again that the only thing that comes out of a horse’s *, even one with teeth like you, is horsesh.
That “lie” was no such thing. Under the old rule that was changed, anyone following one of the major association SOP’s, including NACHI’s, would have had to inspect attics and crawlspaces and exteriors. Under those rules, even reporting on clogged/overfull gutters and water ponding on the ground near a home, though seemingly unrelated to pests, was considered reporting about a pest conducive condition, and anyone reporting those conditions for a fee without having an SPI license, was breaking the law. This wasn’t the only place that was ever posted; it had been posted on other forums too. So, though it was never enforced much, because WSDA never had the budget for it, it was never a lie.
One of the good things that came out of the licensing initiative here is that the pest laws were changed with implementation of the new law so that now home inspectors may at least report on rot and pest conducive conditions without the threat of the enforcement guy from the state’s Department of Agriculture showing up and issuing a citation.
Instead of insulting real inspectors, don’t you have some papers somewhere that you can go shuffle like a good little clerk?
ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!!
Mike O’Handley, LHI
Your Inspector LLC.
Kenmore, Washington
Wa. Lic. Home Inspector #202
Wow, there are hundreds of inspectors in the State of Washington, yet only a few that even come here to read the misinformation you provide here.
“Most” Washington inspectors don’t give this message board any thought when looking for reliable information.
It is entertainment at best.
SPI laws and Home Inspector laws are documented on the States’ site.
It was a lie, then…and you are lying, now.
I have an email from Dr. Soumi…the source that was most often quoted as the supreme authority on SPI licensing…who told me that home inspectors did not have to have an SPI license.
Since SPI licensing required E&O insurance, you guys used this — prior to your present scheme of legislation — to keep your competitors few.
I’ll let you lie some more…then I’ll publish the email, if I still have it. If not, it is in the message board archives for it has been published before.
Like your little blog, you have never let the truth interfere with a good story. Keep up the mediocre work.
No agenda other than raising the blood pressure of bitter, licensed inspectors. As I’ve stated, I don’t doubt what you are saying is true. That’s why I’ve complied.
I don’t believe everything that’s posted for good reason. Remember you’re rantings about the “drop dead” date and unlicensed inspectors not being able to advertise at all? How’d those pan out?
The new home inspector legislation has made the old pest law a moot subject. You can yell and stomp and scream all you want about all the bad home inspector licensing. It seems to consume you and that is not a healthy thing. Home Inspection laws are now a reality in this State, maybe not your State, but the State of Washington. You can cloud the issue by talking to entry level clerks instead of the Manager of the Home Inspector program OR you can go to the source, but since they are sometimes busy, that might be inconvenient and heaven forbid that everyone isn’t at your beck and call. :roll:
Thanks for your concern about my health.
O’Handjob and his sisters would like to continue to scare away their competition with ghost stories about the law…since the law doesn’t seem to be doing a good enough job as it was intended.
At least, it is not acting quickly enough. The idea that they are spending money and time on being licensed and still have people without licenses competing against them until July is really screwing with their minds. This was NOT supposed to happen.:D:D:D
After July, though, if you are one of these newbies…you can expect to see your nearest licensed inspector thumbing through the mail in your mailbox. Be careful.
See, that’s where it’s hard to believe that you could have ever been a competent law clerk, because your reading comprehension leaves much to be desired. I guess it’s true when they say that those who are incompetent are incapable of recognizing their own incompetence. You should be the poster boy.
Under the rules, it was impossible for anyone to perform a competent and complete home inspection without an SPI license, without running afoul of Soumi’s rules. That was the way the rules were orchestrated when the Washington State Pest Control Association, now the Washington State Pest Management Association, pushed through that rule in 1991.
It’s only a lie if there was somehow a way for an inspector to do a full and competent home inspection on a home without:
- Reporting water ponding next to a home
- Reporting poor drainage
- Reporting on overflowing and leaking gutters and clogged downspouts and downspout receivers.
- Reporting downspouts that discharge too close to the home
- Reporting leaky roofs
- Reporting plumbing leaks
- Reporting rotten sub-flooring and joists
- Reporting rotten support posts
- Reporting cracks in foundations
- Reporting vegetation that touches a structure
- Reporting trees that abrade a roof
- Reporting water in a crawlspace
- Reporting leaking shower pans
- Reporting rotten decks and their supports.
- Reporting unflashed/rotten rim boards
- Reporting any unflashed areas with water intrusion
- Reporting the lack of a vapor barrier in a crawlspace
- Reporting insufficient clearance under joists and beams
- Reporting any other issue that Soumi and WSPCA considered to be “pest conducive.”
Soumi himself acknowledged more than once at training events that “technically” the law didn’t state that one had to be a licensed SPI. However, in the very next sentence he would always expand upon that by stating that it was, in his opinion, impossible to follow any published standard of practice and not run afoul of the law. Since you’d never attended any of those events, I guess you wouldn’t have been able to hear that, would you?
Soumi has read your drivel many times; we’ve even had a good chuckle over it a time or two. I’m certain that if he told you that, without telling you the rest of it, he knew full well that by only giving you part of the story that you’d misconstrue his reply and turn it into some of your blather. Or,…did he?
Dan might be a prig sometimes, but, unlike you, I find him to be an honorable man. He’s not the type to put out half truths. Based on your past performance here and elsewhere, I’m pretty certain that he probably told you exactly what I just told you but you’ve opted to selectively edit out that portion of his response because it serves your agenda to present it that way.
Like I said, even a horse’s *** with teeth still spews horsesh** from its maw.
ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!!
Mike O’Handley, LHI
Your Inspector LLC.
Kenmore, Washington
Wa. Lic. Home Inspector #202
Like I said, Washington newbies, expect to see these kids thumbing through your mail come next Summer…
Uh, yes it was.
Sen. Spanel’s original bill - SB5788 - as introduced January 31, 2007 states:
(1) Beginning July 1,2008, a person shall not engage in or conduct, or advertise or hold himself or herself out as engaging in or conducting the business of or acting in the capacity of a home inspector within this state without first obtaining a license as provided in this chapter.
**
(2) On July 1, 2008, any person who has been actively engaged in the business of conducting home inspections for at least two years and who has conducted at least one hundred home inspections may apply to the board for initial licensure without meeting the examination or instruction requirements of this chapter.
The pest management guys immediately went to work and tried to maintain the status quo, so the next month the Senator introduced a substitute bill on February 28th. Later that same day, an engrossed substitute bill was introduced that had a paragraph 3 (not shown here) exempting engineers, pest inspectors, etc., but the changes to the second paragraph (underlined) clearly showed the agenda of the pest management folks.
(1) Beginning July 1, 2008, a person shall not engage in or conduct, or advertise or hold himself or herself out as engaging in or conducting the business of or acting in the capacity of a home inspector within this state without first obtaining a license as provided in this chapter.
(2) On July 1, 2008, any person who has been actively engaged in the business of conducting complete home inspections and has been licensed as a structural pest inspector by the state department of agriculture for at least two years and who has conducted at least one hundred complete home inspections may apply to the board for initial licensure without meeting the examination or instruction requirements of this chapter.
On April 17th, the Senate remanded the bill to committee for study and a sunrise review and hearings were initiated. Throughout the year WHILAG attended every public meeting and in the fall began working with a professional lobbyist to meet and talk to many pols on behalf of inspectors in order to try and bring her around.
On January 18th 2008, Spanel introduced SB6606 which read:
(1) Beginning September 1, 2009, a person shall not engage in or conduct, or advertise or hold himself or herself out as engaging in or conducting, the business of or acting in the capacity of a home inspector within this state without first obtaining a license as provided in this chapter.
(2) Any person performing the duties of a home inspector on the effective date of this section has two years within which to meet the licensing requirements of this chapter.
WHILAG knew that Spanel didn’t favor any form of grandfathering so they didn’t sit on their hands. On January 23rd 2008, Rep. Springer introduced a competing companion bill in the house - HB 3132. HB 3132 was drafted by WHILAG and was a strategic move intended to force her hand.
The next day, Spanel contacted WHILAG and asked for a meeting. WHILAG members met, went over her draft, put together some proposed changes aimed at providing some way to acknowledge existing inspectors experience and met with the Senator. On February 7th, she introduced a substitute bill which read:
(1) Beginning September 1, 2009, a person shall not engage in or conduct, or advertise or hold himself or herself out as engaging in or conducting, the business of or acting in the capacity of a home inspector within this state without first obtaining a license as provided in this chapter.
(2) Any person performing the duties of a home inspector on the effective date of this act has until July 1, 2010, to meet the licensing requirements of this chapter. However, if a person performing the duties of a home inspector on the effective date of this act has proof that he or she has worked as a home inspector for at least two years and has conducted at least one hundred home inspections, he or she may apply to the board before September 1, 2009, for licensure without meeting the instruction and training requirements of this chapter.
**
This was the same language used in the engrossed substitute bill and in the bill that was finally passed on March 10th 2008, signed by the Governor on March 12th 2008 and became effective 90 days later on June 12, 2008.
So, you see, once again you don’t have your facts straight. From the second that the Governor signed that bill, which was a compromise between Spanel’s version and the house version that WHILAG had gotten introduced, the final date for licensure of anyone practicing home inspections on the date that the bill became effective, June 12, 2008, has always been, and is still, July 1, 2010.
Every one of those involved with WHILAG, who are the ones you constantly trash with your spew, fought very hard here to separate the SPI requirement from the home inspection law and to get inspectors’ experience recognized in the law and every one of them has always known that the final deadline for licensure was July 1, 2010.
Why don’t you tend to matters in Missouri where at least you know a little bit of what you’re talking about.
ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!!
Mike O’Handley, LHI
Your Inspector LLC.
Kenmore, Washington
Wa. Lic. Home Inspector #202
At the Western Washington ASHI conference this past weekend, Rhonda Myers herself stated that:
- Newer inspectors can inspect.
- Newer inspectors can also advertise, but THEY must acknowledge full disclosure to the public / agents / clients that they are NOT currently “Licensed WA. Home Inspectors”.
Agents can be fined for referring non licensed people to their clients,… Don’t you think, heaven forbids something goes wrong on an inspection that THAT information would have been appreciated by the agent, or clients prior to the inspection or taking of the referral? Its a slippery slope that only you can decide how to go down it.
You can take what you want from this, do your own due diligence, like Stephen repeats time and time again. Its funny that when you try to post helpful information, its somehow stirring up trouble and looked down apon. Hey, there were inspectors that cried foul for missing the grandfather dead line, crazy at it may seem, they say there was not enough information posted in advance… Talk about people out of the loop :roll:
Absolutely correct; but remember that the only persons that must currently have a license before July 2nd of next year are the very new inspectors - those are the only persons that a realtor can get in trouble for referring until that date.
Until July 2nd 2010, realtors can still legally, without fear of penalty, refer inspectors to any unlicensed inspectors in the “experienced” or “newer” inspector category because those persons had already been practicing on or before June 12, 2008.
ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!!
Mike O’Handley, LHI
Your Inspector LLC.
Kenmore, Washington
Wa. Lic. Home Inspector #202