So it’s your contention that a state law (sb 212) which contained a poorly copied version of the ASHI SOP is superior to my contractual agreement with my clients to meet or exceed the NACHI SOP. WHat a crock of ****. I suppose you’d agree that HI’s should have the option of informing about SAfety problems like the recent bill did. That this is superior to my contracted agreement and practice which tells my clients that any Safety issue will be communicated to all parties and concerned folks (like tenants living with unsafe wiring) as an exception to the usual confidentiality practice.
My Quinlan can’t find a lawyer to sue someone. Could it be that even the sharks recognize a case without merit. No HI routinely checks for mold using other then their senses. And beyond visually examining the elctrical ground what other tests would an HI do in a normal inspection (please, if you are an electrician or engineer and actually measure the ground performance that is wonderful. But that is not in anyone’s HI SOP) As for My Q’s plumbing leaks a year after the fact it was an inspection of conditions at the time. And the later occuring plumbing problems could be the necessary ingredient for the mold to grow as well.
But the problem couldn’t be a homeowner looking for someone to pay for the ordinary maintenance and repair things that happen in every house sooner or later. We all know homeowners would never do that. It must be a lack of state regulation that caused this problem. Who cares if honest and hardworking HI’s who haven’t yet built up a pile of inspections are run out of business for the benefit of folks just waiting to pick up all that business.
Now don’t get me wrong. I support fair licensing. And the recent SB212 had one saving grace that I’m sure you’d approve of. It would have stopped the currrent practice of Mass inspectors from slipping into NH for a fast buck. (Like happened to poor Mr Quinlan if your theory is correct. Hired one of those ashi vulturess from Mass) while keeping NH inspectors out of their sandbox. The bill required Mass to recognize NH licensing and until it did then Mass inspectors could stay on thier side of the border where they belong. An exellent idea in my opinion.
Licensing that imposes “ex post facto” or backward looking requirements is wrong. When and if NH comes up with forward looking regulation that protects consumers while requiring that inspectors improve their knowledge going forward without making a blatant attempt at giving control to one dying unprofessional association I’ll support it.