Builder messed up, and blames me!

[Billy Boerner]

Originally Posted by jbushart

"Tied to a sale", eh? What did the builder/contractor plan to do with his condos that he had hired Will to inspect?

Will I agree with Bushhart on this. Jim at the exact point and time Will was hired if the house wasn't up for sale or tied directly to a sale then no home inspection was conducted according to IL state law in my opinion even if they plan on selling it. If the home is up for sale and the seller hired will to inspect it then yes I agree with you.

[Billy Boerner]

Originally Posted by jbushart

"Tied to a sale", eh? What did the builder/contractor plan to do with his condos that he had hired Will to inspect? If an Illinois homeowner thinking about selling his house hires someone to do a pre-sale home inspection but has not put it on the market.....does he have to use a licensed home inspector in your opinion?

According to state law that Will posted I would say the home owner can hire however they wish. Now once the house goes on the market the buyer according to law "MUST" hire a licensed home inspector. Since the home wasn't "tied to a sale" according to state law no inspection falls under what IL considers to be a true home inspection.

This is why I'm glad I'm in a unlicensed state. I can consult on what ever I want or do a home inspection on whatever I want and no one has any say so. Now if I was dragged into court however IMO the Judge is going to base his or her decision on a SOP of some organization. If I'm doing a consultation outside of the SOP such as Infra Red I better have a Scope Of Work agreement signed or I may have some serious problems. Without an agreement your leaving fate is up in the air based soley on what a Judge "believes". Since 99% of all judges has none to little training in our career field I will also ensure I have some type of agreement written up which lays out for my client exactly what I'll be doing what I may or may not find.

[James H. Bushart]

Originally Posted by bboerner

According to state law that Will posted I would say the home owner can hire however they wish. Now once the house goes on the market the buyer according to law "MUST" hire a licensed home inspector. Since the home wasn't "tied to a sale" according to state law no inspection falls under what IL considers to be a true home inspection.

So...by your interpretation....Missouri home inspectors can advertise and practice "Certified Move-In" inspections, radon inspections, and pre-sale home inspections throughout the state of Illinois....with no Illinois license....as long as the house is not listed for sale or under contract. Is that correct?

[Billy Boerner]

Originally Posted by jbushart

So...by your interpretation....Missouri home inspectors can advertise and practice "Certified Move-In" inspections, radon inspections, and pre-sale home inspections throughout the state....with no Illinois license....as long as the house is not listed for sale or under contract. Is that correct?

In MO you can do whatever you want Jim. You know that. No one monitors us that I know of. Know one cares what we do until something goes wrong.

[James H. Bushart]

Originally Posted by bboerner

In MO you can do whatever you want Jim. You know that. No one monitors us that I know of. Know one cares what we do until something goes wrong.

No, Billy....I am talking about Missouri inspectors going into Illinois to practice these inspections without a license. It's okay, right? As long as the house is not listed for sale?

[Billy Boerner]

Originally Posted by jbushart

No, Billy....I am talking about Missouri inspectors going into Illinois to practice these inspections without a license. It's okay, right? As long as the house is not listed for sale?

According to IL state law your exactly right. We can simply walk in and do consultations and home inspections until the home becomes contracted for sale. That's exactly how I read it and I've read alot of regs in my time.

[James H. Bushart]

Originally Posted by bboerner

According to IL state law your exactly right. We can simply walk in and do consultations and home inspections until the home becomes contracted for sale. That's exactly how I read it and I've read alot of regs in my time.

Well, Billy, how many of these have you done, personally?

[Billy Boerner]

Originally Posted by jbushart

Well, Billy, how many of these have you done, personally?

None. Never did a home inspection or any type of inspection in IL to date.

[James H. Bushart]

Originally Posted by bboerner

None. Never did a home inspection or any type of inspection in IL to date.

Why not. Don't you live in Illinois?

[Michael Larson]

Watch out Billy. Jim smells fresh meat.

[James H. Bushart]

Will...what are your thoughts on Billy's interpretation of your law. Can I advertise unlicensed home inspections for owners of homes prior to listing, like "Move-In Certified" without any problems from the State?

[Billy Boerner]

Originally Posted by jbushart

Why not. Don't you live in Illinois?

Yes sir for the next couple of months. Once I get back from IRAQ I'm moving into MO. If I knew I legally 100% could get away with it trust me I would move into the IL market in a flash. Eventually however I plan on becoming licensed in IL anyways. Regardless pre inspections are un heard of around MO and this side of IL. I've had maybe two calls if that for them since I've been in business here and no calls on the IL side for consultations they have all been from the MO side.

[Billy Boerner]

Originally Posted by mlarson

Watch out Billy. Jim smells fresh meat.

LOL Mike, since I'm 300 miles from Jim not to worried anymore plus he's a pretty cool guy so I know exactly his agenda on this one he's trying to prove Will wrong on this one and I think I may have just found a loophole for such in Will's IL state law. I may be reading it wrong however seems pretty clear to me a home inspection according to law must be "TIED TO A RE TRANSACTION" to be considered a true home inspection. Anything else is mearly a consultation which is not governed at all in IL.

[James H. Bushart]

Originally Posted by bboerner

LOL Mike, since I'm 300 miles from Jim not to worried anymore plus he's a pretty cool guy so I know exactly his agenda on this one he's trying to prove Will wrong on this one and I think I may have just found a loophole for such in Will's IL state law. I may be reading it wrong however seems pretty clear to me a home inspection according to law must be "TIED TO A RE TRANSACTION" to be considered a true home inspection. Anything else is mearly a consultation which is not governed at all in IL.

I think there are many Illinois inspectors who will be very disappointed over this revelation, Billy.

As for proving Will wrong, there is nothing to prove. Will's actions were not unethical in that he did not provide the report written for Client A to anyone else.

Will is a bit confused over his business relationships with people he does consultations for, but that's his problem.

As for me, my client is a person with whom I am conducting business and they do not become a client only at the point of paying me, as some people have laughingly concluded. The COE clearly defines how I am to conduct myself toward the public, generally, and toward my client, specifically.

If you were to apply the illogic of Larson, Nahrgang, and others....your failure to pay your medical bill would provide your doctor and/or the hospital the grounds to sell your confidential medical records to the highest bidder, since it is their property and they have no ethical obligation to you since you are not a "paying" client.

[Michael Larson]

Originally Posted by jbushart

As for me, my client is a person with whom I am conducting business and they do not become a client only at the point of paying me, as some people have laughingly concluded. The COE clearly defines how I am to conduct myself toward the public, generally, and toward my client, specifically.

Let me also laughingly point out that when you "do business" at a grocery store or mechanic, they are not your client.

For someone so precise as you imagine yourself to be this is a error.

It would be best to change the COE to remove any obligation to the "client" in the event that no payment is received to remove all doubt IMHO.