ASHI Legislation in Wa. State

[jclark1]

Section 5- I have plenty of training time. But that didn't include 25% in the field. Does this mean (if you don't have 250 inspections) you would have to enroll in one of their approved programs? Or is section 5-5 saying if you pass their written course you get certified?

Does anyone know the answer to the question above?

[Brian E. Kelly]

Originally Posted by jclark1

NEW SECTION. Sec. 5 (1) The board must prepare a written training course to be administered to applicants for a certificate of registration. The training course must be constructed to determine whether the applicant:
(a) Possesses general knowledge of the technical information and practical procedures that are necessary for home inspection; and
(b) Is familiar with the local government regulations as related to home inspections.
(2) In development of the training course, the board must require at a minimum the following:
(a) One hundred sixty hours of training;
(b) A combination of classroom education and field training, where seventy-five percent of the applicant's time is spent in classroom education and twenty-five percent in field training.
(3) In development of the training course, the board must review the standards of practice and code of ethics of the American society of home inspectors and incorporate into the training course any portions that are determined by the board to be applicable.
(4) The board must develop and implement procedures for approving training courses offered by an entity other than the board. Only board-approved training courses meet the requirements of this section.
(5) An applicant must successfully complete a written training course that meets the requirements of this section and that is either offered or approved by the board in order for the applicant to be eligible for a certificate of registration with the department as a home inspector.

NEW SECTION. Sec. 27 This act takes effect July 1, 2006.

Section 5- I have plenty of training time. But that didn't include 25% in the field. Does this mean (if you don't have 250 inspections) you would have to enroll in one of their approved programs? Or is section 5-5 saying if you pass their written course you get certified?
I don't have a problem with having to take a test (written and practical), in fact I think it's good for our industry to have some standards.
I do have a problem with 1 organization crafting legislation geared towards protectionism. I'm sick and tired of corporations and other special interests writing their own legislation and getting it passed based on campaign contributions... But that's a whole different subject...don't get me started!

Sec. 27- Is this thing going in to effect July 1?

Thanks for passing this on Wendy. Where can I get more info?

I would recommend your Legislature James, or follow Wendy's' link to US Inspect.

[wforsyth]

Originally Posted by wforsyth

No, it's been tabled while waiting for review from Labor, Commerce, Research & Development.

Washington State fortunately has something called a Sunrise Law that requires anyone asking to implement new licensing requirements, to go through an industry review first. That is what saved us here as far as I can tell, because it gives us time to work on this.

You are welcome James!

http://www.multistate.com/YPPA.nsf/0...8?OpenDocument

[Brian E. Kelly]

Originally Posted by wforsyth

http://www.realestate.com/special-offers/inspectors.asp

I love US Inspect

[wforsyth]

I suppose if my kids weren't trying to completely and utterly ruin my day, I might get the joke. But I guess they are and I don't.

[rbunzel]

Wendy,

There is a coalition of inspectors from ASHI, NAHI, AII and NACHI who have been addressing this bill since December. According to Senator Spanel's office (she is the sponsor) this has been sent out for review and if history is any teacher, the bill will never see the light of day. However, being the proactive sort we are, we are going to create language that the inspector community is comfortable with and have it ready in case it does see daylight. I will email you the contact info to get on the list and I think we have a meeting scheduled for March.

BTW - ASHI did not sponsor this bill (at least that what was claimed), It was proposed by a technical school in Bellingham and if you look at the education requirements, that makes sense. They are pretty heavy compared to other states.

//Rick

[Brian E. Kelly]

Originally Posted by jclark1

What is the link to usinspect (above) for? I saw nothing on there pertaining to this discussion.

No joke Wendy, when you started this discussion you linked to US Inspect for some unknown reason.

[Brian E. Kelly]

Originally Posted by rbunzel

Wendy,

There is a coalition of inspectors from ASHI, NAHI, AII and NACHI who have been addressing this bill since December. According to Senator Spanel's office (she is the sponsor) this has been sent out for review and if history is any teacher, the bill will never see the light of day. However, being the proactive sort we are, we are going to create language that the inspector community is comfortable with and have it ready in case it does see daylight. I will email you the contact info to get on the list and I think we have a meeting scheduled for March.

BTW - ASHI did not sponsor this bill (at least that what was claimed), It was proposed by a technical school in Bellingham and if you look at the education requirements, that makes sense. They are pretty heavy compared to other states.

//Rick

Keep your eye on them Rick, and good luck.

NEW SECTION. Sec. 7 (1) The board must develop a curriculum for continuing education courses to be offered to home inspectors, registered under this chapter, that requires a minimum of twenty-four hours of training per year. In developing the continuing education curriculum, the board must:
(a) Set criteria for the course content, which must include review of any provisions of the standards of practice and code of ethics of the American society of home inspectors that the board determines to be applicable;

[Frank M. Carrio, CMI]

We had the same thing happen in New Hampshire. The "Technical Advisor's" turned out to be the President of the ASHI New England Chapter.

The "funny" thing is that this "man" does NOT live in New Hampshire!!!!

He came from out of state to influence New Hampshire law.

This same person had his ASHI CHAPTER pay for his membership in our NEW HAMPSHIRE CHAPTER of NACHI!!!! Talk about James Bond!!

We are still "fighting the fight," and I do not have the time or the typing speed to keep up with this post.

Wendy, If you need any help please call / contact, Nick, Joe Farsetta, Joe Ferry and last but not least you can always call me.

GOOD LUCK!


</IMG></IMG></IMG></IMG></IMG>
</IMG></IMG></IMG></IMG></IMG>

[cbuell]

While on the surface this sounds like "ASHI" legislation, I think that they are sort of using the ASHI standards as a starting point. Given that there is little difference between any of the association's standards of practice I don't think it is a huge flaw in the bill overall. I agree it is poor wording and should be changed to "WA State's standards of practice"----a point that I am sure will surface during the "comment period." I don't think this is "ASHI" legislation given that they are actively campaigning against the bill from what I have heard.

[wforsyth]

They may be, but the problem definitely is the wording and only incorporating the standards of one group over all others.

Why would ASHI be fighting this in Washington State, and actively supporting legislation in other states?

Brian, I know I put that in and up above I explained why. It's not a direct correlation but similar problems.

[wforsyth]

What are the association affiliations of the people at the school who sponsored the bill?

They certainly aren't NACHI or it would have NACHI wording in it, not exclusively ASHI.

[cbuell]

Wendy,
What school are you talking about?
Is there more ASHI wording in the bill?

[wforsyth]

Rick said the bill was proposed by a technical school in Bellingham.

I don't see more ASHI wording in it so far.

[cbuell]

Wendy,
As far as I know Senator Spanell introduced the bill on her own and consulted with the owner of Arbutus Inspection Training Inc (that teaches the 160 Residential Home Inspection Course at Bellingham Technical College----and many other technical colleges around the state). I am one of four teachers of this course---two are ASHI and two are NACHI----and I can say for sure that we are pretty "non-denominational". Hope this helps.