Consumer Advocacy Group Announces Opposition to Missouri HB 2057!!!

[Doug Edwards]

I have personally being dealing with and observing HI laws in Florida and following HI laws around the country for over a decade and I have yet to find in a single instance where the "public" is the ones pushing for a HI law. Another law enacted to force HI to do their jobs is just another layer of laws on top of already existing laws (lawS not law) that protect the consumer. It has always been groups who stand to make more money, shift responsibilities and liability, stifle competition or all of the above that push for these HI laws and unfortunately there are almost always HI who are more than willing to go along to get along with those parties and more often than not are heavily engaged (often covertly) in make the HI laws reality. We have numerous such HI right here in Florida and some of the same ones are sweating bullets because they helped to enact the proposed HI law here and now find themselves having to prepare for 2010 or go out of business. The costs right are going to be high yet there will still be incompetent inspectors doing business when it is all done. Others are standing in the wings waiting to scoop up all the money they can in the interim by selling the new requirements to the HI community.

[Michael Larson]

Originally Posted by wdecker

Licensing can help, but only if it is done in the right way.

Will, that sounds too much like "Socialism works if if done the right way and by the right people"

You may have trouble proving either is true.

[James H. Bushart]

Originally Posted by dedwards

I have personally being dealing with and observing HI laws in Florida and following HI laws around the country for over a decade and I have yet to find in a single instance where the "public" is the ones pushing for a HI law.

There is a reason for that.

The public has more control over who stays in business than the government does.

The government can fine me, bar me, suspend me, and refuse to license me....and as many inspectors have demonstrated in many different states, I can still do home inspections.

But the public has the power. No calls.....no inspections. Period. This is how the public determines who they will allow to stay in business or not.

All....virtually all....home inspection laws are initiated and supported by some group who feels that they will gain, financially, by it. A real estate salesman, an education vendor, or an inspector thinking he will thin his market.....always someone with something to gain.

"We are doing this for the consumer" is a mantra that eases consciences but little else. Consumers don't care.

[William J. Decker]

Originally Posted by mlarson

Will, that sounds too much like "Socialism works if if done the right way and by the right people"

You may have trouble proving either is true.

Good point. Maybe state governments are such that they can't do it right.

[John McKenna]

Is SoP better as a suggestion or a law?

[James H. Bushart]

Originally Posted by jmckenna1

Is SoP better as a suggestion or a law?

In business, your standard operating procedure is how you describe to your potential client what your product is.

In an unlicensed state, the buyer has the ability to shop and choose what they feel to be the most appropriate. They can also negotiate with the inspector whatever modifications they feel they would like for him to make and he can set his fee, accordingly.

In a state where the SOP is mandated by the government, the potential client's decision has already been made for him and the ability to modify or negotiate a change is limited or negated.

"Licensing" is when the government does the thinking for the consumer. Where it exists, it needs to be repealed.

[rrebelo]

Originally Posted by jbushart

While these arguments are hardly likely to be collected and referred to as "The Federalist Papers", they do make it interesting for the readers of this newspaper as they learn that there is more to a home inspector licensing bill than just "protecting the consumer".

First, the paper published this:




Apparently, I raised the ire of some used house salespeople in the western side of my state. Soon, the following was published:





I responded as follows, which was published today:

James,

The Professional Services Rendered amount of the sale price of a property (6%, 7%, etc.) does not ALL go to a particular agent; most often the amount becomes split 4-ways between the listing brokerage, thier agent, the Buyers brokerage, and thier agent.

Therefore, the agent recieves little in comparison, per hour, that what is percieved the make. In-other-words, if that agent, who makes $4k on one transaction AFTER working several months on a property, do the math. AND if that agent does not have steady business, closings per month, that $4K that was earned was peanuts.

By-the-way James, it seems you don't have many inspections?

YOU SPEND WAY-TOO-MUCH TIME IN THESE BLOGS!

Yes, licensing does NOT make much sense either!

[James H. Bushart]

Originally Posted by rrebelo

By-the-way James, it seems you don't have many inspections?

I have about all the inspections I can handle, really. I'm doing quite well, thanks.

I noticed that your site was disconnected, though. I hope things are going well for you in Florida.