KCRAR article

[Gary L. Farnsworth, CMI]

Nick, you will not believe this article. I hope you read it. James, Dan, all Kansas inspectors look at this. The BS is flowing already. Mis-information abounds. I just hate the "WE" term.

http://kcrarnews.frogpond.com/DispAr...TICLE_ID=22981

[Joe Farsetta]

Yes... yes... yes...

Regulate those scumbag home inspectors. How dare they limit their liability to under 10,000.

And while we're at it, lets add these severe punishment to those bad realtors...

Created a new maximum fine of $5,000 for extremely serious violations such as forgery, mortgage fraud and intentional misrepresentation where fraud or deceit is proven;

Okay. Let me understand this. A realtor gets nailed with a WHOPPING $5000 maximum fine for forgery, fraud, and misrepresentation, where its all proven. So, if they do all this and get an $11,000 commission, the net profit is still $6000. Sounds like good business to me...

Provide the Commission with the authority to punish unprofessional conduct by real estate licensees such as the theft of personal property, harassment and physical abuse (attempted mortgage fraud language opposed by KAR was deleted by the House Commerce and Labor Committee);

So I guess the Commission was powerless to punish a realtor for beating the crap out of a client for not purchasing the *****box they were just shown. After beating the snot out of the client, the realtor could have, theoretically, driven off in the clients car. While they may have gone to jail for either infraction, they wouldnt have lost their real estate license.

And thank God that the realtors were successful in having that pesky attempted mortgage fraud language pulled from the law!

Toto, I dont think we're in Kansas anymore.

[Gary L. Farnsworth, CMI]

LOL!!!!!!! Did you notice that we, as Kansas inspectors, have to abide by the liability limit by July of 2008? Wrong. The govenor has yet to appoint the board, and actually, the bill is not really law yet until it is a recorded statute. I hope they print a date retraction. It will show how they are already screwing up.

[James H. Bushart]

Once again...the KAR is clearly marketing a home inspection as a $10,000 warranty on the purchase of the home they are selling.

Kansas inspectors may want to begin to educate the used house salesmen in their area on what the new inspection reports are going to look like on 7/1 when this law takes effect.

There will be a few guys who will think that appeasing the salesmen with a soft report will get them somewhere....but we will be reading about them in the weeks and months to come.

[Nick Gromicko]

If you read the article carefully you will note that the REALTORs just put the appraisers out of biz.

[Steven D. Farnsworth]

Response from Luke bell pertaining to the posted article. This bill is already being interpeted for a specific advantage.


"The statement published in the May 2008 KCRAR newsletter is correct and there will not be a retraction or correction. If you will look at Section 15 on Page 6 of the legislation, it states that “this act shall take effect and be in force from and after its publication in the statute book.” Since this always takes place on the July 1 immediately following the legislative session, this statute will become effective on July 1, 2008. Unless otherwise specified in the body of the legislation, all provisions in the legislation will become effective on July 1, 2008.

You will note that the sections of the legislation pertaining to the registration requirements for home inspectors in counties with population both greater and less than 60,000 do not take effect until July 1, 2009 and January 1, 2011, respectively. As a result, home inspectors will not be required to satisfy the registration requirements (i.e. examination, membership in a not-for-profit association, carrying $100,000 in general liability insurance, maintaining $10,000 in financial responsibility assurance mechanisms, annual continuing education, etc.) until their respective time for registration specified in Section 10.

However, since Section 11 does not fall under the language written into the registration requirements in Section 10 and does not contain a specified date for implementation, the liability provisions contained in that section will become effective immediately on July 1, 2008 when this legislation is published in the statute book. This means that following July 1, 2008, home inspectors are prohibited from limiting their liability for errors and omissions to less than $10,000 per home inspection and must provide all customers with a completed pre-inspection notice prior to the home inspection."

Luke Bell
Director of Governmental Relations
Kansas Association of REALTORS®

[James H. Bushart]

Write Luke back.

Tell him his job is to interpret legislation for real estate salesmen. We are not interested in or obliged to his interpretations.

We know he bought this law with his own money, but it still does not make it his.

[Gary L. Farnsworth, CMI]

Sec 11: "It is the duty of all home inspectors registered uder this act..."

I cannot abide by sec. 11. I am not registered. Mr. Bell is out of line. He needs to be careful.

[James H. Bushart]

I picture this guy with his pants around his ankles....a copy of his HI licensing law in one hand...his "ray wand" in another....making Japanese faces and shouting to his wife "It is my pee-pee and I can wash it just as fast as I want to."

So excited about his new $10,000 warranty....he just can't wait the 14 months it is going to take to get it implemented.

[Kenneth Lott]

The Real Estate and insurance people sure got their way on this one.

[Dan Bowers, CMI]

Having carefully reviewed Mr Bell's letter, the article and the Bill I have determined that Mr. Bell is wrong. The Bill will go into effect once registered, etc. however the Bill does not take effect until we are registered, etc.

Mr Bell and the realtors are showing either gross stupidity or true colors.

Mr Bell stood time and time again in state legislative meetings and announced to the legislators that in Kansas IF the home inspector used an Inspection Agreement with a clause LIMITING his / her liability - the consumers had no recourse if a home inspection went awry OTHER than to get a refund of their fee's. I'm helping 3 inspectors at the current time with their lawsuits.

In Kansas small claims court allows a consumer to sue (or claim) for up to $4,000 against someone like us; there is arbitration, mediation andr litigation.

Every time I heard a realtor or KAR employee or ASHI/KAREI inspector spout that BS, I wondered if (1) they really were that naive or dumb; OR (2) if they were just flat out scum bag liars. I never found a choice (3).

If you look at the KCRAR or many other Kansas real estate contract - they seem to be written in about 9-10 point type AND it seems like they have about every other paragraph a sentence stating "The realtors is not liable for .......', etc, etc. Yet they tell us they get sued a lot.

Yet they kept stating if we use a similar clause - we can't be sued.

[Gary L. Farnsworth, CMI]

Need any help with the 3 lawsuits? Thanks for your comments. Senator Brownlee is communicating with State attorneys. Mr. Bell is way out of line. I will try to keep everyone posted.

[James E. Braun, CMI]

That is the way I read it too.
Most of the times when a Realtor gets sued over an inspection is when the Realtor tried to make the defects that the inspector found as nothing to be concerned about, and convinces the buyer to buy the property anyway without those defects being corrected. I run into this type of Realtor at least once a week. I make sure I piss this him/her off so much that they will never refer me. So I will never get drug into court because of what they said. Realtors do it to themselves, some are nothing but lawsuits waiting to happen.

[Gary L. Farnsworth, CMI]

James, you are correct also. We should be scrutinizing RE agents more. I suggested on another thread to do a folder/agreement for doing any new inspections with a new RE agent. Let them know up front. Perhaps, say something about the RE in the pre-inspection agreement: "missinterpretations to second or third parties............."

[James H. Bushart]

Originally Posted by gfarnsworth

James, you are correct also. We should be scrutinizing RE agents more. I suggested on another thread to do a folder/agreement for doing any new inspections with a new RE agent. Let them know up front. Perhaps, say something about the RE in the pre-inspection agreement: "missinterpretations to second or third parties............."

Honestly and truly, those inspectors presently working with RE salesmen should begin to prepare the agent for the post-HI law report to eliminate the gasps of shock and dismay.

With the KAR marketing this $10,000 home inspector warranty they purchased from your congress...you have no choice but to point out the darkest side to every possibility related to every defect. Not too many agents are going to be ready for that.