New Washington Legislation Submitted

[James H. Bushart]

Originally Posted by lcapaul

"The terms "Report" or "report" as used in this section will mean a complete WDO inspection report." applies to Any Report that mentions WDO......

Where is this stated, directly, in your law governing structural pest inspectors? I cannot find it.

[lcapaul]

Originally Posted by wforsyth

III. The inspectors are not required to:

A. Move any personal items or other obstructions, such as, but not limited to:

1. Throw rugs.
2. Furniture.
3. Floor or wall coverings.
4. Ceiling tiles
5. Window coverings.
6. Equipment.
7. Plants.
8. Ice.
9. Debris.
10. Snow.
11. Water.
12. Dirt.
13. Foliage.
14. Pets

B. Dismantle, open, or uncover any system or component.
C. Enter or access any area which may, in the opinion of the inspector, to be unsafe or risk personal safety.
D. Enter crawlspaces or other areas that are unsafe or not readily accessible.
E. Inspect underground items such as, but not limited to, underground storage tanks or other indications of their presence, whether abandoned or actively used.
F. Do anything which, in the inspector's opinion, is likely to be unsafe or dangerous to the inspector or others or damage property, such as, but not limited to, walking on roof surfaces, climbing ladders, entering attic spaces or negotiating with dogs.
G. Inspect decorative items.
H. Inspect common elements or areas in multi-unit housing.
I. Inspect intercoms, speaker systems, radio-controlled, security devices or lawn irrigation systems.
J. Offer guarantees or warranties.
K. Offer or perform any engineering services.
L. Offer or perform any trade or professional service other than home inspection.
M. Research the history of the property, report on its potential for alteration, modification, extendibility, or its suitability for a specific or proposed use for occupancy.
N. Determine the age of construction or installation of any system structure, or component of a building, or differentiate between original construction or subsequent additions, improvements, renovations or replacements thereto.
O. Determine the insurability of a property.
P. Perform or offer Phase 1 environmental audits.
Q. Inspect on any system or component which is not included in these standards.

Oh, Oh Roy, now you're going to be sued too, Wendy has quite a list, especially if you go back a few months, "her people" must be very busy.

I hit the reply twice, thought I had already posted Roy's.

Are you really that incompetent, do you really know so little about Home Inspection and the SOP? Now you're telling us that you don't need to mention WDO damage or conditions according to the SOP, that's good Wendy, now I do believe that you have never even been on a Home Inspection.

It's too bad that even if you were correct about the SOP and you weren't required to report such items, that State Law takes precidence over the SOP just like it does in every other State.

[wforsyth]

Originally Posted by lcapaul

Oh, Oh Roy, now you're going to be sued too, Wendy has quite a list, especially if you go back a few months, "her people" must be very busy.

See, you totally ignore where I answered your question and proved you wrong, and resort to insults. That's how i know I'm right.

Roy and Ray are on permanent ignore in my brain. They aren't worth paying attention to. They're just two old farts.

[wforsyth]

I thought you were done Lewis and were only going to email?

[lcapaul]

Originally Posted by jbushart

Where is this stated, directly, in your law governing structural pest inspectors? I cannot find it.

WAC 16-228-2045 Complete wood destroying organism inspection reports. (1) Any report that identifies damage or infestation by WDOs or, conditions conducive to damage or infestation by WDOs pursuant to the sale, exchange, or refinancing of any structure or, as a result of telephone solicitation by an inspection, pest control, or other business, must be a complete WDO inspection report and must comply with this section. The terms "Report" or "report" as used in this section will mean a complete WDO inspection report.

Again, if a Home Inspection report mentions the conditions under this paragraph it, the Home Inspection Report must be a Complete WDO Inspection Report.

Try it this way without the real estate junk: Any Report that Identifies damage or infestation by WDOs or, conditions conducive to damage or infestation by WDOs............must be a Complete WDO Inspection Report.

If a report mentions WDO then the reprot itself becomes a Complete WDO Report and must follow the guidlines of the law, that does not mean that in the case of a Home Inspection report that it cannot follow the SOP.

You're reading it just like I did when I first saw it, but when you read it the way it was intended it makes sense. Why would the opening words "Any Report" be defined as a Complete WDO Reprt, read it that way:

Any "Complete WDO Inspection"report that identifies damage or infestation by WDOs or, conditions conducive to damage or infestation by WDOs pursuant to the sale, exchange, or refinancing of any structure or, as a result of telephone solicitation by an inspection, pest control, or other business, must be a complete WDO inspection report and must comply with this section. The terms "Report" or "report" as used in this section will mean a complete WDO inspection report.

The last sentence wouldn't be needed if it was written that way, but 2035 does begin with Any WDO Inspection......and says that who ever does the inspectionmust be licensed. No there is no mention of HOme Inspectors but between the two it specifies that any report with WDO becomes a Complete WDO and that the Inspection must be done by a licensed inspector.

The WSDA also includes Appraisors in the SPI licensing requirement because Appraisors oftne mention WDO damage and conditions in their reports.

I know you don't like HI Laws, but read this the way it was intended and not the way someone would who wanted to get out from under it. It sucks, but It's the Law.

[Roy D. Cooke, Sr]

Originally Posted by wforsyth

Roy and Ray are on permanent ignore in my brain. They aren't worth paying attention to. They're just two old farts.

Thanks WENDY ,but I guess you have a very short memory you have said before you would stop following me and it seems to last for a short period and away you go .
You like to think you help a lot of people well I just had a look and you have made well over 5,000 posts and you have started where you are giving information and help to Home Inspectors 68 starting Posts.
I have made just over 3900 posts and where I have started and been giving information and help with 500 starting Posts.
As was said before Wendy you are a parisite who takes others information and becomes an instant expert.
You should be ashamed of your self your are like the empty wagon lots of noise but nothing inside .
Please leave me alone and I will do the same for you .
No reply required .

Roy Cooke

[lcapaul]

Originally Posted by wforsyth

See, you totally ignore where I answered your question and proved you wrong, and resort to insults. That's how i know I'm right.

Roy and Ray are on permanent ignore in my brain. They aren't worth paying attention to. They're just two old farts.

The only person you have proved to be wrong wendy is yourself.

Explain how you follow the SOP and not mention WDO, we'd all be interested in that and how you, someone who has never conducted a Home Inspection has taken it upon herself to redefine the NACHI SOP/

The only thing you are right about is that you can do Home Inspections in Washington without an SPI License, the trouble is that the Inspection will not be in accordance with any recognized SOP and it will be totally worthless to the client because you cannot, now you tell us that you don't need to, mention WDO damage or conditions. Go ahead and do those kind of Inspections Wendy, you're probably qualified for them, but read this first:

http://www.nwrealtor.com/displaycomm...articlenbr=138

[Peter Doane]

Originally Posted by wforsyth

You are not reading the law with the correct emphasis. It says that you cannot report conducive conditions in a COMPLETE WOOD DESTROYING ORGANISM REPORT without being a licensed SPI. It does NOT say you cannot mention conducive conditions. Only that you cannot place them in an official report. It does not say you cannot call them out and defer them to a specialist. This is what everyone on the opposing side is NOT getting.
This is why The WSDA guidelines are just that. Guidelines.

You didnt answer my question,.... I didnt ask for an interpretation of the law,.. I simply asked: What do you spicifically say, in your report, to your clients that are buying a home in Washington State when they hire YOU to do a Pre Purchase "Home Inspection" and YOU come across the condition in the picture I posted?
I'm just curious about what you (or any non SPI Home Inspector doing business/ inspection in WA. State) would say if you/they came across this condition?

[lcapaul]

Originally Posted by wforsyth

I thought you were done Lewis and were only going to email?

I was, but then I got to reading a couple of old threads from back in September, remember your references to "Caselaw", the ones that you couldn't locate because you had deleted them, but later decided that maybe they weren't caselaw at all, and then in this thread you said that Dennis had told you about them, but Dennis didn't "introduce" himself until you had made your statements about caselaw and how two inspectors had taken the WSDA to Court and won, but then maybe it wasn't court. and how you were going to take the SPI Test, of course that was after you said you weren't getting one our of principle. and how you were getting your Realtors license , that hasn't happened yet either has it......in that thread you actually threatened to sue more people than you have in this one, including Joe F., how did those Lawsuits go? Of, right they take time.

In this thread alone you've gone from "I'm going to take the Test just so I don't get left out" back to "i'm protesting by not doing inspections". and now you've revised the NACHI SOP, you're a busy girl Wendy

[Peter Doane]

Originally Posted by jbushart

A home inspector can legally comment on anything covered by his SOP.

Don't cloud the water with information you are not 100% sure about,.. or that may only apply to your state....

Any SOP (NACHI's, ASHI's, NAHI's etc for example) Is a requirement ONLY to being a member in "good standings" in that specific organization, it does not over ride state laws in place. States may adopt certain requirements but only the specific state can say WHAT is required. Currently, WA. State does not have any regulations or SOP for home inspectors EXCEPT ONE: that if you do home inspections for a real estate transaction, you MUST also be a SPI. Period.
When I do an inspection for a real estate transaction (RET), It gets its own ICN# as required by law,... Whether I find WDO issues or NOT.

[wforsyth]

Originally Posted by pdoane

You didnt answer my question,.... I didnt ask for an interpretation of the law,.. I simply asked: What do you spicifically say, in your report, to your clients that are buying a home in Washington State when they hire YOU to do a Pre Purchase "Home Inspection" and YOU come across the condition in the picture I posted?
I'm just curious about what you (or any non SPI Home Inspector doing business/ inspection in WA. State) would say if you/they came across this condition?

IF I was doing a report such as this (and I emphasize IF), then I would phrase it something like this:

Due to certain conditions encountered by the home inspector, that could potentially indicate conditions conducive to Wood Destroying Organisms, it is recommended that a Structural Pest Inspector be hired to evaluate the area below the sink in the kitchen. Since the home inspector is not a licensed Structural Pest Inspector, they are not allowed by law to comment on whether or not conditions exist that are conducive to Wood Destroying organisms, and therefore defers to a specialist in the field, a Structural Pest Inspector who will be able to help the client determine what conditions do or do not exist in this area.

Maybe you missed this?

[wforsyth]

Originally Posted by pdoane

Don't cloud the water with information you are not 100% sure about,.. or that may only apply to your state....

Any SOP (NACHI's, ASHI's, NAHI's etc for example) Is a requirement ONLY to being a member in "good standings" in that specific organization, it does not over ride state laws in place. States may adopt certain requirements but only the specific state can say WHAT is required. Currently, WA. State does not have any regulations or SOP for home inspectors EXCEPT ONE: that if you do home inspections for a real estate transaction, you MUST also be a SPI. Period.
When I do an inspection for a real estate transaction (RET), It gets its own ICN# as required by law,... Whether I find WDO issues or NOT.

NO IT DOESN'T. There are NO LAWS on the books referencing home inspectors. ONLY Structural Pest Inspectors.

The ONLY report that requires an ICN if involved in a real estate transaction, is a COMPLETE STRUCTURAL WOOD DESTROYING ORGANISM INSPECTION REPORT.



Not, simply a home inspection report.

[James H. Bushart]

Originally Posted by pdoane

Don't cloud the water with information you are not 100% sure about,.. or that may only apply to your state....

Any SOP (NACHI's, ASHI's, NAHI's etc for example) Is a requirement ONLY to being a member in "good standings" in that specific organization, it does not over ride state laws in place. States may adopt certain requirements but only the specific state can say WHAT is required. Currently, WA. State does not have any regulations or SOP for home inspectors EXCEPT ONE: that if you do home inspections for a real estate transaction, you MUST also be a SPI. Period.
When I do an inspection for a real estate transaction (RET), It gets its own ICN# as required by law,... Whether I find WDO issues or NOT.

Peter,

I think we are arguing apples and oranges.

Your state requires a certain report from all of its licensed structural pest inspectors. Not home inspectors. It is the interpretation of some - and not all - Washington home inspectors that the SPI rules apply to them. Your state government has not published anything definitive to say otherwise.

In the absence of a state mandated SOP, a home inspector may choose any he wishes to use...just as you choose to issue a report consistent with that of a licensed SPI. No one is saying you are wrong to use it and, apparently, no one of consequence is disagreeing with those who choose not to.

This is common when governments intervene in business through legislation.

Where the state has failed in writing and enforcing a clear law, people like Lewis are turning to marketing (informing the consumer of the value of his report) which should be the final determining factor, anyway. Not the government.

So...before you Washingtonians decide to take a second plunge into the quicksand of laws and their interpretations...perhaps you might want to stick with controlling your own destinies through your own marketing strengths and let the government continue to deal with pot holes and stop signs and things it is good at.

[James H. Bushart]

Originally Posted by pdoane

that if you do home inspections for a real estate transaction, you MUST also be a SPI. Period.

Your law does not say this. It is simply those who are interpretting your law who are telling you this, IMO.

[wforsyth]

Originally Posted by jbushart

Where the state has failed in writing and enforcing a clear law, people like Lewis are turning to marketing (informing the consumer of the value of his report) which should be the final determining factor, anyway. Not the government.

This would be all well and good if he was just stating his inspections are superior. But he is misinforming the public and stating that those who choose not to become SPI are breaking the law. This is false and misleading advertising and breaks the laws of truth in advertising.