New Washington Legislation Submitted

[wforsyth]

Montana Legislation, Smart:


(xiv) the presence of potentially hazardous plants or animals, including but not limited to molds or mold-like substances that could cause disease in some humans, or wood-destroying organisms;

[Steven L. Smith]

"Certain sections of the RCW that were there just a couple months ago, have now been repealed and no longer exist. If you want I'll post them, or you can go read them yourself."

Please do post them if you have time. I had no been aware of any changes. But I have not been looking for them either.

[hmiller]

Washington State Department of Agriculture (WSDA)

Structural Pest Inspector Requirements

Licensing questions can be directed toll free to (877) 301-4555 or

license@agr.wa.gov.

Do I need to be licensed as a Structural Pest Inspector (SPI)?

(1) Are you conducting inspections for potential or proposed real estate transactions?
(2) Are you inspecting for or reporting on the presence or absence of any of the following?

1. • termites
2. • carpenter or moisture ants
3. • wood infesting beetles
4. • wood rot (fungus)

(3) Are you inspecting for or reporting on damage by any wood destroying organisms?

(4) Are you inspecting for or reporting on any of the following conditions?

1. • soil in direct contact with wood
2. • wooden or other conducive debris under or near the structure
3. • water in a structure from poor drainage or a plumbing leak
4. • failed caulk or grout at water splash areas
5. • inadequate clearances such as may be found in a crawl space
6. • restricted or failing gutter systems
7. • inadequate ventilation causing excessive moisture in wood
8. • vegetation in contact with the structure

If you answered "yes" to any of these questions, YOU must be licensed as a SPI.

Wendy
Are you saying that there are hundreds (maybe more) of us Washington Home Inspectors that pay for E&O coverage, bonds, attend WSPCA technical seminars, have met and listened to Dan Suome talks on enforcement actions against non licensed people, and all the complaints he has received from the non licensed people inspecting homes........are just licensed as SPI's and filling out reports that we don't need to do? Paying all that money for not? Taking time away from paying inspections to drive to Pierce or So. King County for seminars?
I think you would have a way different attitude if you attended one of those WDO technical seminars. You would learn alot.
I hear lots of complaints from individuals who aren't happy that they have to comply with this law. But we do it because we a serious about our profession.

[lcapaul]

Originally Posted by ssmith

"Director will be a Washington Home Inspector, someone with an SPI License"

Lewis, if you follow the link, this woman would be the director.

http://www.dol.wa.gov/about/message.html

She is the director of DOL. It states that the director is the director of DOL at the bottom of the first page. Liz Luce also sits as the head of the board of realtor licensing. The home inspector board would include 8, but she is clearly in charge and it indicates that the board would give her information. As for your other comments, your guess is as good as mine as to what criteria will be used. I know that some lobbying is taking place suggesting exactly what you recommend as far as looking at the date one received a WDO license. Whether they will do that or not remains to be seen. And, whether it matters or not depends on whether the bill passes, of coursse. There are many things in that bill that could probably be figured out later by the board.

Maybe you should give us your definition of what a Home Inspection consists of Windy, then maybe we could understand how YOU can do a Home Inspection in accordance with any industry standards, that would not include a WDO Report, and as Stephen pointed out, not include an ICN.

Most of us must have a different definition of what a Home Isnpection consists of than you do. but then over the past year it has appeared that most of us have different definitions about most things you claim to be an expert in.

I think most of us who have SPI licenses would be interested in a link to where you found your information that sections of the WSDA RCW's or WAC's have been repealed, please post them.

[lcapaul]

Originally Posted by hmiller

Washington State Department of Agriculture (WSDA)

Structural Pest Inspector Requirements

Licensing questions can be directed toll free to (877) 301-4555 or

license@agr.wa.gov.

Do I need to be licensed as a Structural Pest Inspector (SPI)?

(1) Are you conducting inspections for potential or proposed real estate transactions?
(2) Are you inspecting for or reporting on the presence or absence of any of the following?

1. • termites
2. • carpenter or moisture ants
3. • wood infesting beetles
4. • wood rot (fungus)

(3) Are you inspecting for or reporting on damage by any wood destroying organisms?

(4) Are you inspecting for or reporting on any of the following conditions?

1. • soil in direct contact with wood
2. • wooden or other conducive debris under or near the structure
3. • water in a structure from poor drainage or a plumbing leak
4. • failed caulk or grout at water splash areas
5. • inadequate clearances such as may be found in a crawl space
6. • restricted or failing gutter systems
7. • inadequate ventilation causing excessive moisture in wood
8. • vegetation in contact with the structure

If you answered "yes" to any of these questions, YOU must be licensed as a SPI.

Wendy
Are you saying that there are hundreds (maybe more) of us Washington Home Inspectors that pay for E&O coverage, bonds, attend WSPCA technical seminars, have met and listened to Dan Suome talks on enforcement actions against non licensed people, and all the complaints he has received from the non licensed people inspecting homes........are just licensed as SPI's and filling out reports that we don't need to do? Paying all that money for not? Taking time away from paying inspections to drive to Pierce or So. King County for seminars?
I think you would have a way different attitude if you attended one of those WDO technical seminars. You would learn alot.
I hear lots of complaints from individuals who aren't happy that they have to comply with this law. But we do it because we a serious about our profession.

Harold,

Windy has been given Dr. Soumis number and email address numerous times, yet she refuses to call or contact him, yet she still claims expertise in the SPI/WDO matter, she's the only person in 16 years that has realized that the law has no meaning and that it would never stand up in court.

Read her ramblings, she doesn't even know what we are required to inspect and report on, on her website, according to her, she has a disclaimer that says she doesn't do "Termite" Inspections, that's the sum total of her knowledge about a subject she claims to be such an expert in. In the past she has even told New Members that they don't need the SPI License because she could show in court that the Law was not enforcable, she even stated that there had been 3 previous cases against the WSDA where Inspectors had gone to Court and proved that the Law was invalid, of course no one at the WSDA nor any other Inspector is aware of that.

Maybe its time for all of the Inspectors who do perform legal Inspections in accordance with WAC's and NACHI Standards to push Soumi into enforcing the Rules like he keeps telling us he's going to.

There is nothing in 5788 that says ICN's will be eliminated, although with the requirement to post the Inspectors license number on every report ICN's may not be needed. Myself I believe that athough the Licensing may change to DOL, WSDA will still be the "enforcing" agency for everything regarding WDO Reports, so the ICN's may still be used.

What do you think of Steven's information that the Director of the DOL, and the Realty Board will also be the Director of the Home Inspectors Board?
Is she a Realtor? How else would she get on a HI Board, and wouldn't it be a Big Time Conflict of Interest to have the Director of the Realtor's Board be Director to the Board of "Deal Killers"?

[lcapaul]

Originally Posted by ssmith

At BTC, over the years, we have on a few occassions offered on its own the WDO part of the course, which is one day in class and a followup WDO inspection. People have taken this section, coming into the regular class for the couple days. The school has priced it higher per hour than what the other "full-time" students pay, but it was affordable. We have not done that in a couple years, but if people were interested in it, I could get specific prices from admissions. Basically, most people take the whole course, priced as Charlie quoted. At one time, we offered the WDO course stand alone in some big markets, but decided it was better to encourage most people to take the full class. If we were to have a number of experienced inspectors wishing to take just the WDO portion, to learn how to do such inspections and then complete the WSDA test, they should contact me and we might be able to put such a class together. As you know, we are willing to travel to about any community or tech college in the state, but we would need enough students to make it worthwhile.

Steven,

As an Instructor at BTC don't you have a financial interest in seeing a Law passed that includes "classroom" Instruction, you know, job security and all that? Didn't Waterman have a similiar interest in seeing SP6229 passed?

Your comments and opinions are fine, you're more than free to make them, but don't you as an Instructor have a different view of what may be good for you?

[James H. Bushart]

An interesting point is being raised, here.

When the only real law you have is being ignored and is not enforced...what's going to be different with your new law.

Your ASHI counterparts and other special interests are working hard to control the industry through your legislature, but (besides ratting on each other) how will this new law affect those many who apparently ignore the existing one?

[Steven L. Smith]

"Is she a Realtor? How else would she get on a HI Board."



NO, NO, NO...way off track. She is the director of the state agency -- State Department of Licensing, one of the largest agencies in this state. The Governor appoints heads of the departments: State Patrol, Employment Security, Labor and industries, etc. This woman will be more of a bureaucrat than a realtor. If one was to read her resume, which I have not, she has probably been in government most of her adult life. It is a career path, not usually easy, to get that high in state government.

[lcapaul]

Originally Posted by ssmith

"Certain sections of the RCW that were there just a couple months ago, have now been repealed and no longer exist. If you want I'll post them, or you can go read them yourself."

Please do post them if you have time. I had no been aware of any changes. But I have not been looking for them either.

I just searched the WSDA and WSPCA sites, there are no changes listed, it would seem that if Codes affecting Licensed SPI's were changed, that WSDA would notify the license holders, maybe they're trying something new and notifying those without licesnses.

[Steven L. Smith]

Obviously, all of us have circumstances that influence our views. David Waterman was a contractor, who had an affiliation with BTC. When David left, the program was totally consumed by the college. Those of us teaching work for the college on an hourly basis. While some income is derived, it is certainly not a large part of the income any of the four of us make -- that comes from inspections. Most of us enjoy working with so many potential inspectors and students. That is a primary motivation as traveling is not my favorite thing. For your info, I have not felt there was a problem with the suggested drop from last years 160 ED hours to 120 now. That is my opinion, as are all my comments at this thread and may not reflect the administration of the college. So you are right, my connection to BTC does influence my views. I think my views are most influenced, as a result of the BTC connection just from the number of inspectors, and future inspectors, that I end up talking to regularly.

I have hardly been trying to hide any such connection, which I think is apparent by my posts and the BTC link on each one.

[lcapaul]

Originally Posted by jbushart

An interesting point is being raised, here.

When the only real law you have is being ignored and is not enforced...what's going to be different with your new law.

Your ASHI counterparts and other special interests are working hard to control the industry through your legislature, but (besides ratting on each other) how will this new law affect those many who apparently ignore the existing one?

Your ASHI counterparts and other special interests are working hard to control the industry through your legislature, but (besides ratting on each other) how will this new law affect those many who apparently ignore the existing one?

It's not just ASHI James, there are NACHI people involved, and, sadly, most of the the unlicensed Home Inspectors in Washington State, at present, are NACHI members, at least when you compare differnt Association member lists with WSDA License listings. We've had that discussion before, when I asked if the HI Associations weren't going to Self Regulate their Members then who was?

I like things the way they are, it would be nice to be the only Legally Licensed HI in the Spokane Area, but there are 3 other NACHI Inspectors here that are licensed, and around 20 ASHI licensed inspectors, along with the more than 20 unlicensed NACHI members here.

If the "New Law" required Washington HI's to have used 100 Inspection Control Numbers on the reports they claim for grandfathering, then those who have been performing HI's without the required license would have no inspections/experience to claim. they would have to meet the full requirements that any new inspector would.

Why would any SPI/HI "Rat Out" an unlicensed Inspector intead of pointing out to clients and realtors that an SPI is a requirment in Washington State and for them to be sure their Inspector is Licensed, and to include a WSDA Letter to Realtors from the WSDA warning them of potential liability for referring an unlicensed Inspector in your Realtor Marketing materials and website?

My main reason for ******** about unlicensed inspectors is that they make the Association I belong to look bad, other than that why would I want to do away with two of my advantages over unlicensed inspectors, an SPI and E&O,

This Bill, even though I object to parts of it, and don't totally support the Idea of licensing itself, won't effect me in any great way, I already carry E&O and have a License, a little hassle and another "fee", life goes on.

[hmiller]

[quote=lcapaul]Harold,

Windy has been given Dr. Soumis number and email address numerous times, yet she refuses to call or contact him, yet she still claims expertise in the SPI/WDO matter, she's the only person in 16 years that has realized that the law has no meaning and that it would never stand up in court.

[quote]

Lewis...ya......I know..
The information I present is not to argue the point with Wendy,
but to simply challenge the misinformation with facts.
This will hopefully benefit other Washington HI's that are new to the business, and trying to sort out what the State of WA expects of them.
We know there is no changing Wendys' mind...
But heck what do I know.....I have only been in business since 1997, and licensed as an SPI, since about 1999 when we were still called commercial consultants....I have only inspected around 2500 homes. Guess I really don't know much

[lcapaul]

Originally Posted by ssmith

Obviously, all of us have circumstances that influence our views. David Waterman was a contractor, who had an affiliation with BTC. When David left, the program was totally consumed by the college. Those of us teaching work for the college on an hourly basis. While some income is derived, it is certainly not a large part of the income any of the four of us make -- that comes from inspections. Most of us enjoy working with so many potential inspectors and students. That is a primary motivation as traveling is not my favorite thing. For your info, I have not felt there was a problem with the suggested drop from last years 160 ED hours to 120 now. That is my opinion, as are all my comments at this thread and may not reflect the administration of the college. So you are right, my connection to BTC does influence my views. I think my views are most influenced, as a result of the BTC connection just from the number of inspectors, and future inspectors, that I end up talking to regularly.

I have hardly been trying to hide any such connection, which I think is apparent by my posts and the BTC link on each one.

I have hardly been trying to hide any such connection, which I think is apparent by my posts and the BTC link on each one. --

That's why I knew you were an instructor, I wasn't questioning your integrity or honesty, I was just pointing out that you most likely had a differnet outlook because of yoru instructor position and income derived from BTC and may be more likely to support Classroom instruction. If Waterman/6229 hadn't happened would BTC have taken over the HI Course completely?

As an instructor you are similiar to an education vendor, and this Bill has priovisions that benefit Education Vendors, in fact it puts one on the Board, another conflict of interest.

Thanks for pointing out the "Director" thing, I'd misread that, to me it is a serious conflict of Interest, the Director of the DOL should have the right, after advice and input from the different industries, to approve licensing requirements, but she/he should not be the Director of any Board, especially two conflicting businesses like Realtors and Home Inspectors.

The Home Inspector's Board should be the ones who determine what acceptable proof of requirements are, not the Director of the DOL, she should approve them but not write them.

I'm glad you did point this out though, now I'm leaning more towards putting some effort into killing this Bill than I am just accepting it or recommending modifications

[lcapaul]

[quote=hmiller][quote=lcapaul]Harold,

Windy has been given Dr. Soumis number and email address numerous times, yet she refuses to call or contact him, yet she still claims expertise in the SPI/WDO matter, she's the only person in 16 years that has realized that the law has no meaning and that it would never stand up in court.

Lewis...ya......I know..
The information I present is not to argue the point with Wendy,
but to simply challenge the misinformation with facts.
This will hopefully benefit other Washington HI's that are new to the business, and trying to sort out what the State of WA expects of them.
We know there is no changing Wendys' mind...
But heck what do I know.....I have only been in business since 1997, and licensed as an SPI, since about 1999 when we were still called commercial consultants....I have only inspected around 2500 homes. Guess I really don't know much

That's when Windy and I first got into it, she was telling anew Inspector that he didn't need an SPI License.

I'm working on setting up a NACHI Meeting in Spokane, the First Gurst Speaker I want is Dr. Soumi, or a WSDA Rep who can explain the Law to NACHI Inspectors here, who seem to listen to Windy and claim I'm lying and trying to run them out of business, what's really funny is that the Nachi inspectors over here who get the most upset are the same ones. who like Windy, have never talked to Soumi or anyone in authority at the WSDA, only "some girl" in the office.

Part of the confusion on the part of new inspectors is that they never properly researched the requirements for becoming a home inspector in Washington State, and the fact that the DOL doesn't handle the licensing of Pest/SPI licensing, why would anyone thinking of becoming a Home Inspector bother to search the WSDA Site for licensing requirements, if you call DOL they will tell you that there are no requirements other than a business license to be a Home Inspector, hopefully this Bill, if passed will fix that.

The information about SPI Requirements is widely available on almost every Asshociation and HI Education site, so not knowing about it is really no excuse.

I'm really going to pi$$ off some of the unlicensed inspectors soon, I just learned that Press Releases can help increase my website rankining, what better Press Release could there be than to remind Home Buyers and Realtors of the WSDA Requirements for Home Inspectors in Washington?

[Steven L. Smith]

"If Waterman/6229 hadn't happened would BTC have taken over the HI Course completely?"

Absolutely! Last year's bill or the outcome had less than zero to do with that change. David Waterman, after running his Housemaster business for more than a decade and his sideline company, Arbutus Training, had decided to make some changes in his personal life. At about that time, he received a lucrative offer from a past employer, that fit in with travel and where he wanted to see his life go over the next few years. He took that offer and is presently doing that job which is in a different field. Since he chose to leave home inspection, and severed all of his contacts to it, BTC had to assume control of the program quickly, which they did. We had a class to put together within about a week of David changing directions. Despite what others may think, as someone who knows David and was around him at the time, neither David nor the school was all that "consumed" as far as personal involvement in the bill. He gave input, and met with Harriet Spanel when requested, and he did promote education but he was not living or dying each day worried about or thinking about that bill. He already knew he was leaving the field by the time anything happened with it.

And, yes, anyone reading my posts should realize that, to some degree, my posts are tainted by my connection to the BTC program, which is part of the community college system not a private vendor. That said, I do try to contribute thoughtful comments that others will find worthwhile, while trying to avoid the hornets nests.