Should a warranty managment company be HI licensed?

[Brian E. Kelly]

Originally Posted by kpierce

Maybe the board member who thinks I should can speak up and defend his position.

Got any meeting minutes or a link we can read to flesh out this thread Kevin???

[kpierce]

Originally Posted by bkelly2

Got any meeting minutes or a link we can read to flesh out this thread Kevin???

I'm waiting....

[kpierce]

Originally Posted by Scott Patterson

Kevin, I thought you were also inspecting homes and that you had a home inspectors license already.

I'm still inspecting but probably only until July 2010. I haven't convinced myself yet to justify the cost of getting a license.

[kpierce]

I've heard through the grape vine that it was Mike O.'s argument. Your thoughts Mike?

[Stephen W. Stanczyk]

I was at the Home Inspector Advisory Board meeting where this was discussed. One of the Board Members brought this up and read from portions of an Active Rain profile or description. The name of the individual or company was redacted out.

I think the wording in question is from Kevin's profile. The item that brought the most attention was:

Identify incomplete, broken, missing, or otherwise damaged areas, along with confirming the overall product meets and or exceeds your specifications along with Industry Standards for workmanship and performance.

Confirm operation of all appliances, doors, and windows, locks, plumbing fixtures, electrical sockets, and other systems and or mechanisms.

There was about 20 minutes of discussion and the item was referred to the Business Practice Committee. They will meet on Tuesday, November 10, 2009 to discuss this and other items. Place and time to be determined and posted on the Home Inspector Website for the DOL.

Some of the discussion touched on the fact that subcontractors of the builder are licensed when required. i.e. plumbers, electricians, hvac techs. If that is the case, why wouldn't a company like Kevin's, also a subcontractor, that performs the duties above that are performed during a home inspection and are part of the State SOP, also require a license like the other subcontractors. I guess if he was an employee of the Builder, it would not be an issue.

There were at least 2 Board Members that felt this was not an issue as those performing this function are normally not inspecting but taking claims from the buyer as items to be fixed under the warranty. Not inspecting, but merely taking information from the buyer. The wording that Kevin has is on that fine line. Do the words "identify" or "confirm" become interchangeable with inspect? At least "identify" is used commonly in the NACHI SOP.

Discussions continued with information about Oregon law that says if you inspect a certain number of items noted in their SOP, it becomes a home inspection. A single item would not qualify. That language is being looked at by the Committee to see if new codes or even laws would be needed to enact something similar.

It usually takes a couple weeks to get the minutes posted. The last meeting had the audio tapes available in about a week if I remember right. It was one of the more interesting Board meetings that I have attended.

Best to all.

[kpierce]

Originally Posted by sstanczyk

I was at the Home Inspector Advisory Board meeting where this was discussed. One of the Board Members brought this up and read from portions of an Active Rain profile or description. The name of the individual or company was redacted out.

I think the wording in question is from Kevin's profile. The item that brought the most attention was:

Identify incomplete, broken, missing, or otherwise damaged areas, along with confirming the overall product meets and or exceeds your specifications along with Industry Standards for workmanship and performance.

Confirm operation of all appliances, doors, and windows, locks, plumbing fixtures, electrical sockets, and other systems and or mechanisms.

There was about 20 minutes of discussion and the item was referred to the Business Practice Committee. They will meet on Tuesday, November 10, 2009 to discuss this and other items. Place and time to be determined and posted on the Home Inspector Website for the DOL.

Some of the discussion touched on the fact that subcontractors of the builder are licensed when required. i.e. plumbers, electricians, hvac techs. If that is the case, why wouldn't a company like Kevin's, also a subcontractor, that performs the duties above that are performed during a home inspection and are part of the State SOP, also require a license like the other subcontractors. I guess if he was an employee of the Builder, it would not be an issue.

There were at least 2 Board Members that felt this was not an issue as those performing this function are normally not inspecting but taking claims from the buyer as items to be fixed under the warranty. Not inspecting, but merely taking information from the buyer. The wording that Kevin has is on that fine line. Do the words "identify" or "confirm" become interchangeable with inspect? At least "identify" is used commonly in the NACHI SOP.

Discussions continued with information about Oregon law that says if you inspect a certain number of items noted in their SOP, it becomes a home inspection. A single item would not qualify. That language is being looked at by the Committee to see if new codes or even laws would be needed to enact something similar.

It usually takes a couple weeks to get the minutes posted. The last meeting had the audio tapes available in about a week if I remember right. It was one of the more interesting Board meetings that I have attended.

Best to all.

Ah, well at least that makes a little more sense. That's not part of our warranty management/walk through package. We also offer builders a quality control inspection on their homes to assure that the home is free of cosmetic defects and that the components are in working order prior to meeting with the buyers. It's also useful if there is a developer and general contractor relationship, for example a condo building. We act as a third party quality control service so that the developer and GC can agree on a middle ground for completion.

I never thought of it as a home inspection but I guess I can see where he's coming from. It makes a lot more sense than complaining about the warranty management/walk through aspect.

So the question changes to: Should a quality control sub contractor require a home inspector license?

[Brian E. Kelly]

Wow, once you are on the Radar it makes things interesting. Once you start mentioning meeting "Specifications" you are opening a can of worms, IMO.

Was the "Concerned" Board Member a Wa Licensed HI too, by chance????

[kpierce]

Originally Posted by bkelly2

Once you start mentioning meeting "Specifications" you are opening a can of worms, IMO.

Will you elaborate?

[Stephen W. Stanczyk]

Unlike Home Inspection Boards in other states, the Washington State Home Inspector Advisory Board is made up entirely of State Licensed Home Inspectors. There are no Realtors, Appraisers or other entities included.

I think a simple change in the terminology and the wording that Kevin is using would make it a moot issue.

[Brian E. Kelly]

Originally Posted by sstanczyk

Unlike Home Inspection Boards in other states, the Washington State Home Inspector Advisory Board is made up entirely of State Licensed Home Inspectors. There are no Realtors, Appraisers or other entities included.

I think a simple change in the terminology and the wording that Kevin is using would make it a moot issue.

That would also be my guess.

But I would wonder why a HI on a newly formed HI Board (that can not provide meeting minutes in a timely manner nor detailed IMO) would go looking for non existant trouble. Almost sounds personal........................

[kpierce]

The lag for non-member posts on this board is insane! Am I the only one that has to wait for hours for a post to show up?

[Stephen W. Stanczyk]

Originally Posted by bkelly2

That would also be my guess.

But I would wonder why a HI on a newly formed HI Board (that can not provide meeting minutes in a timely manner nor detailed IMO) would go looking for non existant trouble. Almost sounds personal........................

It was about a 3 hour meeting with one 10 minute break that happened yesterday. The people with the tape would not have gotten back to the State offices until late yesterday. They would be sent to a clerk for transcribing off the tape. Since the transcripts would become legal documents, they are not rushed. I am also pretty sure there were dozens if not hundreds of other State meetings that took place yesterday that also have the meetings transcribed.

I don't know the reason it was brought up other than the wording in my previous post.

[kpierce]

Wow! Did Bushart delete his post or a moderator? That was freaking quick!

[Brian E. Kelly]

Originally Posted by sstanczyk

It was about a 3 hour meeting with one 10 minute break that happened yesterday. The people with the tape would not have gotten back to the State offices until late yesterday. They would be sent to a clerk for transcribing off the tape. Since the transcripts would become legal documents, they are not rushed. I am also pretty sure there were dozens if not hundreds of other State meetings that took place yesterday that also have the meetings transcribed.

I don't know the reason it was brought up other than the wording in my previous post.

I just looked at the wa state hi web page, they are not in a hurry with the minutes is all.................

[Stephen W. Stanczyk]

As with all official minutes for just about every organization, state or private, I know of, the minutes must be approved by vote or changes made and then approved by vote at the subsequent meeting. The August meeting minutes were just approved yesterday. I think that is why they put the audio recordings up much sooner.