Texas Inspector Rule Change

[Michael R. Boyett]

Actually, I look at it a little differently. I plan to continue inspecting SD's just like I always have, i.e. confirm presence in recommended areas like hallways, sleeping areas, etc, 'test' them if they are not connected to a monitored home alarm system, disclaim them if they appear to be connected to a monitored alarm system, recommend battery replacement. The burden is now on the Seller to ensure compliance with local ordnances, not me.

[jgroves]

Originally Posted by dbowers

James -

Lets play Devils advocate here.

Ollie North, Tim the Tool Man, Martha Stewart, Delton Dunmire all convicted Felons qive up their menial jobs they're now doing and become high paid home inspectors - how much time will their supervisors spend watching and monitoring them before they're trusted to inspect a house.
Not a fair assessment - 3 of these people are well known nationally.

Dennis L----- is 55 and when he was 19 he stole a car to go joy riding. He got caught and was given probation. He's a convicted felon with a Master Degree in Engineering. He works for the University of ------ as a professor and yes they know of his screw-up almost 40 years ago. He decides to give up his lowly college job, retire and become a big-bucks home inspector.

Will he be trusted?????? It has been 36 years since his transgression, and it was a one time act. The intervening years of good conduct are, of course, proof that he has reformed that side of himself that led to his joyride.

One uncle is in the FBI, one is with the Secret Service. There are lots of people that screwed up somewhere that would probably be more well thought of than you, me and half this Board if they joined our ranks.

In Ken's example, there has been no time since his hypothetical builder repented. He has done nothing to provide anyone of any solid evidence that he has, indeed, reformed himself. After several years of cheating the system it will take time and quality work for him to redeem his image.

And for the last paragraph, again, these unmentioned folks have turned their lives around and have many years of proving their sincere intent. That is why I chose to reference Frank Abagnale. But it was his work with the FBI, under close scrutiny, that helped put him on the path back. He had to earn that.

[Barry Adair]

For what it’s worth smokes have been addressed in the SOP

RULE §535.230 Standards of Practice: Inspection Guidelines for Electrical Systems

(c) Branch circuits, connected devices and fixtures. The inspector shall:

(13) report as in need of repair the absence of, or deficiencies in, the installation and operation of smoke or fire detectors not connected to a central alarm system.

No how you interpret that is up to you.

Anyone have any better comments that is willing to share I’m open.

Here is mine:

The installation of interconnected (sound or visibly alert at all locations) combination type ionization/photoelectric smoke detectors/alarms is now required in new construction and upgrading of older homes is advised.
These smoke detectors/alarms are required on each level including the basement, crawl space, and attic, where applicable, inside of all bedrooms or any rooms designated for the purpose of sleeping and outside within the near proximity of the doors to these rooms.
Test all alarms and detectors by both the test button and smoke per the manufactures instructions. Replace batteries at a minimum of every year or as required.
The smoke detectors are only evaluated for proper location, they are not tested to avoid nuisance alarms consult your security monitor for further details and too assure proper function. All units shall be fully evaluated and tested per the manufacture’s instructions and replaced at least every 10 years.
Failure to repair defective or install absent alarms-detectors and other safety equipment immediately can result in property loss, serious injury, or worse.

OOOPS thread hijacked

[John McKenna]

I already tell my clients to verify and/or upgrade to the most current smoke alarm standards.

[klott]

I don't think it is fair to prohibit anyone with a record from being a home inspector just because they have a record, but rather because of the type of crime committed.Also lets just say someone did something foolish when they were young,(which everyone is guilty of) if they were sentenced to 5 years and served the time, they have paid the debt to society, or is it really a life sentence. Also when prisoners are released, they are supposed to be rehabilitated, they should be given a second chance or they may end up right back in prison, and lets not forget that most of the inspections are on unoccupied houses, so how is that any more dangerous for society than having someone whom the client has never even heard of that could be a much better criminal for the simple reason that he/she has never been caught. As a matter of fact, the one convicted for felony theft would probably be a safer bet to not commit a crime because they know if anything happens they will be the first one looked at. And last but not least, there are ways to limit the type of inspections they would be allowed to perform. No, I do not have a record nor have I been convicted, I just believe there needs to be balance. If you want to talk criminal, I think it is pure criminal to force someone to buy E&O insurance to protect themselves and then settle out of court, then go up on the insureds premiums.