TREC - Proposed SOP update

[Michael R. Boyett]

Here are my notes from this week's TREC Inspectors Committee meeting. As usual, my notes are in blue:

TREC_IC_040708.pdf

[Jack R. Robnett]

Thanks Mike!

[cmcintyre]

Appreciate the update Mike

[Michael R. Boyett]

OK, here are the final, revised drafts of the SOP, the Report Form and the Rules that govern Texas HI's that will go to the full TREC commissioners on April 28th for their consideration. No more revisions will be made to the proposed documents prior to that meeting. If TREC accepts the documents they will be posted to the Texas Register for 30-60 days then TREC will vote to accept them with or without certain revisions, send them back to the Inspectors Committee for more work or completely decline them. That decision will probably take place around August or so.

Proposed SOP: 15 Apr 08 SoP draft.pdf
Proposed Form: 15 Apr 08 REI 7A-1 draft.pdf
Proposed Rules: 15 Apr 08 222 and 223 drafts.pdf

[Michael R. Boyett]

TREC approved the proposed SOP this morning , April 28th, as shown in the attachment above. It now goes to the Texas Register for public comment (that's you...Texas inspectors) and then for final consideration possibly at the June 30th Commissioners meeting. We have about 6 weeks for final review and to make our thoughts & comments heard.

[Dominic J. Maricic]

Hi Mike,

Thanks for keeping us up to date on this. Assuming the changes go through, at what point would inspectors need to be using the new format. I want to make sure our software is up to date and ready to go.

[Michael R. Boyett]

Dominic...assuming the proposed SOP gets little public comment and does get approved at the 6/30 TREC meeting then they will likely make it effective 30-60 days after that. They do like to make things effective Sept 1st for whatever reasons. There was talk at one of the TREC meetings that there would likely be a transition period where inspectors and providers (like yourself) would be given additional time to accommodate the changes, maybe another 90 days after that, say Dec. 1st. During that transition period either form/SOP could be used.

[Dominic J. Maricic]

Gotcha, sounds good. Has there been any discussion on the actual formatting of the reports? I ran into issues before where TREC told me they wanted to be able to hold my report against theirs up to a light and see an identical copy. I stated how TREC's form allows different font types and sizes and so that shouldn't be a requirement, but that didn't seem to matter to them. According to them, they aren't happy with any of the vendors except Whisper (from what I can tell) as it's the only one I now of that identical.

[Michael R. Boyett]

Dominic...you are correct in your interpretation of the form rules. There are clear rules on what you can and cannot do and I've not heard of any significant issues related to those rules. I've certainly never heard anyone at TREC use the "hold it up to a light" analogy. If you follow that set of form rules then you should be able to go by them with little risk. Here are those rules:

(1) The inspector may select the type and size of the fonts, provided the fonts are no smaller than those used in the printed version of the form adopted by the commission.

(2) The inspector may use legal sized (8 1/2" by 14") paper.

(3) The inspector may select the information to be inserted below the caption "Property Inspection Report" and above the text of the form relating to TREC rules; however, the inspector must include the name of the inspector's client, the address or other identification of the inspected property, the date the inspection was performed, and the name and license number of any inspector participating in the inspection. If the person performing the inspection is licensed as an apprentice inspector or real estate inspector, the license number and name of the inspector's sponsor also must be included, and the inspector supervising an apprentice must sign the report.

(4) The inspector may select other information to be inserted in the space on the first page of the report and may allocate additional space on page 2 for that purpose; provided the caption "Additional Information Provided By Inspector" is not deleted.

(5) The inspector may delete inapplicable provisions relating to the optional systems and re-letter the remaining provisions.

(6) The inspector may add footers to each page of the report except the first page and may add headers to each page of the report.

(7) Whether the form is reproduced by computer or is preprinted by the inspector, the inspector may allocate such space for comments as the inspector deems necessary or may attach additional pages of comments to the report.

(8 The inspector may renumber the pages of the form to correspond with any changes made necessary due to adjusting the space for comments or deleting text.

(9) The inspector may list other built-in appliances and additional captions, letters and check boxes for those items.

(10) The inspector may add numbers or letters in parentheses to the right of the caption for each item and may place the property identification and page number either at the top or bottom of the page.

[Dominic J. Maricic]

It was one of the TREC attorneys. I pointed out how there wouldn't be a single inspector using Word that would pass that test. I also pointed out that HomeGauge obviously in no way would pass that test either, and was told that I was correct and they woudln't approve HomeGauge today either. The threw me for a loop as I expected them to back off at that point. As it stands , I've shown the report to lots of TREC inspectors who thought it looked fine, and we have quite a few using it. I just would like it to have their 'approval' even though they don't give official stamps of approval anyways. If you want a copy of the email I got from them, let me know.

[Michael R. Boyett]

Yes, please send me a copy of the e-mail to the address shown in the PM I sent you. I suspect the staff attorney gave you a 'stock' answer but I also suspect they have bigger fish to fry and they don't have someone drilling down on every s/w offering out there unless the developer asks for guidance or if someone were to complain ( I can't envision that unless it was one developer ******** about another one though).