Texas Standards

[Brian E. Kelly]

Originally Posted by jrobnett

According to my lawyer, it is two years after the client could sue. This generally means two years after the purchase. But who really knows? It is hard to get a yes or no answer from TREC.

Cool. We need a definitive answer to that question here in AZ. I would like to see our association push for a national standard on a statue of limitations.

[Michael R. Boyett]

Like I said....turns into a useless pi$$ing match having nothing to do with anything productive or useful. You guys have fun...no more from me.

[Emmanuel J. Scanlan]

Originally Posted by mboyett

I attended the meeting today until about noon. I could write a book but I won't.

Michael,

Thank you for all of your efforts on behalf of Texas Inspectors!

I've seen many very good comments from Inspectors regarding the new SOP and have provided half a dozen pages myself. I am surprised that the IC did not have a much larger stack of comments. Was there any mention of how many responses there were?

[James H. Bushart]

It sounds like the meetings are to fill squares and that the real decisions are made, privately, between public meetings.

Much is happening to change things that seem to have been in place for some time in Texas. Has anyone stated why there is a need for these changes (mandatory E&O, modified SOP, etc)?

[John McKenna]

Originally Posted by jbushart

Here is one of the most recent instances:

I posted: "What is inevitable, IMO, is the enlightenment as to the folly of licensing to continue to the degree that laws begin to be rescinded (at best) or reversed from licensure to simple registration, as a means of collecting revenue."

You Responded:




Seems like a post from a happy inspector who loves his licensing law to me.

Then, there was this statement made by you in response of my criticism of a Canadian licensing proposal:



Again....a proud Texan defending his wonderful licensing law. The problems that others have (mandatory E&O, licensing boards making rules that hurt inspectors, etc.) don't happen in Texas, according to you.

There's more....

Still waiting for the proof.

When you make specific comments that apply, I agree.
When you make broad statements that do not apply, I correct you.

You need to provide proof of this statement:
Texas licensing laws and board run smoothly, have none of the
problems mentioned in laws from other states, and is widely loved
and accepted by all Texas home...

I have never said Texas has none of the problems is loved by everyone.
Your statement is exagerated and only mocking. You know that.

Sorry, no cigar. You had a chance to claim $100, but now it's gone.

[John McKenna]

Thank you Michael for your information and efforts.

[John Cahill]

I'll try to reply to all in this.

The meeting started out as a gloss over. Boyette had to leave at noon to go to work. After lunch the entire meeting was different. Chairman Foster invited public comment and the meeting turned into a editing session that resulted in many changes (more prescriptive) and a lot of public comment. They only got through 20 of the 70 public comments. At 3 PM Chairman Foster declared the changes too substantial to proceed with adoption on June 30. They meet again in July to continue review of public comment. The the SoP will be posted AGAIN for public comment. Now is the time to ask for broad requirements to be specified in that they are proceeding with the prescriptive approach. In the end Chairman Foster was very professional and accommodating. I salute him.

Texas inspectors. NOW is the time to not only ask questions but to author the language you recommend. The system is very receptive to putting it into the SoP. Only you can help the IC solve these problems.

A major insurance company came and gave a presentation. When they left I felt certain they would not be offering home inspection insurance in Texas.

and John McKenna. I respect your opinion and am glad you do not have any problems. You are evidently very talented. Many of your peers disagree with you and I am glad you respect their opinions. I personally think they too are talented. You should come the IC meetings. Your experience would be helpful. I like your risk management however . . . .start teaching and do less inspections. Good luck on your classes.

[John Cahill]

Originally Posted by jmckenna1

I will give you $100 if you can post the proof of the above statements...
We in Texas don't need exaggerations and mocking. Give us something
real or leave us alone.

Here is the statement
Texas licensing laws and board run smoothly, have none of the problems mentioned in laws from other states, and is widely loved and accepted by all Texas home inspectors.

Here is the proof

1) The revision process of the current SoP started in 2004. Thousands of hours were spent on the project. It had Commissioner support. At the last minute they failed due to internal political problems. New people were appointed. Many more hours spent on the project. They were to be passed this June 30. After yesterdays meeting they were postponed again. FOUR years to do an SoP review is evidence that the board does not run smoothly. I predict it will be 2009 before the SoP pass.

2) TAREI had a lobbyist for 20 years. When they let him go he went to work for others and carried the E&O bill to a representative who had insurance industry ties. The bill got ram rodded through in midnight hour by a traitor lobbyist and politician with industry ties. Proof that Texas licensing law does not run smoothly.

3) Inspector Committee Chairman Davis called for an emergency meeting to discuss the bill. Legal did not show up so the Chairman canceled the meeting. The next day TREC refused to allow the IC to have an emergency meeting. The E&O bill passed without inspector committee deliberation due to TREC. Later TREC filed an open meeting violation against the former Chairman for even trying to call an emergency meeting without TREC approval. (a bull**** misdemeanor that has been shelved by the AG).

4) Last week a Committee member got caught red handed in a Open meeting violation. I caught him. TREC is not filing a complaint against him because he is not confrontational. AND drum roll

5) accepted by all Texas home inspectors "All" means "all". It is includes me. I do not accept it and I am a licensed home inspector.

Please send $100 to PO Box 250282 Plano Texas 75025.

Kidding you John.

[John Cahill]

Originally Posted by mboyett

Famous last words, I know...but there is no chance that the TREC Inspectors Advisory Committee would recommend the adoption of any trade association SOP. The Advisory Committee ( 6 Texas HI's & 3 public members) will do one of two things today....make several very minor tweaks to the proposed SOP (that they wrote) and then pass it on to TREC for final consideration and implementation or they will realize more work is needed on the proposed SOP and will inform TREC that it will be several more months before they have a final SOP to present to them.

I will pay John McKenna $100 if TREC adopts ASHI, NACHI, or NAHI SoP.

[Michael R. Boyett]

I attended today's, June 30th, TREC meeting. This was the full Texas Real Estate Commission meeting not the Inspectors Committee meeting. As 'promised' at the June 16th Inspectors Committee meeting the status of the proposed SOP was conveyed to the Commission and the prediction made that the proposed SOP would be ready to present to the Commission at the August 18th meeting. In the meantime, the IC will continue to review the already received SOP comments and make any changes they deemed appropriate. There will be another 30 day public comment period once the SOP is officially presented to the Commission. The TREC chairman reminded the IC representative that the goal was to have the SOP revised, agreed upon and adopted by year-end.

[Michael R. Boyett]

If interested, the latest revised (as of 7/22/08 ) proposed TREC SOP and supporting documents can be found HERE.
As expected, it appears no substantive changes were made even after 70 or more pages of public comment were considered. These documents are planned to be presented to the Commission on 8/18 for acceptance and implementation consideration.

[Michael R. Boyett]

The Texas Real Estate Commission met on Monday, August 18th.

The Commission accepted the proposed SOP, et al, with no discussion or comments from either members of the Inspector's Committee who were there or any comments from the public…there were 4-5 inspectors there. The SOP will be posted to the Texas register for 30-60 days one last time for public comment then accepted for implementation probably at the Oct TREC meeting. I predict we will be inspecting under the new SOP on 1/1/09.

[John McKenna]

So what are your feelings about the new SOP Michael?

[Michael R. Boyett]

Originally Posted by jmckenna1

So what are your feelings about the new SOP Michael?

Well, good question John and the jury is still out on the answer. The Inspectors Advisory Committee was charged with updating the SOP, clarifying certain issues and generally bringing the SOP up to today's standards. Well, they did that in most areas of the SOP but created new issues while doing so. Many of the issues are semantics and how things are worded so, from that respect, not much has changed. I'll give you a 'for instance'....the proposed SOP, like most other SOP's, says the HI is not required to inspect for a cracked heat exchanger on a gas furnace. That obviously being because it may require dismantling of the system to fully inspect the heat exchanger. Anyway, the proposed SOP goes on to say we must now inspect to ensure there is 'no forced air in the burner compartment'. Well, how do you really do that and why, if we are not required to inspect the heat exchanger? That's just a brief synopsis and there are numerous other contradictions and discrepancies either real or perceived in the proposed SOP as would be the case for any SOP, iNACHI's included.

Another interesting tidbit is that the CREIA SOP = 1,803 words, ASHI SOP = 2,665 words, iNACHI SOP = 4,530 words, TREC SOP = 6,502 words! Why does it take so much to define our SOP? I pointed that out to the Inspectors Advisory Committee chairman and he just smiled.

We, in Texas, are held to the highest standard, by far, of any state or trade organization in the world. Some would argue that's a good thing, others will say it dramatically increases our liability. Only time will tell.

[John Onofrey]

Originally Posted by mboyett

Well, good question John and the jury is still out on the answer. The Inspectors Advisory Committee was charged with updating the SOP, clarifying certain issues and generally bringing the SOP up to today's standards. Well, they did that in most areas of the SOP but created new issues while doing so. Many of the issues are semantics and how things are worded so, from that respect, not much has changed. I'll give you a 'for instance'....the proposed SOP, like most other SOP's, says the HI is not required to inspect for a cracked heat exchanger on a gas furnace. That obviously being because it may require dismantling of the system to fully inspect the heat exchanger. Anyway, the proposed SOP goes on to say we must now inspect to ensure there is 'no forced air in the burner compartment'. Well, how do you really do that and why, if we are not required to inspect the heat exchanger? That's just a brief synopsis and there are numerous other contradictions and discrepancies either real or perceived in the proposed SOP as would be the case for any SOP, iNACHI's included.

Another interesting tidbit is that the CREIA SOP = 1,803 words, ASHI SOP = 2,665 words, iNACHI SOP = 4,530 words, TREC SOP = 6,502 words! Why does it take so much to define our SOP? I pointed that out to the Inspectors Advisory Committee chairman and he just smiled.

We, in Texas, are held to the highest standard, by far, of any state or trade organization in the world. Some would argue that's a good thing, others will say it dramatically increases our liability. Only time will tell.

Well said Mike and many thanks for keeping up with this. Hopefully, any refinement made to the SOP will ultimately wind up helping inspectors to do their job (protecting clients). It seems that at least one Texan suggests the SOP has been changed for ulterior motives.