A thread for serious discussion of Washington Senate bill 5778

[wforsyth]

I think mentoring is a wonderful idea which is why I've worked it into my own program I've been working on.

[lcapaul]

Another thing I would like to see in the new Bill is a State ran or endorsed
Mediation board where all complaints against home inspectors would need go before they could go to court, similiar to what they have in Oregon from what I understand.

Like Stephen I'd like to see some teeth in the law and some provisions for enforcement, from small violations to big violations like doing inspections without the proper licensing, to include the SPI if it remains separate.

A Law with no or little enforcement or one with no or little punishment for infractions is worthless

Stephen, Peter, David or Harold would you please wend me an email of what went on at the meeting. Thanks

[lcapaul]

Originally Posted by bkelly2

Not a WA inspector myself, but the AZ law is similar. I found the mentored part of my training to be the best part. I have found that mentoring is equally rewarding.

Good luck fellow HI's

You charge for your mentoring didn't you say Brian? Here you could not. You never explained just how it worked there, and how an inspector out in the middle of now where could be mentored without any more expense or lost time than and inspector in Phoenix. Who's liable for any injury to the mentored inspector, wouldn't clients feel that their inspection was more a training exercise that "their" inspection, who qualifies the Mentor?...Lot's of questions.

[Steven L. Smith]

"As far as education,.. even if you are grandfathered in I think you should also PROVE you have had formal clssroom home inspection education to be grandfathered in as well."

I agree with that, however I think it is unlikely. I spoke with a business lawyer about this issue, based on the recommendations of the industry committee. He said, from a legal standpoint, it is very difficult for a government to legislate a successful business person out of business without a lawsuit. So they can put restrictions on new people coming in, and have modest grandfathering requirements. But it is conceivable that some 20 year inspector, doing 200K per year would not meet the requirements of 120 hours of classroom education. That is likely a reason they are sidestepping that I would think. Now maybe they could reduce that figure some, but I think they are being very careful as far as "knocking" people out of business. The plan is for that to happen when the testing begins down the road. Just my take on what might be happening.

[wforsyth]

So do you have any other new information on the bill?

[James H. Bushart]

Originally Posted by ssmith

"The plan is for that to happen when the testing begins down the road.

This is one of the hidden dangers of turning control of the profession over to the state. You are not only subject to the whims of those formulating the laws governing you, today...but those "down the road" as well.

What is wrong with allowing the market to decide what is good and what is not?

[Steven L. Smith]

I have no information beyond the link that was posted as far as the bill update. I suspect we will see a number of such updates, explanations, definitions as it moves on. I think they are trying to formulate it all from the basic skeleton they have.

[Harold E. Miller]

Originally Posted by lcapaul

Stephen, Peter, David or Harold would you please wend me an email of what went on at the meeting. Thanks

I wish I could attend. I am booked though. I am even working later today (Sunday), which I normally try to avoid. I was hoping that there would have been a little more notice than what we received. I can usually block out some time when I haven't scheduled any inspections yet.

I am hoping that TVW will have it archived on their website, so that I can watch it later.
Their link;
http://www.tvw.org/media/recentevnt....TOKEN=87694826

[lcapaul]

Originally Posted by hmiller

I wish I could attend. I am booked though. I am even working later today (Sunday), which I normally try to avoid. I was hoping that there would have been a little more notice than what we received. I can usually block out some time when I haven't scheduled any inspections yet.

I am hoping that TVW will have it archived on their website, so that I can watch it later.
Their link;
http://www.tvw.org/media/recentevnt....TOKEN=87694826

Thanks for the Link Harold, It's been pretty slow over here, most of my inspections any more seem to be on weekends, people don't like to take time off work unless they have too, all my kids are grown so weekends don't really bother me, my wife isn't a great fan, but it doesn't upset that I'm working half as much as if I was going fishing on the weekend and leaving her home.

I'll check out that link, I hope they show the meeting.

[Steven L. Smith]

Mentoring:

The concept of mentoring is excellent, but from what I have been able to gather, here is the problem and how events unfolded. Some of the individuals who would have been grandfathered in with the industry advisory committee suggestions decided that if new inspector legislation was on the horizon, they wanted to make money off these new people. I know, from associates in meetings conducted by a leading HI society, that some of those individuals publicly stated that they looked on mentoring as a possible new income stream -- new inspectors paying an hourly fee for mentoring.

Because some of these people were obvious about this desire in public, the word was out and the legislature was told -- in resounding measure -- that mentoring was a problem because it would increase the cost of becoming a home inspector. Some figures were estimated in the $50 to $100 per hour range for mentoring. Figure that at maybe three or four hours per inspection, and 30 inspections as they suggested and it is very expensive. So, from what I have gathered, the legislature decided to side with the advisory committee on the concept and value of mentoring...but they decided to bind the hands of mentors and state that it must be done gratis.

So basically, now we have a proposed bill that requires mentoring for some new inspectors, but the parties who could provide it are not allowed by law to charge for the service. Obviously, at least in my analysis, this will result in those potential mentors just "freezing-out" new potential inspectors. Who would want to take them out? Honestly, it is not within the realm of reasonable to expect someone to train their competition for free.

As a result of this wrangling, it seems to me that mentoring should be removed. Either that or come up with a system like Oregon. In Oregon, each applicant is allowed to have experience points, and that earns the person the right to sit for a test. These points come from trade or construction experience, home inspection experience, qualified education, seminars, etc and mentoring is good for a few points.

From what I have been able to gather, this is the situation with mentoring. I think it might have been more straight forward had there not been an overwhelming number of concerned people who told legislators that the mentoring was being promoted so certain "grandfathered" inspectors could make extra money. The cat was out of the bag, so to speak.


Before anyone points it out, I admit that I am affiliated with the state college system and the BTC training program. That role obviously influences my view but it was in that position, where I talk to many inspectors and other people, that I became aware of what seems to be taking place with mentoring. How it will all turn out .... no clue!

[Peter Doane]

If your planning on attending the hearing Monday 10AM:
http://www.leg.wa.gov/legislature/sh...2&Acronym=LCRD

About parking, see link below:

http://www.leg.wa.gov/WorkingwithLeg/dashshuttle.htm

Capitol Campus:
http://www1.leg.wa.gov/documents/LIC...d_Vicinity.pdf

[wforsyth]

Possible executive session on bills heard in committee. Other business.
******************


Does this mean they may make a decision?

[wforsyth]

http://www.leg.wa.gov/pub/billinfo/2...e/5788.SBR.pdf

This is from the ninth. Is this more recent than the other copy we read before?

[wforsyth]

This analysis was prepared by non-partisan legislative staff for the use of legislative members
in their deliberations. This analysis is not a part of the legislation nor does it constitute a
statement of legislative intent.

[wforsyth]

Reciprocity: The director of DOL may issue a license to a person who is a licensed home
inspector in another state if the person's qualifications meet the licensing requirements of this
state.
**********************

It seems this is an updated copy.