Home Inspector Licensing in British Columbia

[Claude Lawrenson]

James Bushart is a pretty smart guy - but here's a quote respecting BC licensing

The government's decision to require inspectors to meet the standards of one of three different professional organizations is a haphazard, quick-fix-solution to a serious problem, said Grasty. His organization receives weekly complaints from people who hired inspectors that failed to identify major problems on their property. Many of those inspectors, he said, already belong to a professional association.

Read more....
http://www.canada.com/search/license...977/story.html

http://www.pssg.gov.bc.ca/mediaroom/...inspectors.pdf

[Marcel Gratton]

Originally Posted by gluck

"Advocates for home inspection licensing are a lot like the contradictory Pro-Life advocates who oppose abortion...and support the death penalty.

They are private business owners because they want to enjoy the freedom of free enterprise...free competition...freedom to succeed or die by their own merit...and they want the State to control entry and establish boundaries for their profession.

They are professionals who are skilled at their trade and work to develop a relationship of trust with the public....yet they want the State to enact laws to protect the consumers from "the other guy".

The licensing "coalitions" are groups of home inspectors with various agendas: those big city inspectors pushing for mandatory E&O to freeze out the part-timer and rural inspector, those wanting to prepare to retire who push for mentoring requirements, those who simply want to control others pushing for (with the hope of being seated on) autonomous licensing boards, and those from associations who sell tests, sell education classes or other services that the law will be written to mandate.

There is nothing "free" about that enterprise."

Thanks to James Bushart for describing the situation in Canada with such precision.

That is so right George!

Just another money grab...

[Vern Mitchinson]

It looks to me like our iNACHI members in BC sat back and waited for someone else to do something. The result is they were left out. The other associations appear to have lobbied the government successfully and made their case. Of course they did not tell the government about iNACHI. Why should they? The lesson here is that all iNACHI members in all the other provinces must be alert to any and all lobbies by other associations. In Alberta when I first heard a rumour that something was going on I took it upon myself to follow up and found out that indeed the government was studying the home inspection business at the request of another association. When I tracked down and contacted the government official in charge he did not know iNACHI even existed. I made him aware and we were invited to participate and the result is we were recognized and our concerns will be addressed.
The bottom line here is to contact your government and make yourself and iNACHI known. If not your livelihood could be threatened as has come to pass in BC.
WAKE UP AND DO SOMETHING.
Sitting on your butt, whining and bit*hing will accomplish nothing.

[Vern Mitchinson]

One item that has been ignored in the BC info pack is a statement that the government Registrar has the option to grant a licence to anyone that he deems qualified. There are no strings attached to that clause. A lot of the above statements are not based on fact but on wishful thinking and propaganda. I suggest you all go to the BC web site and read all the info instead of running off half cocked and wasting your efforts and money on rumour and misinformation.

[Joe Johnston]

I am surprised that anybody in the Industry has been caught flat footed on this one. There has been loads in the media and on-line for anyone interested (which should be all BC Inspectors) Nachi were always pretty low down the pecking order, and I really feel the licensing is in the best interests of all ,to at least create some sort of level playing field.
I am hoping the legislation will create a good benchmark for the public, and create conditions whereby Inspectors can charge what they are worth.

[Joe Johnston]

Originally Posted by vmitchinson

It looks to me like our iNACHI members in BC sat back and waited for someone else to do something. The result is they were left out. The other associations appear to have lobbied the government successfully and made their case. Of course they did not tell the government about iNACHI. Why should they? The lesson here is that all iNACHI members in all the other provinces must be alert to any and all lobbies by other associations. In Alberta when I first heard a rumour that something was going on I took it upon myself to follow up and found out that indeed the government was studying the home inspection business at the request of another association. When I tracked down and contacted the government official in charge he did not know iNACHI even existed. I made him aware and we were invited to participate and the result is we were recognized and our concerns will be addressed.
The bottom line here is to contact your government and make yourself and iNACHI known. If not your livelihood could be threatened as has come to pass in BC.
WAKE UP AND DO SOMETHING.
Sitting on your butt, whining and bit*hing will accomplish nothing.

I totally agree, anyone entering this business in the last few years undertaking due diligence, would have been aware of the push {Especially by CAHPI(BC)} for licensing.
Although nobody knew the outcome it was clear that the major players CAHPI(BC) and the ASTT would have some input.
Nachi was nowhere in the running and Inspectors should have been asking questions as to why Nachi did not come on board.
I originally joined Nachi as it was the quickest way to have some "professional" acreditation and the excellent resource of the forum.
Nachi in BC never recovered from the 3 day expose of the industry on provincial news, a few years ago
As it unfolded, it was looking like CAHPI was being sidelined by the process, but the end result is pretty favourable to CAHPI members.
If, as somebody mentioned the old school of Inspectors wanted control why were CAHPI pushing so strongly for the NAC, Surely they could have pushed for their registration system to be the benchmark?
The Government really had no option, unless they wanted to spend millions, but to go with the training of existing agencies. Why re-invent the wheel?.

The legislation is not going to be the one fix but it is a good place to start, creating at least a level playing field. With the criminal background check it should hopefuly create a more professionl image of the industry.


Lets all hope

[jkogel]

FYI, At the bottom of page 1, the associations originally named in the consultation process.

http://www.pssg.gov.bc.ca/legislatio...nsultation.pdf

Consultation has been closed for 12 mos.
http://www.pssg.gov.bc.ca/legislation/closed.htm

Posted Sat at 8:38 PM, PST

John Kogel
www.allsafehome.ca

[dcook1]

Originally Posted by clawrenson

James Bushart is a pretty smart guy - but here's a quote respecting BC licensing

The government's decision to require inspectors to meet the standards of one of three different professional organizations is a haphazard, quick-fix-solution to a serious problem, said Grasty. His organization receives weekly complaints from people who hired inspectors that failed to identify major problems on their property. Many of those inspectors, he said, already belong to a professional association.

That is about the extent of it... this will NOT remove the sloppy or useless inspector. It will make them accountable to a certain extent. However when it comes down to it, that inspector will now go get a license and operate and when he does get a complaint, he will simply open a new business... what will change? Only the amount of money that goes from your hands to the governments hands.

Barrie and Wasaga Beach already hand out their version of a license. What does this mean??? That they try to collect a little money, and that is about it.

However this is the time to make sure when this does come into play, we are not left scrambling.

[George A. H. Luck]

That is a very interesting point David. We all know that licensing does not guarantee a 'good' inspection and it does not change bad inspectors into good ones.

So, one must ask, why did the B.C. government go down this road? It is all about accountability. Now the politicians can say to the public "We set up a programme of licensing to take care of all the problems with the system so whatever happens from now on out is not our fault!"

Statements like this;
"His organization receives weekly complaints from people who hired inspectors that failed to identify major problems on their property."
are entirely subjective and represent opinion only. It is a steady diet of this sort of 'news' that has been fed to governments across the country, to convince them that licensing is the only answer and that only CAHPI can fill the need for a controling mechanism.

It is our job to educate the politicians, as did Vern in Alberta, that there are far more inspectors outside of CARPI than in it and that we neither want nor agree with licensing or the NCP.

[tneyedli1]

Originally Posted by vmitchinson

One item that has been ignored in the BC info pack is a statement that the government Registrar has the option to grant a licence to anyone that he deems qualified. There are no strings attached to that clause. A lot of the above statements are not based on fact but on wishful thinking and propaganda. I suggest you all go to the BC web site and read all the info instead of running off half cocked and wasting your efforts and money on rumour and misinformation.

Vern:
Two more ideas to float are that the realtors should only give out a list of gov't. licensed
H.I.'s and that ALL residential home sales be inspected. This would go a long way in upgrading many shoddy home owner/new construction/repairs etc.
T.Neyedli
www.alphahomeinspections.ca

[Claude Lawrenson]

David - I heard about the Barrie inspector licensing - but my understanding this is strictly a business license to "legally" operate within the city boundaries.

Any info on if this is really enforced? Any other comments????

Thanks in advance.

[Claude Lawrenson]

Terry - I like your thinking. On the other hand CMHC did such as study within the last 6 years. The mandatory inspection thing was soundly rejected - by guess who?

https://www03.cmhc-schl.gc.ca/b2c/b2...00370000000002

http://www.cmhc.ca/publications/en/r.../03-101-e.html

http://realtytimes.com/rtpages/20030911_inspections.htm

[James H. Bushart]

Originally Posted by gluck

Statements like this;
"His organization receives weekly complaints from people who hired inspectors that failed to identify major problems on their property."
are entirely subjective and represent opinion only. It is a steady diet of this sort of 'news' that has been fed to governments across the country, to convince them that licensing is the only answer and that only CAHPI can fill the need for a controling mechanism.

I have to tell you that if this is true....that the flow of complaints is measured "weekly"....you guys are in terrific shape.

In our country, real estate sales have exceeded 30 million homes sold in the last five years, per the NAR. If half of them had inspections (a conservative number), that is 15 million home inspections over a five year period.

Considering most of home inspectors in my country belong to no association and most states do not have licensing, that means that most of these 15 million home inspections were not even regulated by a SOP, a code of ethics, or any uniform standards at all.

And of those averaged 3 million inspection reports per year, if two clients per week complained as could be the figures referenced in blue, above, that is only 110 out of 3,000,000 customers. Then, consider that not all of their complaints were valid....

There is a reason why...in my country as well as yours....there are no consumers lobbying for these ridiculous laws. That reason is that there is no demonstrated reason to enact one.

Home inspection licensing is what your competitor thinks the consumer needs in order to protect him from you.

[George A. H. Luck]

Thanks James. That is exactly right. As in the United States, there is no demonstrated need in Canada either. We are fed a constant diet of the same erroneous claims such those quoted above. No numbers. No perspective. The only thing that remains true is that the Home Inspection Industry has a failure rate that would be the envy of most industries.

[James H. Bushart]

The many discussions I have read on the Canadian forums of this message board have confounded me.

In America...licensing criteria is viewed as a minimum basic standard, like a building code. Proponents feel that this standard .... usually involving a written test, a fee, and some type of continuing education....will protect the consumer from their competitors. The license basically represents nothing but a disguise for newbies wanting to look like they are as equally qualified and competent as their competition.

In Canada...you are actually seeking to take seasoned experience, advanced education, and peer reviews of advanced skills...and instead of seeking ways of getting advanced recognition and fees for them, you want to turn them into little more than entry level requirements.

Home inspectors who want to set the bar an inch below their own present level are obviously doing so to eliminate competition. This is rarely disputed (by others than them). But what does that tell your client...that you, after having attained the many requirements established by these various groups, are merely qualified to be an entry level inspector? Why should they pay you any more than the lowest possible entry level fee?