General limitations and exclusions.
Does this section still remain or was it removed from the standards???
Thanks in advance.
Withdrawn…
Notice of Change/Withdrawal
DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION
RULE NOS.: RULE TITLES:
61-30.402 Continuing Education Requirements for Biennial Renewal
61-30.812 Standards of Practice, General Limitations and Exclusions
NOTICE OF WITHDRAWAL
Notice is hereby given that the above rule, as noticed in Vol. 39, No. 7, January 10, 2013 issue of the Florida Administrative Register has been withdrawn.
I find this significantly disturbing.
…it was actually never part of the home inspector law, a realtor group tried to have it inserted into our adimistrative code and failed.
FYI
I am not good with interpreting this stuff so I ask respectfully does this mean no more continuing education and no SOP? Forgive me if the question seems foolish.
SOP is intact and so is CE requirements. Maybe you should read the rules yourself.
https://www.flrules.org/gateway/ChapterHome.asp?Chapter=61-30
I knew someone as smart as you would know the answer and my CE is already done and I follow the sop except for what I put in my contract that I do not do 
Thanks for the answer What I saw above confused me but hey I’m no Lawyer.
One of my first major mistakes in life going into Construction instead of Law 
Most people have the assumption that all Lawyers are rich and if you pass the bar you will enjoy wealth. Nothing is further from the truth. Law is extremely competitive and many Lawyers barely scrape by. Of course, there are lots of wealthy Lawyers, however, they are the minority.
that right there is funny! Lol
I had a great run in Construction and lots of fun but sure would like the ability to work as I get older and less able to do physical things.
…at that point, they are referenced as “attorneys”…not lawyers.
What’s your thought process on 61-30.801?
if you read the statutes we could write our own as long as we give it to the client prior to inspection.
That is how it seems to me. Which is good enough if so.
now that is funny…
The DBPR never recieved that…it was never applied and never considered.
oh…“FYI”
It is.
Thats how I have been interpreting it. Seems like a ton of wasted money for useless reasons