kurt Posted October 23, 2011 Report Share Posted October 23, 2011 Well, I guess that's what I was thinking. Have 2 licenses, do two jobs, get paid for "both". I got the liability anyway. Get a license for $50, sound smart, charge more. Louisiana sounds medieval. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Katen Posted October 23, 2011 Report Share Posted October 23, 2011 Well, I guess that's what I was thinking. Have 2 licenses, do two jobs, get paid for "both". I got the liability anyway. Get a license for $50, sound smart, charge more. Many do just that. If I worked in WA a lot, I'd probably do it. The problem with it is that it takes more than an initial hoop to jump through. For one thing, they require E&O and/or surety bonding for the WDO work. Then, for every WDO inspection you do, you have to obtain a special number from the DOA. There are also very specific rules about what you report and how you report it. You also have to prepare a diagram of the house with every report. Last, if you screw up, or if someone accuses you of screwing up, they nail you not only for the screw up, but for any other procedural violation that they can discover. They're really serious about that last part. It might sound strange, but the thing that really gets me is the drawing a diagram part. I like to think that I can communicate some information about a pest condition without having to draw a diagram. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Jones Posted October 23, 2011 Report Share Posted October 23, 2011 Ditto... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kurt Posted October 23, 2011 Report Share Posted October 23, 2011 OK, I get it. Wiener patrol. Mildly demeaning to have some mope insist one can't know about a bug without special training. Drawing a diagram doesn't sound complicated; do it in SketchUp in about 1 minute, turn it into a .pdf, catenate it into the print script. We get told what we have to report, and somehow it just doesn't seem plausible that the "reporting requirements" could be all that complicated or hard to follow. Although, I'd probably choose the theater approach. It's easy and fun to make fun of bureaucrats; it's non-stop material. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Katen Posted October 23, 2011 Report Share Posted October 23, 2011 OK, I get it. Wiener patrol. Mildly demeaning to have some mope insist one can't know about a bug without special training. Drawing a diagram doesn't sound complicated; do it in SketchUp in about 1 minute, turn it into a .pdf, catenate it into the print script. We get told what we have to report, and somehow it just doesn't seem plausible that the "reporting requirements" could be all that complicated or hard to follow. Although, I'd probably choose the theater approach. It's easy and fun to make fun of bureaucrats; it's non-stop material. It's not that any of the requirements are particularly difficult or onerous, I just chafe under the collar of oppression. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
allseason Posted October 24, 2011 Report Share Posted October 24, 2011 And I thought NJ was rough, they eliminated the sketch/map years ago. If someone is providing a WDI inspection why the f--k wouldn't they charge a fee for it? One of the issues that ticks off the licensed applicators in NJ is HI's giving away the WDI inspections, and the fact that they might not have a WDI pesticide applicators license. I don't include the WDI inspection in the home inspection and that is clearly stated in my pre inspection agreement. Also in the PIA I have a paragraph regarding a WDI inspection should they request one. If I see WDI evidence in a building while doing a home inspection and I am not doing a WDI inspection I can and will tell them there is evidence of WDI and recommend a licensed applicator perform an inspection. If they ask me what it is specifically I tell them that I am not there in that capacity due to the fact that it now changes the PIA/contract, oh, and they are not paying me for it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hausdok Posted October 24, 2011 Author Report Share Posted October 24, 2011 If someone is providing a WDI inspection why the f--k wouldn't they charge a fee for it? One of the issues that ticks off the licensed applicators in NJ is HI's giving away the WDI inspections, and the fact that they might not have a WDI pesticide applicators license. Hi, That's actually the logical justification that the bug guys give for why a law was passed here in 1991 that made it illegal for anyone performing any inspection tasks associated with a pest inspection to do so without a pest inspectors license. In a private discussion with me years ago, the late Duane Roundy admitted that they were also trying to limit their competition from the then-growing home inspector field which the bug guys here dwarfed at the time. The problem we had with it is that you couldn't do a home inspection to even the most basic standard because that law made inspecting gutters, earth-to-wood clearance and about a dozen very basic home inspection tasks part of looking for conducive conditions and therefore brought all home inspections into the pest inspection arena and had forced all home inspectors to become bug certified. After 16 years a pest inspection included with a home inspection at no extra cost essentially became the norm and we'd constantly lived under threat of sanctions from WSDA if we'd missed a bug issue while concentrating on the home inspection aspect more than the bug aspect. We pushed to make it legal for home inspectors to simply read the books, take the license test one time and pass it to prove that they knew what wood destroying insects and bugs were, but not to have to get a pest inspectors license. WSDA wouldn't have any of it. We eventually convinced Sen. Spanel that pest conducive conditions and wood rot are ubiquitous here but that the actual number of times we see live insects is very small; and that it made sense to allow us to counsel buyers about pest conducive conditions and identify wood rot and tell them what to do about it, because doing so helps prevent insect issues. Dr. Soumi didn't argue with that logic and by the time the battle over licensing was nearing an end he'd stated that he wouldn't object to us identifying conducive conditions and wood rot, as long as insect issues were referred to a licensed bug guy. That got us out from under WSDA when the licensing law was passed. Personally, I still think all home inspectors should have to read those books, take that written test and do one pass through that bug demonstration house in Puyallup and should then be allowed to call 'em like they see 'em; but I don't see that going anywhere soon. One thing has happened here though; as home inspectors became better at identifying conducive conditions, wood rot and pests and telling folks how to avoid bug issues and how to correctly repair rot damage, the number of bug and wood rot cases dropped and the bug inspection business here got so slim that a lot of pest management firms stopped doing inspections altogether. They didn't realize that when they got that law passed in 1991 it was going to essentially wipe out the bug inspection end of their business. Now that the bug end is separated from identification of wood rot and conducive conditions, I'd think that any inspector holding an SPI license would be sharp enough to realize that he or she should be charging extra for that extra service and extra liability and won't be giving it away. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Bunzel Posted November 2, 2011 Report Share Posted November 2, 2011 I don't know any details on the cases mentioned but when the WSDA investigator looks at the house in questions they will spend hours investigating it. If your inspection report documentation doesn't include everything they find over the course of their investigation then you will get spanked regardless of accessibility or the conditions present when you did your inspection. From talking to other inspectors and taking SPI classes I get the impression that the WSDA wants to make an example everytime they do an investigation. I am just thankful that the home inspectors are under the DOL. At least they seem to be more realistic in their approach. Frankly unless the banks start requiring WDO inspections, I don't see any reason for an HI to carry the SPI license. Clients don't seem to care or value it. //Rick Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hausdok Posted November 3, 2011 Author Report Share Posted November 3, 2011 I am just thankful that the home inspectors are under the DOL. At least they seem to be more realistic in their approach. //Rick Hi Rick, I got a chuckle out of that. Were you at any of the public hearings for the sunrise review or the public input meetings for the committees working on the bills? If so, do you remember how many bug-centric inspectors stepped up to the tables and insisted that if we were going to be licensed they felt we should remain under WSDA? I don't think there's any question that if the legislators had seen fit to do the licensing with WSDA running it that we'd have had a full-blown cluster on our hands. So far, knock wood, it still seems to be moving along pretty smoothly and none of the prophesies of the arm wavers have come true. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul N Frey Posted November 7, 2011 Report Share Posted November 7, 2011 Here is a little different spin. While you must be licensed and take an "Exam" to do inspections in Oregon, we are woefully back country when it comes to WDO inspections. Literally anyone can do the "WDO Inspection" part but must be licensed to do the application. This leads most Structural Inspectors to throw in a WDO - many times with disasterous results. I followed one "Inspector" that identified subs incorrectly (it was old WBB damage and quite inactive) and to this day refuses to admit he made a mistake. I asked him just how much money he had required sellers to pay out for uncalled for termite treatments as a prequisite for selling the home and he just stared at me and said "not my problem"! So, Dan S in Wa is tough and lots of people don't like him (he is a little / lot dictatorial) but he has really straightened out the industry there. Here in Oregon we have a bunch of political pussies that are afraid to rock the boat and mandate licensing for a WDO inspection. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjr6550 Posted January 6, 2012 Report Share Posted January 6, 2012 Kurt, Years ago I had a license in PA. Besides taking tests, continuing education, and fees, I had to have general liability insurnace to do pestiside application, even though I did not do applications. For me it was not worth the hassle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.