Jump to content

Washington State DOL Completes H.I. Peer Review

Recommended Posts

The Washington State Department of Licensing has finally completed their 6 month sunrise review for proposed H.I. licensing legislation in the State of Washington. Key recommendations in the DOL final draft are:

  • home inspector licensing;
  • separation of home inspectors and structural pest inspectors;
  • home inspectors will be able to report rot and conducive pest conditions and recommend appropriate professionals;
  • two year licensure for about $450 for the two-year period;
  • test requirements consisting of legally defensible, proctored, etc. with a Washington State specific segment;
  • six-member board made up of home inspectors;
  • no specific grandfathering, but those in business at the time that licensing takes effect will have two years to take the exam;
  • board will set experience criteria that may substitute for initial training and field work.
There's more to the report than just these and these are only DOL's recommendations. From here, the legislators must decide whether to go forward, go back to the drawing board, or chuck the entire idea. Guess time will tell what's going to happen in Washington State.

To download or read a copy of the final sunrise review report, click here.



Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 5 weeks later...

"separation of home inspectors and structural pest inspectors"

In the California, San Jose area there are separate pest, structural, roof & HVAC inspections done per transaction.

I can't say what percentage of these transactions get these specific inspections, but I can say the general home inspector in Washington State has much more to shoulder than in the Bay area.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...


I just received the final sunrise report and recommendations from the Washington State Department of licensing, so I've removed the draft of the final from TIJ's archives. The report's author, Bruce Chunn, informs me that there have been a few minor edits since the draft came out, but that the core findings and recommendations remain essentially unchanged.

To download a copy of the final report and recommendations pertaining to home inspector licensing by the Washington State Dept. of Licensing, click here.

Many thanks to Mr. Chunn for keeping us up-to-date on what's been happening in Olympia.

You're a Mensch, Bruce!



Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Kurt,

Funny you should ask that. There's going to be a meeting on the 13th in Olympia and Soumi has asked interested home inspectors from the various organizations, as well as independents, to attend.

The meeting involves the language being used in pre-inspection agreements all over the state by home inspectors. It seems that the AG has determined that home inspectors here can't have a limitation of liability clause in their contract limiting recovery to just the cost of an inspection, or an arbitration clause leaving damage determination up to an arbitrator, because under Washington State's screwy pest-control laws, anyone who is performing inspections of a home is "technically" doing a pest inspection, and is therefore required to carry either E & O insurance or a $25,000 bond.

This is an interesting idea, because it could open a whole lot of inspectors (At last estimate the State believes there are between 1300 and 1500 inspectors in the state) to additional liability.

Because I'm not affiliated with any association, I was invited to attend. However, I've got a conflict and won't be able to make it. So, of there are any independent Washington inspectors out there who would like to take my place, shoot me an email at hausdok@msn.com and we can talk about it.

In fairness to Soumi, he's said publicly more than once that he doesn't think that the WSDA should be in control of home inspector licensing in the state and that he's not adverse to some kind of a system wherein home inspectors would be able to comment and report on rot and would be required to refer all insect issues to licensed pest control operators.

In fairness to Chunn, he's just an objective observer. He went around the state gathering information from inspectors and let anyone who wanted to say anything have his or her say, over and over again, without painting anything one way or the other. It's interesting when one reads Chunn's document that inspectors on both sides of the licensing issue feel that it supports their view and not the other side's. Maybe it was too objective.



Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Create New...