Realtors, Inspectors Battle, Heating Up In Kansas.

[fqp25]

Came across this today. It appears that Kansas Realtors are trying to control inspections. If this bill goes through, they should just call it Realtors Evaluations, and not Inspections

Read Full Story Here

[hausdok]

Thanks , Frank

I'd oppose this for no other reason than it specifies that licensees must show proof of membership in one of the recognized associations.

If you're a member of one of the associations, forgive me for saying this, but that's bullshit. None of the associations hold the franchise on competence or integrity. Belonging to an association shouldn't be criteria for becoming a licensed home inspector in any state.

I've been an independent for longer than the years I spent trying out the associations, and you won't find my customers complaining about my competency, ethics, or integrity. What right have they to force independents to join one of these soap operas? Besides, I'd guess that it's somehow unconstitutional, to boot.

OK, I'm done. Now I'm going out somewhere and kick someone's cat.

ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!!

Mike

[hausdok]

Here's the latest on this one:

ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!!

Mike

[Brian G]

The bill, HB 2315, would set standards for home inspectors and allow homeowners to sue inspectors for an amount up to $10,000.

They can't sue now? If it's the limit of liability clause, they could deal with that without turning the world upside-down.

The HI"s out there should ask if the legislature plans to put an HI on the realtor's board. [:-mischie

Brian G.

Somehow I Doubt It []

[traderpats]

Sadly this is a clear example of the ethics of too many in the RE industry and the ignorance (or corruption) of the legislatures. Anyone that is familiar with the issues involved, (HI and RE) know damn well these types of laws are not good for the consumer. If passed the board will slowly weed out the best inspectors and those left would be catering to the agents. This of course would be detrimental for those same clients that the agents profess to having a fiduciary duty. When issues do arise the HI and buyer will end up paying out of their pockets while those same agents are more readily able to line their own. Bad deal anyway you look at it.

FWIW - We sold our own home last year. The paperwork was readily obtained from one of those Sale By Owner stores. The forms were easy to understand and straight forward. I thought something had to be missing. The title company, (who really does most of the paperwork), assured me it was all fine. The sale went through without any problems. NOT worth the 6% - 7% we were quoted. If it's a simple sale consider buying a book on the subject and save yourself 10's of thousands. Even with having an attorney review the paperwork you'll come out way ahead.

[hausdok]

Originally posted by traderpats

Anyone that is familiar with the issues involved, (HI and RE) know damn well these types of laws are not good for the consumer. If passed the board will slowly weed out the best inspectors and those left would be catering to the agents.

Hi,

Well, not to be argumentative, because I do think that this is a very poorly written law, you're assertion presupposes that everyone appointed to that board is going to be a criminal who's open to the idea of a conspiracy to water down the competency of the average inspector in Kansas. That seems, at least to me, to be a stretch.

Sure, you might get one or two board members who're on the side of builders and realtors, but, as has been shown in North Carolina, it's not always so easy for political appointees to "fix" things while under the scrutiny of an entire state's populace bird-dogged by home inspectors.

ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!!

Mike

[hausdok]

Hi All,

Here's another one that just cam in via Google Alerts.

OT - OF!!!

M.

[kurt]

Shoot, I wouldn't mind having a bill that said I was only responsible for $10,000 if I screwed up. And, getting whupped upside the financial head w/a penalty might make a few practitioners consider this thing we do a little more seriously.

As far as the other stuff, w/agents ruling the universe etc., etc....

The Justice Dept. has the NAR in court right now going after their commission structure. There's folks that are on our side. We just have to help them.

I'm not at all worried that the customer base for competent home inspections is simply going to disappear because a few realtor geeks think they can push stuff down folks throats. Folks aren't that stupid. They just need options. We're an option.

[DLRambo]

In Kansas, the state appellate court has ruled several times over the past 12 years that a service business can CONTRACT with their clients and limit their liability (time or $$$).

The realestator community AND trial attorneys have started telling the media and legislators that because of that, if anything goes south in a home inspection, the buyer has no recourse against the inspector (99 yards of BS - done lots of expert witness for other inspectors that only wish that was 100% true).

Therefore for national security and to protect the children the saviours of the consumer (agents & attorneys) are pushing a bill that among other things writes into state law that HI can not use language that limits his/her liability to UNDER $10,000.

The Bill also makes mandatory either: E&O ins, a $10,000 escrow account like a RE Brokers, a $10,000 no revocable letter of credit (pledge your house, etc) OR a $10,000 Bond of some kind.

[DLRambo]

Almost forgot - No other profession in our state has any kind of restrictions like that on them.

Agents been having MANY breakfasts or luncheons for legislators telling them how NEEDED this is AND mentioning this is an election year AND the Realtors have 15,000 voting members and $$$$.

I sat in on one of these meetings. Very subtle. Like a 10 lb sledge hammer to kill a fly.

I hear naive or foolish inspectors say "oh how great - our liability is limited to $10k. Stop and imagine:

You miss an electrical defect that burns a house down and kills or severely injures a kid. Think a jury will stop at $10k. Don't get stupid. You know the answer to that like I do.

So all the $10k does is open us up to every whiny baby or slightly sleazy realestator out there. Bad move. Whats worse is we've got local HI's helping push this - "it'll help clean up the industry"

Oh pleaseeeeee..................

[hausdok]

Hi All,

Apparently, I haven't been keeping up very well with what's been going on in Kansas. A Kansas inspector just emailed me the link to a proposed substitute bill that's just been introduced there and asked me to post it. Apparently, folks in Kansas are dissing each other backward and forward and he doesn't want to have a bullseye painted on his back so he gave it to Mikey because "Mikey will try anything!" So, here's the link for you Dorothy land folk:

http://www.kslegislature.org/bills/2008/2315.pdf

ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!!

Mike

[hausdok]

OK,

Quick review:

- It looks like any board provisions have been eliminate and now the fate of HI's is at the sole discretion of the Secretary of State. (What's up with that? Were things so contentious and so disorganized there that the pols felt that inspectors just couldn't be trusted to work together? Inquiring minds want to know.)

- HI's are not permitted to disclaim liability for any error or omission or to limit their liability to anything less than $10,000 and must have any limitation over $10,000 agreed to in writing in a pre-inspection contract.

- Pre-inspection contracts will be mandatory.

- Proof of financial responsibility in the form of a $10,000 surety bond or an E & O policy that covers them for not less than $10,000. (Personally, if I were permitted to have a limitation of liability for no more than $10,001, and were permitted to push any claim less than that to a 3rd party arbitrator, which this bill doesn't seem to prohibit, and prevent my report being used by anyone other than my client, which I also don't see prohibited here, I'd probably be happy if there were a means to appeal any decision by the Sec. of State to an arbitrator as well.)

- A statement that they've passed a proctored and approved exam. It doesn't say what the exam is - only references an appendix.

- Proof that they've joined an association (What's up with that bullshit? Why should a HI have to join one of these soap operas unless he or she wants to?)

- Inspectors will be required to comply with whatever SOP or C of E that they must, depending on which association they've joined.

- Compared to here, the initial registration will be easy at $400 every 2 years. (Man, did we get shafted! I suppose it's because the cost of everything is so much higher here than in Dorothy land.)

Initial cost per inspector with the bond/E & O; exam; fee looks like it could probably go as high as $900 to $1000.

So, is this going to set some folks off in Kansas? It should - it looks like a pol without any experience at home inspections will be holding all inspectors by the cajones and able to clamp his fist anytime he (or she) feels that inspectors are screwing up. What would be a shame is if this came about because inspectors there couldn't learn to work together to get the pols to listen to them. When licensing is staring inspectors in the face, all the debating back in forth in the world on these boards will do them absolutely no good, unless they bury the hatchet, learn to come together, and work together to help mold whatever it is the pols intend to throw at them.

ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!!

Mike

[hausdok]

Hi,

If you want to reply with quote you must type in your response either above or below the text that appears in the composition box with the word quote or /quote in brackets and then click the button that says "submit reply".

OT - OF!!!

M.

[sqwmama]

Hi. From Missouri here, there is no regulation on Hi, builders, or contractors in Mo. as of now. I recently started my HI service. I have researched the different HI associations, to me it is a couple magazines a year for hefty price. I have been hands on construction from braking ground to turn key for the past 28 years. I didn't take an internet or home course in home inspection. I have been trying to get E & O insurance , and it's not required in Missouri , but all the applications want to know if you are certefid with any of the many home inspector assosiations. I hope I don't have to go that route. I have read others SOP and agree with most, so I have come up with my own. I am a home inspector , that's all. There is no one or any sourse that could change that. I am working for my client only. Hope they get it right in Ks. and some day soon in Mo.

Originally posted by hausdok

OK,

Quick review:

- It looks like any board provisions have been eliminate and now the fate of HI's is at the sole discretion of the Secretary of State. (What's up with that? Were things so contentious and so disorganized there that the pols felt that inspectors just couldn't be trusted to work together? Inquiring minds want to know.)

- HI's are not permitted to disclaim liability for any error or omission or to limit their liability to anything less than $10,000 and must have any limitation over $10,000 agreed to in writing in a pre-inspection contract.

- Pre-inspection contracts will be mandatory.

- Proof of financial responsibility in the form of a $10,000 surety bond or an E & O policy that covers them for not less than $10,000. (Personally, if I were permitted to have a limitation of liability for no more than $10,001, and were permitted to push any claim less than that to a 3rd party arbitrator, which this bill doesn't seem to prohibit, and prevent my report being used by anyone other than my client, which I also don't see prohibited here, I'd probably be happy if there were a means to appeal any decision by the Sec. of State to an arbitrator as well.)

- A statement that they've passed a proctored and approved exam. It doesn't say what the exam is - only references an appendix.

- Proof that they've joined an association (What's up with that bullshit? Why should a HI have to join one of these soap operas unless he or she wants to?)

- Inspectors will be required to comply with whatever SOP or C of E that they must, depending on which association they've joined.

- Compared to here, the initial registration will be easy at $400 every 2 years. (Man, did we get shafted! I suppose it's because the cost of everything is so much higher here than in Dorothy land.)

Initial cost per inspector with the bond/E & O; exam; fee looks like it could probably go as high as $900 to $1000.

So, is this going to set some folks off in Kansas? It should - it looks like a pol without any experience at home inspections will be holding all inspectors by the cajones and able to clamp his fist anytime he (or she) feels that inspectors are screwing up. What would be a shame is if this came about because inspectors there couldn't learn to work together to get the pols to listen to them. When licensing is staring inspectors in the face, all the debating back in forth in the world on these boards will do them absolutely no good, unless they bury the hatchet, learn to come together, and work together to help mold whatever it is the pols intend to throw at them.

ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!!

Mike

[hausdok]

Originally posted by sqwmama

Hope they get it right in Ks. and some day soon in Mo.

Originally posted by hausdok

Hi, welcome to the board.

They aren't going to get it right as long as Missouri inspectors continue to post near-libelous allegations in the Missouri papers criticizing the state representative that keeps trying to push through legislation there.

Home inspectors are piss ants compared to legislators; when a legislator gets it into his or her head that there's going to be legislation - there will, in all likelihood, be legislation sooner or later. Inspectors need to recognize that reality and then band together across organizational and independent lines and come up with something that they can meet the legislator halfway with. Only then will the legislator be willing to sit down and actually consider what they're saying.

James Bushart has been openly criticizing the Missouri legislator who's been trying to push through regulation of HI's. There's nothing wrong with criticizing a legislator; hell, we all do it, but that guy is an ex-cop and Bushart's criticisms of the guy has made it sound like he's a corrupt politician that's entered into a conspiracy with real estate folks to try and get inspectors under their thumb. If there's one thing that you don't want to do with an ex-cop is imply that he's a crook; that's a sure recipe for trouble. Apparently, Bushart, the little ex-Jag-clerk with an enlarged ego, refuses to recognize that reality.

Even if Bushart is right and what he's been implying is true, and I've never read anything Bushart has posted that proves that there actually is such a conspiracy, the method he's using to fight legislation there is scorching the earth for future inspectors.

What's going to happen is, as time goes by that legislator will gradually get more and more legislators on his side and will eventually have enough in his corner that he won't even have to consider the concerns of a bunch of irate home inspectors who don't care to learn how the politics game is played. Then where will Missouri inspectors be? I'll tell you - laboring under stupid rules written by non-inspectors with a ton of onerous extra requirements heaped on their profession that aren't heaped on any others.

You guys should be working on forming a coalition of clear thinkers that can see beyond their own prejudices and are willing to work together with independents and inspectors from all of the associations without bringing in the agendas of organizations.

If you do that, and learn to work around your differences for the good of your Missouri brothers, you'll eventually get something that, though it won't be perfect and won't be what everyone in your coalition would like to be, at least will be endurable for all. However, mark my words, if inspectors keep f***king with that legislator's head, eventually it's going to come back around and bite every Missouri inspector right square in the ass.

If you want to know how to get it done, read Sandy Hartman's article here.

ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!!

Mike