C.A.H.P.I. Urges Canadawide H.I. Licensing

Quote: Originally posted by hausdok

Hi,

Of course licensing can't guaranty that nobody will every receive a bad inspection again. Does a doctor's medical license guaranty you'll never receive shoddy medical care?

Critics of licensing often like to say that licensing solves nothing. I think that boiled down to its basics a licensing program simply ensures a basic level of competency. Much the same way that your state's drivers' licensing program and driver's test ensured that you were competent enough behind the wheel to do what you claimed to be able to do - drive a car safely - a well thought out licensing program needs to ensure that those practicing this profession have sufficient training to be considered minimally competent, and it needs to test every inspector to ensure that the inspector has retained enough of what he or she has learned to be able to ensure that the inspector has the minimum level of competency needed to do what the inspector claims to be able to do - inspect homes properly.

Quote: Beyond that, it's no more possible to ensure an inspector does in fact perform a proper inspection than it's possible to ensure that every person holding a driver's license that climbs behind the wheel of a car is going to drive safely.

Quote: Originally posted by kurt


There are no good arguments for or against licensing.

Quote: Originally posted by kurt


There are no good arguments for or against licensing.

Quote: Originally posted by Jim Katen



I'm not arguing for it or against it. I just believe that home inspector licensing laws get passed because people believe that such laws will lead to better inspections. They don't. And home inspectors often support such laws because they think that the laws will limit competition. They don't do that either.

I'll also take this opportunity to point out that while the initial law is rarely a big problem, the subsequent tinkering often is. That's when you get into the petty little rules about what *must* or *must not* be reported, what you *must* and *must not* write in your reports, and what specific words you must write. It's the result of the a small number of inspectors trying to impose their inspection ethic on everyone else.

As a state's licensing rules age, they tend to get worse as every new crop of committee or board members attempts to add a little something to the stew of rules.

Quote: Originally posted by Marc

I'll also take this opportunity to point out that while the initial law is rarely a big problem, the subsequent tinkering often is. That's when you get into the petty little rules about what *must* or *must not* be reported, what you *must* and *must not* write in your reports, and what specific words you must write. It's the result of the a small number of inspectors trying to impose their inspection ethic on everyone else.

As a state's licensing rules age, they tend to get worse as every new crop of committee or board members attempts to add a little something to the stew of rules.

Jim K.

=========================

Licensing does help but not much. It's the proverbial 'foot in the door'. The question is...How do you 'up the bar', raise the standard, tighten the SOP without ending up with what Texas has, which is a lot of realtor engineered 'gotta do this, gotta do that' that doesn't translate into any good for anyone at all?

Who knows?

Marc