The Licensing Forum

[Raymond Wand]

Its variable whether licencing makes for good inspector or whether its even good for the public, but what about associations who have no outside scrutiny, and report to themselves? Who ensures these many inspection associations are on the up and up? Who protects the inspectors from over zealous, unscrupulous administration or that they actually are dealing fairly with consumer complaints

[hausdok]

Hi Raymond,

Well, the associations are entities unto themselves. As far as I know, there are no rules outside of any organization for the way that they run things internally. Whether they are formed initially by a group with a common interest that sets down rules for membership, establishes bylaws, and voting procedure; or they're simply money making schemes initiated by single individuals that call them "associations," they're essentially private clubs. A few eventually gain such stature that they're recognized as semi-official entities, such as the AMA, ABA, ASHRAE, NAHB, etc., and they pull a lot of weight with pols and the public, but in the end they make their own rules.

They can be good associations or bad associations such as The American Red Cross or the Salvation Army; or they can be bad associations such as the National Socialist Party, Klu Klux Klan, or the Branch Davidians, etc. They have a right to make their own rules and the public has a right to join or not join as they see fit. If people in those associations don't like the way they do things, they are free to leave - that's the way it works.

I understand; you're upset because the public relations firm you paid to represent you booted you as a client for violating its message board rules when many of its other clients routinely violate those same rules. Because it's not really an association, per se, maybe there are laws in Canada that govern under what conditions a business can severe its business relationship with a client, but where true associations are concerned the membership is pretty much at the mercy of those who make the rules.

Sure, it doesn't seem fair, but without hard and fast bylaws and rules that require a vote to take certain actions, associations can pretty much do anything they want. In your case, that firm's proprietor, who sees himself as the imperious leader, apparently ceded that power to a group of his clients. He can do that if he wants to, and he can take that power away just as easily if he gave it. It's his firm, he can run it the way he wants.

If you're so upset about it, why don't you talk to a lawyer and see if there isn't some sort of implied contract that's been breached and go after them in civil court for breach of contract. Otherwise, you're out now so put it behind you; it ain't worth losing any sleep over. You need to let it go and stop beating a dead horse.

Think about it, you became addicted to the self aggrandizing that goes on over there, and, now that you don't have that daily dose of propaganda and mollycoddling, you're acting like an ex alcoholic who rails against the evils of alcohol but spends all his time hanging out in bars at night. If I were you, I'd force myself to stay off that site and refuse to think about, or even mention those folks, for at least six months. Kick it cold turkey and don't give it another thought. There are other things to do with your life than sit around stewing over a perceived injustice. Get over it.

ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!!

Mike

[Scottpat]

Good post Mike!

[Brian G]

Originally posted by jbushart

It has not. Licensing has failed in every state to achieve any of its desired outcomes.

Licensing solves nothing.

My my, Mr. Bushart has universal knowledge of all outcomes of all licensing efforts in the entire United States. Needless to say, he's wrong. In my state, Mississippi, it wiped out hundreds of fly-by-night guys who had no business whatsoever doing home inspections. That's a good thing.

It also set up a governing board that can, and occasionally has, taken away bad inspectors right to work in this state. That's also good.

Licensing certainly isn't a road to a perfect situation, but neither is having absolutely no regulation. I do know it has made things worse in some states, but not all, and sooner or later licensing will be everywhere.

I'll stick to what I've said on this subject for years:

A good law is better than no law.

A bad law is worse than no law.

Everything depends on the law you get.

Brian G.

Fight For a Good Law, Or Suffer Under a Bad One [8]

[Raymond Wand]

Mike,

It's your opinion that I am upset with that other association, the fact is I am not. If you were up on the facts you would know that the concerns are with one association up here which was created under statute which is obligated to follow its charter and its bylaws which it is not. Thus my concern and others with regard to proper and a legal duty to ensure to the members and the public things are on the up and up. This cannot be assured under self regulation. It has not worked up here since 1994 and continues to flounder under the current regime.

Your comparison to alcohol addiction is your need to justify your post.

I can assure you that if I wanted to remain addicted I could quickly and easily sign onto that forum under an assumed name. I don't need you telling me whats best for me, I have been in this biz since 1991 and am very familiar with how the associations I belong to operate. As mentioned licencing is the only way to solve the "self aggrandizing" which you coined. The only reason I can think of why some are so damning about licencing is because it will disrupt their fiefdom, and need to control a populace of lemmings while lining their pockets. Thats my real beef, not my departure from the Nacho stand.

Thanks for the advice, but if you want to practice psychology you need a licence.

[hausdok]

OK,

Whatever you say.

OT - OF!!!

M.