I consult to the HI profession... check references...at least 3. Use a service that provides a written narrative report on the specific house...not a same day computerized report that is a checklist and/or boiler plate...as that is the minimum standardŅand the least informative.

Get the contract up front...in order to know what is and isn't included. If the HI provides additional services, make sure he has the training and experience (or licenses as is the case for radon or wood destroying insect inspection) to do so...if they outsource, find out to who..and check on them.

PA does not license HI's yet...but they are required to carry Errors and Omission insurance. Ask for a copy of the certificateÂÂcall the insurance company to make sure it is not lapsed...and find out what is an is not covered..as additonal services often require a rider.

The HI should spend a minimum of 2.50 hours in the home for an average sized home in average conditionÂ..this does not include time for report generation....the time should be spent on the inspection.

Many HI's will encourage you to ask questions as they inspect...NOT. That is a distraction for even the best....you want an HI who is going to give the inspection his undivided attention...and then show and tell afterwards.

Attend the inspection as that is the best way to understand the findings.

Last but not least, although your REA may have provided a great referral, there is now ay to know for sureÂso you may want to choose another, and follow the above recommendations as this will give you a far better chance of having a through, professional and meaningful inspection.

Best wishes and happy holidays!

--- "I consult to the HI profession... check references...at least 3. Use a service that provides a written narrative report on the specific house...not a same day computerized report that is a checklist and/or boiler plate...as that is the minimum standardand the least informative."

It never ceases to amaze me that some inspectors tout their onsite report generation as being a good thing. I cant imagine providing an onsite report for even the smallest, simplest house in great condition.

--- "PA does not license HI's yet...but they are required to carry Errors and Omission insurance. Ask for a copy of the certificatecall the insurance company to make sure it is not lapsed...and find out what is an is not covered..as additonal services often require a rider."

Many inspectors (me included) would decline the inspection if they were aware that the buyer contacted their insurance company. The ones that wouldnt, should.

--- "The HI should spend a minimum of 2.50 hours in the home for an average sized home in average condition..this does not include time for report generation....the time should be spent on the inspection".

Thats a bare minimum. I can only dream of being done in two and a half hours. I rarely spend less than three hours in pretty much any house, and thats with taking voice notes. I spend roughly the same amount of time as the inspection writing the report and adding 20-60 photos.

--- "Many HI's will encourage you to ask questions as they inspect...NOT. That is a distraction for even the best....you want an HI who is going to give the inspection his undivided attention...and then show and tell afterwards.
Attend the inspection as that is the best way to understand the findings."

Attend the inspection, but dont ask questions? How does that work?

Logic, you are nearly always dead-on right with your advice, but not with this. I agree that the buyer asking questions during the inspection is a distraction, but ruling out inspectors who encourage questions and do a walk and talk, is going to eliminate a lot of very good ones. Its a distraction, but theres no better way to build up a rapport with the buyer, to have the buyer see just how hard you worked for him (that helps if theres a problem down the road), and to be sure the buyer understands the issues. Frankly, I couldnt backtrack through the house and point out every single issue that I found during my first trip through.

--- "Last but not least, although your REA may have provided a great referral, there is now ay to know for sureso you may want to choose another, and follow the above recommendations as this will give you a far better chance of having a through, professional and meaningful inspection."

And also make sure the inspector is a member of one of the two "legitimate" inspector organizations.

--- "Best wishes and happy holidays!"

Have a happy birthday! You share a birthday with my mother.

Joe

inspectorjoe: "Many inspectors (me included) would decline the inspection if they were aware that the buyer contacted their insurance company. The ones that wouldnt, should."

Why? This advice is based upon a real and serious problem in NJ...which I think is probably also an issue in PA...but has yet to surface...as PA has no licensing.

A VERY large number of licensed NJ HI's have allowed their E&O to lapse...or, it has been cancelled at some point for some reason. However, many have continued to inspect...with the buyer being none the wiser.

Not only is this deceptive practice...but as E&O policies are "claims made", once a policy lapses, all coverage is canceled...including coverage for those inspections that were performed when the policy was in effect.

Consequently, there are an untold number of NJ buyers who will not have the recourse of the HI's E&O policy if they should need such recourse.

This is such a problem that the NJ licensing board has the following warning on their website: "Please call the Committee office to check if a licensee has current insurance coverage."

That said, the bad apples have spoiled it for the bunch.

"Attend the inspection, but dont ask questions? How does that work?"

Of course the buyer should ask questionswhen the HI takes them around the home after he has performed the inspection to show and explain the findings. This takes more time on the part of the HIbut it is the best way to eliminate distractionsand the chance of missing somethingespecially something that is NOT therebut should beaka paradigm paralysis.

In addition, this benefits the entire process for all in the long termas the fewer errors on the part of the HIthe less the chance of losing E&O..or having to pay through the nosethe better the chance of containing cost in order that a home inspection remain affordableand the better the buyer is protected. It is a big picture issuewith the end result point being to improve the quality of inspections.as well as the level of professionalism and accuracy that the buyer will receive.

"And also make sure the inspector is a member of one of the two "legitimate" inspector organizations."

In PA this would be ASHI or NAHI. The last I heard, NACHI was still "qualified" by PA as a "legitimate" organization. Has that changed?

Be that as it may, in PA this indeed a requirementas they have no other regulatory process....they still allow the profession to police itself. :-(

Howeverin the grand scheme of things it is meaninglesswhich is why licensing of HIs in PA is in the works. Membership in all the "legitimate" orgs is on the honor system.and therefore basically meaningless to the consumer.

BTWthe birthday indicated is the default if one does not enter a different datebut thanks for the good wishes nonetheless.

Don't know if this helps, probably not:( I got this from an overview of what other states have done by the Ohio REA to investigate the options for somehow licensing or regulation HI's in Ohio, apparently OH is currently one of 20 states that has none, as might be expected, in the states that have some sort of "law" they can vary widely from "what's the point" to fairly robust.

"One other state is worth mentioning in describing the administration of a home inspection
licensing program. Pennsylvanias law is fairly unusual in that it seemingly attempts to regulate
the industry without having to provide any direct governmental oversight. Rather than have the
state bear the responsibility of administering a full licensing program, home inspectors in
Pennsylvania are required to be members of a national home inspector association that:
(1) Is operated on a not-for-profit basis and is not operated as a franchise.
(2) Has members in more than ten states.
(3) Requires that a person may not become a full member unless the person has
performed or participated in more than 100 home inspections and has passed a
recognized or accredited examination testing knowledge of the proper
procedures for conducting a home inspection.
(4) Requires that its members comply with a code of conduct and attend continuing
professional education classes as an ongoing condition of membership. (SB
1032, 1999; §7502)
This shifts the responsibility of maintaining qualified home inspectors in the state onto the
professional associations. By meeting the membership requirements of one of these
associations, the inspector is presumed to be qualified. However, there are a number of issues
with this particular law. The above definition of a national home inspector association is open to
interpretation. In addition, Pennsylvania has no agency or regulatory body that ensures
inspectors are meeting this membership requirement. Instead the law simply states:
SB 1032, 1999; § 7510. RELIANCE BY BUYER.
A buyer shall be entitled to rely in good faith, without independent investigation, on a
written representation by a home inspector that the home inspector is a full member in
good standing of a national home inspection association. "

marys1000, thanks for the link. Interesting reading.

As far as the following:

"A buyer shall be entitled to rely in good faith, without independent investigation, on a
written representation by a home inspector that the home inspector is a full member in
good standing of a national home inspection association. "

The problem is that it does not take much to be in good standing with either. I know of all too many HI's who are members in one, both or more, that routinely violate the SOP's and the COE's as a SOP. Many of these HIs have NJ and/or NY licenses as well.

Very, very few if any HI's get booted out of ASHI, NAHI, NACHI etc......

The PA set up is basically a fox guarding the henhouse dealand those who formed PHIC (Pennsylvania Home Inspectors Coalition) that decides who and how many aspiring HIs they will take on ride alongs for training (AKA controlling their competition) seem to basically spend an most of their time arguing and suing over which org is the best

Licensing does not mean much more...as few if any of the states have the resources in place to enforce the regs.....but at least it does provide a centralized place to check on insurance coverage and disciplinary actions

Interestingly enough, of the 30 NJ HIs who responded to the OHIO survey 7 admitted that they dont carry E&O insurancewhich is required by NJ lawwhich just serves to prove my point that buyers need to verify that the HI does indeed have current E&O coverage. 3 HIs admitted to supplying cost to repair estimates, also precluded by state regulations.

Interesting as well that both HIs and REAs in NJ "somewhat agree" that REAs recommend "soft" inspectors.

Last but not least, Im not sure what type of training any REA has to offer any opinion on HIs knowledge of building constructionand, I love the comment of at least one REA regarding HI report adequacy: "inadequate because they "over-do"! LOL!

They also have the NJ qualifications wrongit states that the training inspections must be performed "under the guidance of a licensed HI". Wrong. They must be performed in the presence of and under the direct supervision of a licensed HI. BIG differenceand the law was amended to make that change in 2005.

Therefore, IMO the results of this study all need to be taken with a BOULDER of salt

That said, all of the above and more is exactly why the buyer must perform their own due diligence in order to have the best chance of a professional, unbiased and thorough inspection.

"A VERY large number of licensed NJ HI's have allowed their E&O to lapse...or, it has been cancelled at some point for some reason. However, many have continued to inspect...with the buyer being none the wiser. "

Logic, how do you know that a VERY large number of inspectors don't have insurance. If it's such a big problem, the insurance companies should be required to notify the HIAC upon termination of coverage.

Joe,there are alternatives to being a member of the two "legitimate HI organizations". I usually attend 1-2 classes per month for HI CEU credits. Both are not the orgs you are referring to. In NJ, it's not a benefit to belong, and in 21 years in the biz, I've only been asked if I'm a member maybe a half dozen times.

van356: "Logic, how do you know that a VERY large number of inspectors don't have insurance. If it's such a big problem, the insurance companies should be required to notify the HIAC upon termination of coverage."

Do the research.

Start by reading the HIAC meeting minutes over the last few years for your answer. Not only have there been numerous discussions regarding lapsed policies ...discovered via those insurance company notices, but a number of HI's have asked to have their licenses temporarily placed inactive due to lack of insurance.

And.many if not all of these HI's who have allowed their policy to lapse DO get reinstated...even though all of their previous clients are now screwed on a claim.....so, that does not seem to indicate that buyers rights are being considered first and foremost. Nor is it fair to the HI's that for over the $4-7K plus per year to maintain coverage.

This has apparently prompted HIAC to include the warning on their website to check on the insurance status.as it is not a given. However, that does not help the buyer who does not even know that the website even exists...which is most.

Andas you may or may not know...HIAC can discipline the licensed HI...but they have zero jurisdiction over the unlicensed HI...which is one reason why the NJ AG has ordered and overhaul of ALL the processional licensing boards...including the fact that complaints are processed way to slowly to be beneficial to the public. One of the goals is to have the same access to info on all of the licensed professions as is now available for MD's.

Last but not least, sources tell me that there is even discussion to attempt to require E&O to be occurrence based...and not "claims made"...which will cost the HI's...and in turn the buyers a VERY pretty penny indeed.

That said...what of all of the HI's who currently have insurance...although a previous policy lapsed. Unless they forked over for tail coverage (most don't according to FREA), all previous inspections are no longer covered.

Andas the ranks of those licensed has dropped by at least 100 since the first licenses were issued...what do you think will be the plight of all those buyers who have a claim....with the HI who is gone from the business...and no longer insured?

IMOadd it up...that is a large enough number to constitute a major problem.with a capital "P".

Orfile an OPRA requestasking for the number of lapsed policies..as well as those reinstated since 2003. Happyor as the case may be, very sad reading.

Logic wrote: "Joe wrote: "Many inspectors (me included) would decline the inspection if they were aware that the buyer contacted their insurance company. The ones that wouldnt, should."

Why? This advice is based upon a real and serious problem in NJ...which I think is probably also an issue in PA...but has yet to surface...as PA has no licensing.
A VERY large number of licensed NJ HI's have allowed their E&O to lapse...or, it has been cancelled at some point for some reason. However, many have continued to inspect...with the buyer being none the wiser.
Not only is this deceptive practice...but as E&O policies are "claims made", once a policy lapses, all coverage is canceled...including coverage for those inspections that were performed when the policy was in effect.
Consequently, there are an untold number of NJ buyers who will not have the recourse of the HI's E&O policy if they should need such recourse.
This is such a problem that the NJ licensing board has the following warning on their website: "Please call the Committee office to check if a licensee has current insurance coverage."
That said, the bad apples have spoiled it for the bunch."

Reply: - There is of course, nothing wrong with a buyer requesting proof of insurance, but contacting the insurance company directly, steps over the line. In my eyes, the person that does that has branded himself as a potential candidate for causing trouble down the road. I would eliminate that risk by declining the job.
That scenario has never happened to me and it may very well never happen. I dont know if its a Pennsylvania thing, but shoppers rarely ask about insurance, and when they do, you know from other questions asked that theyre working down a list they got from somewhere.
You say that E&O policies are claims made. Some are, but of course many are occurrence policies. I believe Pennsylvania requires a certain number of years of tail end coverage for claims made policies. Of course, thats meaningless if a policy isnt in effect when an inspection is done.
Ive never read of any problems with lapsed insurance in PA, but as you said, maybe it hasnt surfaced yet.

Logic wrote: - "(Joe wrote: "Attend the inspection, but dont ask questions? How does that work?")
Of course the buyer should ask questionswhen the HI takes them around the home after he has performed the inspection to show and explain the findings. This takes more time on the part of the HIbut it is the best way to eliminate distractionsand the chance of missing somethingespecially something that is NOT therebut should beaka paradigm paralysis.
In addition, this benefits the entire process for all in the long termas the fewer errors on the part of the HIthe less the chance of losing E&O..or having to pay through the nosethe better the chance of containing cost in order that a home inspection remain affordableand the better the buyer is protected. It is a big picture issuewith the end result point being to improve the quality of inspections.as well as the level of professionalism and accuracy that the buyer will receive."

Reply: - I agree completely that its far best that the inspector do the inspection alone, eliminating many potential distractions, but like it or not, thats not how the vast majority of inspectors operate. By telling the OP "you want an HI who is going to give the inspection his undivided attention...and then show and tell afterwards", a lot of very good inspectors are going to be eliminated.
Id much rather do the inspection alone, but do the typical "walk and talk" for a variety of reasons. As I mentioned before, the biggest benefit may be the rapport you build up with the client. They see how hard you worked for them, how dirty you got and just how much you really know about what youre doing, both through things said and the level of confidence and organization that you exhibit. Taking the buyer back through the house after the inspection can take a huge amount of time, plus, Im sure that Im not the only inspector out there who suffers from "fried brain syndrome after some inspections and might have a hard time recalling all of the issues again. Then theres the issue of what do you do with the buyer during the inspection. I wont start without a signed contract, so that means the buyer has to be there from the start. I dont want the buyer(s) wandering unsupervised through the house for hours while Im inspecting.
A buyer that "gets it" really isnt much of a distraction. The ideal is no more that one or two people at the inspection, who are pretty much silent, asking appropriate questions at the appropriate time. That happens maybe 10-20% of the time. Ive had many fewer problems since I started emailing buyers a courteous letter asking them to limit the number of people they bring, not to mess with things in the house and giving tips on how not to cause unnecessary distractions during the process.
Still, I do relish those inspections for out of town buyers, when Im there alone and can give the inspection my total attention.

Logic wrote: - "(Joe wrote: "And also make sure the inspector is a member of one of the two "legitimate" inspector organizations.")
In PA this would be ASHI or NAHI. The last I heard, NACHI was still "qualified" by PA as a "legitimate" organization. Has that changed?"

Repl: - Im not going there. From reading your posts, I know youre savvy; Im sure you know the issues. The OWNER of one of the orgs can be very vindictive. Im not saying anything specific on a public forum.

Logic wrote: - "Be that as it may, in PA this indeed a requirementas they have no other regulatory process....they still allow the profession to police itself. :-(
Howeverin the grand scheme of things it is meaninglesswhich is why licensing of HIs in PA is in the works. Membership in all the "legitimate" orgs is on the honor system.and therefore basically meaningless to the consumer."

Reply: - I havent heard anything lately about Senate Bill 359, introduced last March. I assumed that it just died with the end of the 2007 Legislative session. Is it still active?

Logic wrote: - "BTWthe birthday indicated is the default if one does not enter a different datebut thanks for the good wishes nonetheless."

Reply: - Jeez, I never knew that. I looked and saw that my Birthday is also January 1. What are the odds of that? :-)

Logic wrote: - "The PA set up is basically a fox guarding the henhouse dealand those who formed PHIC (Pennsylvania Home Inspectors Coalition) that decides who and how many aspiring HIs they will take on ride alongs for training (AKA controlling their competition) seem to basically spend an most of their time arguing and suing over which org is the best"

Reply: - You might want to do some research on PHIC and the Mentoring Program. You seem to be ignorant of the facts. The PA system IS a fox guarding the henhouse deal, but dont blame PHIC or the Mentoring Program. Far from being a means to "control their competition", the Mentoring Program was created as a means for prospective inspectors to achieve the minimum of 100 inspections required by Act 114. It removed a barrier to entering the profession; it didn't add one.

On what do you base your statement that those who formed PHIC "spend an most of their time arguing and suing over which org is the best". If you knew what you were talking about, you would know that Joe Kelly was on the receiving end of a lawsuit, not the other way around.

inspectorjoe: "There is of course, nothing wrong with a buyer requesting proof of insurance, but contacting the insurance company directly, steps over the line. In my eyes, the person that does that has branded himself as a potential candidate for causing trouble down the road. I would eliminate that risk by declining the job."

While I can understand your point in that such a question could be a red flag that the buyer may be a major PITAor that they are looking for a problem before they even hire, the fact is that it really is the only way that a buyer can be assured that the HIs insurance is in effect. And yes..PA HIs are required to maintain E&O insurance for one year after the last inspection report is issuedhoweverit does not state that it must be TAIL coverage. In other wordsif one allows a policy to lapse...or better yet, changes over to a cheaper insurer for that last year to save money, if it is not tail coverage (which is more costly), all inspections that went before are no longer covered.but they would still be compliant with the law.
In addition, I have yet to meet an HI who carries and occurrences policyalthough Im sure a few exist here and there.they are the exception to the rule..

Now, as far as how many in PA have allowed coverage to lapse, the question is how is it tracked? As far as I can see, any ability to verify education, experience, or any real meaningful oversight regarding insurance compliance by any sort of non-partisan state entity is absent from the legislationso there really is no equivocal way to know what is going on with the PA home inspection profession. This is why a PA buyer has no choice but to perform quite a bit of due diligence.

inspectorjoe: "I agree completely that its far best that the inspector do the inspection alone, eliminating many potential distractions, but like it or not, thats not how the vast majority of inspectors operate."

Interestingly enough, most HIs I know say they operate in this manner because the REAs tell the buyer that the HI SHOULD take them aroundand they dont want to risk losing the inspection by trying to counter what the buyer has come to believe from the REA. Most..if they had their druthers would prefer to do the job on their own. A number of HIs who do the inspection alone say that once they explain to the buyer that it is to their benefit..and whythey are very happy with the process.

In addition, lets not kid ourselvesthe walk and talk maximizes the number of inspections the HI can complete in one daytherefore it is often more about the bottom line, that what is in the best interests of the buyer.
Howevernone of the above changes the fact that every HI can perform a better and more through inspection WITHOUT distractions. and it is up to the HI profession, the organizationsAND the licensing boards to educate the public in issues such as thishowever, none endeavor to do soand, IMO, this is mostly due to the desire to maximize profits..and to some degree to not raise the ire of NAR.

inspectorjoe: "Im not going there. From reading your posts, I know youre savvy; Im sure you know the issues. The OWNER of one of the orgs can be very vindictive. Im not saying anything specific on a public forum."

Agreed. Howeverwith licensing these orgs are becoming more and more superfluous..and they KNOW it...but still, all too many HIs who are members of the various orgs seem to be devoted to arguing over the issue of which org is best..top banana..most memberswho inflates membership, on and on and on.all of which is of zero benefit and totally meaningless to the public in every shape, matter and form.

inspectorjoe: " I havent heard anything lately about Senate Bill 359, introduced last March. I assumed that it just died with the end of the 2007 Legislative session. Is it still active?"

Scuttlebutt is that after ASHIs latest position statement, ranking PA #27, there is renewed interest, as the ASHI position has been reported in most of the major news outletstime will tell.

inspectorjoe: "You might want to do some research on PHIC and the Mentoring Program. You seem to be ignorant of the facts. The PA system IS a fox guarding the henhouse deal, but dont blame PHIC or the Mentoring Program. Far from being a means to "control their competition", the Mentoring Program was created as a means for prospective inspectors to achieve the minimum of 100 inspections required by Act 114. It removed a barrier to entering the profession; it didn't add one.

I am extremely familair with PHIC, and the fact remains that the control of such is still in the hands of the prospective HIs competition. You may not be aware of the fact that the NJ law was originally structured the same wayand was amended to take the control away from the HIsand put it where it belongsunder the jurisdiction of the educational institutions that teach the required course work.

If PHIC is indeed all that altruistic, I look forward to seeing PHIC actively lobby the PA lawmakers to license the profession in a similar manner to NJ (inclusive of edcuation) only with improvementsthe buyers would be better protectedand the control of who entersor does not enter the profession would be in the hands of educatorsand not the competition. Then, PHIC won't be able to blame the law, and at the same time then beat their chests about picking up the slack.

There would also be quantifiable oversight and accountability over who gets to "mentor" and HOW.which is very much needed in order to assure that such "mentoring" is meaningful.

I am not yet aware of any efforts on the part of PHIC to lobby to amend the legislation...or an effort to lobby to introduce new legislation that would better benefit the profession as well as the buyers. Are there any efforts of which you are aware? If so, I would appreciate a link to the info.

That saidI enjoyed our chat.

Lets hope 2008 brings better things to all of the buyers, sellers, HIs and REAs in 2008. :-)

Logic wrote: - While I can understand your point in that such a question could be a red flag that the buyer may be a major PITAor that they are looking for a problem before they even hire, the fact is that it really is the only way that a buyer can be assured that the HIs insurance is in effect. And yes..PA HIs are required to maintain E&O insurance for one year after the last inspection report is issuedhoweverit does not state that it must be TAIL coverage. In other wordsif one allows a policy to lapse...or better yet, changes over to a cheaper insurer for that last year to save money, if it is not tail coverage (which is more costly), all inspections that went before are no longer covered.but they would still be compliant with the law.

Answer: - Thats yet another example of how poorly thought out and written that law is.

Logic wrote: - In addition, I have yet to meet an HI who carries and occurrences policyalthough Im sure a few exist here and there.they are the exception to the rule..

Answer - Well, I guess Im the exception. BTW, I know of others.

Logic wrote: - Now, as far as how many in PA have allowed coverage to lapse, the question is how is it tracked? As far as I can see, any ability to verify education, experience, or any real meaningful oversight regarding insurance compliance by any sort of non-partisan state entity is absent from the legislationso there really is no equivocal way to know what is going on with the PA home inspection profession. This is why a PA buyer has no choice but to perform quite a bit of due diligence.

Answer: - Almost none do seem practice due diligence, though. Thats why one contacting my insurance company would be such an extraordinary thing.

Logic wrote: - Interestingly enough, most HIs I know say they operate in this manner because the REAs tell the buyer that the HI SHOULD take them aroundand they dont want to risk losing the inspection by trying to counter what the buyer has come to believe from the REA. Most..if they had their druthers would prefer to do the job on their own. A number of HIs who do the inspection alone say that once they explain to the buyer that it is to their benefit..and whythey are very happy with the process.

Answer: - I would prefer to do the job alone, and agree that I CAN do a better job alone, but I dont, because of the reasons I listed previously. I dont give a rats ass about what agents think or what they tell the buyer they should expect. Of course, that may be part of the reason Im down to an average of 2-3 inspections a week lately.

Logic wrote: - In addition, lets not kid ourselvesthe walk and talk maximizes the number of inspections the HI can complete in one daytherefore it is often more about the bottom line, that what is in the best interests of the buyer.

Answer: - I dont know about that. With me, it wouldnt be a wash, but it might be close to it. I couldnt (and wouldnt) do more than two a day either way.

Logic wrote: - Howevernone of the above changes the fact that every HI can perform a better and more through inspection WITHOUT distractions. and it is up to the HI profession, the organizationsAND the licensing boards to educate the public in issues such as thishowever, none endeavor to do soand, IMO, this is mostly due to the desire to maximize profits..and to some degree to not raise the ire of NAR.

Answer: - I strongly disagree with the second part of that. Its NOT the job of the HI profession, the organizations, or the licensing boards to get involved in a private business decision by "educating" the public on which of the two practices they should want.
Its the same with your advice to the OP: "Many HI's will encourage you to ask questions as they inspect...NOT. That is a distraction for even the best....you want an HI who is going to give the inspection his undivided attention...and then show and tell afterwards."
Following your advice would automatically rule out a lot of good inspectors, possibly even some of the very best. Why summarily write them off? While the distraction issue is a very good and valid point to bring up, wouldnt that person be better served by being given tips on minimizing distractions to the inspector?

Logic wrote: - Agreed. Howeverwith licensing these orgs are becoming more and more superfluous..and they KNOW it...but still, all too many HIs who are members of the various orgs seem to be devoted to arguing over the issue of which org is best..top banana..most memberswho inflates membership, on and on and on.all of which is of zero benefit and totally meaningless to the public in every shape, matter and form.

Answer: - I disagree that there is zero benefit. There are fundamental differences between the organizations and the vast majority of home buyers have no clue. I dont think helping the public understand the dynamics of this is meaningless.

Logic wrote: - I am extremely familair with PHIC, and the fact remains that the control of such is still in the hands of the prospective HIs competition. You may not be aware of the fact that the NJ law was originally structured the same wayand was amended to take the control away from the HIsand put it where it belongsunder the jurisdiction of the educational institutions that teach the required course work.

If PHIC is indeed all that altruistic, I look forward to seeing PHIC actively lobby the PA lawmakers to license the profession in a similar manner to NJ (inclusive of edcuation) only with improvementsthe buyers would be better protectedand the control of who entersor does not enter the profession would be in the hands of educatorsand not the competition. Then, PHIC won't be able to blame the law, and at the same time then beat their chests about picking up the slack.

Answer: - I never said that PHIC was altruistic. If you are extremely familiar with PHIC, then you probably know the main reason the organization was formed. While the intent was not altruism, there was and is a benefit to the otherwise unsuspecting home buying public.
It would scare the hell out of me if control of who enters the profession is put in the hands of the educators, if those "educators" include the two week, churn em out diploma mills. I dont think home inspection is ever going to be a true profession until the educational requirements are much higher, with college level courses, a requirement for passing a valid proctored exam such as the NHIE (not a ridiculously easy online exam) and initial peer review.

Logic wrote: - There would also be quantifiable oversight and accountability over who gets to "mentor" and HOW.which is very much needed in order to assure that such "mentoring" is meaningful.

Answer: - Cant argue with that!

Logic wrote: - I am not yet aware of any efforts on the part of PHIC to lobby to amend the legislation...or an effort to lobby to introduce new legislation that would better benefit the profession as well as the buyers. Are there any efforts of which you are aware? If so, I would appreciate a link to the info.

Answer: - No, Im not aware of any.

Logic wrote: - That saidI enjoyed our chat.

Answer: - Likewise.

Logic wrote: - Lets hope 2008 brings better things to all of the buyers, sellers, HIs and REAs in 2008. :-)

Optimistic answer: - Hope springs eternal .......

Joe

=======================================
mickeddie: How did the inspection go?

========================================
One last rant. With all the advertising dollars this site takes in, wouldn't it be nice if they updated from this circa 1995 board software?

inspectorjoe: "One last rant. With all the advertising dollars this site takes in, wouldn't it be nice if they updated from this circa 1995 board software?"

ROFLOL! On this we are in TOTAL agreement!!! :-)