When I hire someone for their knowledge, I want their opinion based on the facts and information obtain and their expereince! This would not help protect the homebuyer ... which is the reason for an inspection. http://www.ncdoi.com/OSFM/Engineering/HILB/NCHILB.asp http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/2021862/
If you have an opinion email board members at archispec@nc.rr.com; jliles@nccommerce.com; davidgjones@earthlink.net; cnoles@ncdoi.net; john@cb-wm.com; cottagetocastle@charter.net; Bschultz@firstsouthnc.com
I am working from my phone, so I am not able to do the research I should on this, but here goes. A lot of the real-estate crash can be traced to inspectors working with lenders to inflate the value of a home. The AG of New York indited a couple of big players the other day, which led to another large drop in the stock market. I personally want the facts not someone's bias, according to the ISO principles for auditing/inspecting this is the foundation of professionalism.
I agree with the changes that will be implimented. The current level of certification for Home Inspectors is inadequate. It allows lesser knowledgable people to become "Opinionated" on the report. Some inspectors, not all, have minimal experience in the building industry and inspect homes strictly from the "chart". Their lack of experience in the industry does not qualify them to become an "expert" in the construction field. The ability to respond on issues so vast as all of the trades in the construction of a home can not be learned from a book. It takes years of experience. I think to resolve the issue the certification should be tiered in level of qualifications. Those who pass the extensive testing for construction knowledge should be allowed to comment. Those not holding that qualification should not be allowed to comment.
I agree there should be a level of qualifications and experience required to get a license. Changing licensing requirements makes more sense to me than restrciting what a home inspector can say or recommend.
