Michigan Votes

2008 House Bill 6088 (Require licensure of home inspectors )

[Comments on this legislation] [Text and Analysis] [Add to Watch List]
[Previous] [Next]

  • Introduced by Rep. Frank Accavitti, Jr. on May 8, 2008, to require licensure and regulation of home inspection services. The bill would create a Michigan Home Inspectors Board to establish licensure and competence assessment requirements, and would establish regulations on home inspector training, contracts, operations, disclosures, and more.
    • Referred to the House Regulatory Reform Committee on May 8, 2008.
      • Reported in the House on June 10, 2008, with the recommendation that the substitute (H-1) be adopted and that the bill then pass.
    • Substitute offered in the House on June 12, 2008. The substitute failed in the House by voice vote on June 12, 2008.
    • Substitute offered by Rep. Daniel Acciavatti on June 12, 2008. The substitute passed in the House by voice vote on June 12, 2008.
    • Amendment offered by Rep. Bill Huizenga on June 12, 2008. The amendment passed in the House by voice vote on June 12, 2008.

Line

Comments

Introduced by Rep. Frank Accavitti, Jr. on May 8, 2008. New Comment

1) very unrealistic [by Anonymous Citizen on September 4, 2008]
The liability issue is one thing but what about the licensing requirement of participating in 200 inspections under another inspector? I am currently enrolled in a home inspection program and was hoping to start a good honest business to support myself and family. What the hell is someone going to say when a 40 year old guy walks in to a home inspection company and says hey I wonder if I could have 200 of your jobs? Thanks a lot Michigan you did it again!
Reply New Comment

Line

2) Great Idea [by Anonymous Citizen on August 13, 2008]
It's about time we stopped the evil home inspectors from wreaking havoc on our wonderful state. More Regulation Now!
Reply New Comment

Line

3) HOUSE BILL 6088 IS BAD FOR MICHIGAN! [by Anonymous Citizen on August 4, 2008]
"(2) A HOME INSPECTOR AND HIS OR HER FIRM ARE STRICTLY LIABLE FOR ANY AND ALL DAMAGES OF ANY TYPE SUSTAINED BY THEIR CLIENT AS A RESULT OF A VIOLATION OF THIS ARTICLE OR ANY ACT OR OMISSION COMMITTED BY A HOME INSPECTOR WHILE PERFORMING ACTIVITIES PURSUANT TO A LICENSE UNDER THIS ARTICLE. THE DAMAGES ARE NOT SUBJECT TO ANY LIMITATIONS SET FORTH IN A CONTRACT FOR HOME INSPECTION SERVICES OR ELSEWHERE."

"ANY AND ALL DAMAGES OF ANY TYPE"
EVEN THOSE THAT ARE LATENT AND/OR CONCEALED? FOREVER? "NOT SUBJECT ANY LIMITATIONS"? HOW CAN ANYBODY OFFER THIS TYPE OF INSURANCE? AT ANY PRICE? HB 6088 WILL NOT PROTECT CONSUMERS/HOME BUYERS IF KILLS AN IMPORTANT INDUSTRY (HOME INSPECTIONS), OR DRIVES PRICES SO HIGH ONLY THE RICH CAN AFFORD ONE! YES, HOME INSPECTION SHOULD REGULATED TO HELP INSURE HOME INSPECTORS ARE QUALIFIED ECT... BUT, THIS AMENDMENT IS NOT GOOD FOR MICHIGAN! PLEASE! REMOVE IT.
Reply New Comment

Line

4) This is BAD for Michigan [by Anonymous Citizen on July 24, 2008]
Passing this Bill would do Horrible things to the industry. I would definitely close my Home Inspection business due to the EXTREME liability. How can you possibly be held liable for anything wrong that happens to a home, for an indefinite amount of time and infinite amount of money based on spending a few hours in a home? Buying any form or Errors and Omission Insurance (E&O) would be impossible or so expensive that no home inspector could absorb it. I could not possibly be protected from frivolous lawsuits from sue happy clients.
Passing the cost to homeowners would mean either:(1) far fewer home inspections due to cost - worsening homes and an already very poor housing market (2)Increased cost in purchasing a home, making investors even more nervous.

Reply New Comment

Line

5) HB 6088 [by Anonymous Citizen on July 23, 2008]
If this bill passes with this section included, many inspectors will go out of business and consumers will most likly fore go the inspection due to the high costs associated with it. Many Michigan home inspectors do not endorse this bill as written "(2) A HOME INSPECTOR AND HIS OR HER FIRM ARE STRICTLY LIABLE FOR ANY AND ALL DAMAGES OF ANY TYPE SUSTAINED BY THEIR CLIENT AS A RESULT OF A VIOLATION OF THIS ARTICLE OR ANY ACT OR OMISSION COMMITTED BY A HOME INSPECTOR WHILE PERFORMING ACTIVITIES PURSUANT TO A LICENSE UNDER THIS ARTICLE. THE DAMAGES ARE NOT SUBJECT TO ANY LIMITATIONS SET FORTH IN A CONTRACT FOR HOME INSPECTION SERVICES OR ELSEWHERE."
Reply New Comment

Line

6) HB6088 [by Anonymous Citizen on July 16, 2008]
Michigan Association of Home Inspectors dose not support HB6088. So please remove from the Verbiage of the bill.
Reply New Comment

Line

7) HB6088 [by Anonymous Citizen on July 16, 2008]
the following amendment was added to the Bill:

"(2) A HOME INSPECTOR AND HIS OR HER FIRM ARE STRICTLY LIABLE FOR ANY AND ALL DAMAGES OF ANY TYPE SUSTAINED BY THEIR CLIENT AS A RESULT OF A VIOLATION OF THIS ARTICLE OR ANY ACT OR OMISSION COMMITTED BY A HOME INSPECTOR WHILE PERFORMING ACTIVITIES PURSUANT TO A LICENSE UNDER THIS ARTICLE. THE DAMAGES ARE NOT SUBJECT TO ANY LIMITATIONS SET FORTH IN A CONTRACT FOR HOME INSPECTION SERVICES OR ELSEWHERE."

I was wondering what lawyer added this to the bill???

Reply New Comment

Line

8) Unbelievable [by Anonymous Citizen on August 10, 2008]
Reading this amendment I almost think it's a bad joke. Being a Michigan HI I'm not sure I would be able to stay in business were such an open ended amendment allowed. If I were to continue my fees would absolutely increase substantially to cover costs.

While I can understand the need for some client protection my hope is this amendment is removed altogether or at least altered to contain verbiage that is reasonable.

Vince Santos

Reply New Comment

Line

9) Stop whining [by Anonymous Citizen on August 18, 2008]
From first hand experience... Had our new home inspected (Large Michigan HI CO.), after the inspection we closed on the house. A month later when the weather started getting warm, house started smelling like a camp fire. Well, our wonderful "professional" that inspected our home "missed" all the fire damage in the attic. Which he inspected and commented was in good condition. Whoops! Seller didn't disclose so obviously they are responsible as well, but what's the point of having a home inspection if this kind of negligence exsists. But I had to sign the CYA contract that Michigan home inspector require you to sign. I believe this legislation is targeting these types of "inspectors". "Assistant fry guy at the burger joint this week-Michigan home inspector next week". About time some accountability will be forced upon the housing industry in our state!
Reply New Comment

Line


Copyright © 2008 USA Votes, Inc.  Patent Pending.  All rights reserved.  Terms of use

A free public service of Mackinac Center for Public Policy
Mackinac Center for Public Policy
Capitol Building

Search legislation: