*
Having a problem here in Naples with either unlicensed contractors,
or those doing jobs with an improper license. For background, any
remodels done in condos above 3 stories high need a GC license, a
opposed to a Residential Lic. (homes to quadplexes) or Builder Lic.
(homes to commercial up to 3 stories). Above 3 stories are
considered “commerical” and require a GC lic., which can also build
bridges, etc. Neither of the 3 licenses can do elec., plbg, HVAC or
roofing, and must use licenses people in those trades.
Home owners can pull permits only in homes – not stores, offices or
condos which are all zoned “commercial” .
We have a cabinet company that does a lot of work either refacing
canbinets or changing existing cab’s and tops. They are telling the
owners to get their own electricians, plumbers, tile setters, etc. And
these owners are doing that. Some owners are also initiating
remodels on their own and hiring the carpenter, drywallers, and other
subs. It’s illegal to do that since the owners can’t pull permits, and in
fact don’t. Also have some “handymen” doing the above work – hired
by home owners to save money. These are not cheapo houses, but
houses and condos up to well over a million bucks. I’ve been hired
by a few home/condo owners to either finish or correct work done by
these people who screwed it up.
Son Tom’s frustrated. The building departments, both city and county
make him jump thru hoops to get permits while the above are getting
away with it. Naples is has just created a Remodelers Council
(Tom’s in it) and one of the topics on their agenda is to get this
stopped by calling the bldg. dept’s on these projects in progress, and
also creating a new brochure educating the public of the legal permit
requirements.
Tom’s contention is that the other remodelers should have to go thru
what he and I have to get our licenses, get the proper insurances,
take the mandated annual educational classes and go thru the
permitting procedures as we do. Of course that also means up to
8-10 inspections per remodel and the subsequent time lost waiting
for them – usually 1/2 to a full day. Not a lot, but still increasing the
project completion.
On the other hand, owners who do a remodel with no permit, and
especially who use a contractor without a license or the proper
license, cannot sue him if a problem occurs, and the contractor
cannot sue the owner either – a dangerous situation of both owners
and these contractors.
So, call the building departments or not? Is it being a “squealer”, or
protectng the professionalism of our local industry members and
their livelihoods while educating the home owners of the pros and
cons, and subsequent ramifications.
Replies
*
Okay, I'll go first. Succinctly, I say give no quarter to these types. Turn them in to every agency you think may have jurisdiction.
My reasons are that they 1)undercut your business by offering a less expensive--read cheap--alternative to you. 2)you work hard to build a legit business for the longterm only to have it jeopardized by unscrupulous competitors. You can be sure the public views these guys as your competitors even though you don't think they are. After all, you're all contractors. 3)they give contactors a very bad reputation.
When push comes to shove, they simply skip out of town. Here, other than being caught in a sting operation, these sharks get away with it. They burn me everyday. Here's why: I pay Gen. Liab. insurance, I pay self-employment taxes, payroll taxes, WC, and licensing costs. This is a burden which comes due every quarter or annually. So, I have an overhead cost above and beyond what these peckerheads would even consider.
A guy cuts me by 40% on a bid, then abandons the job. Who has been provided a service? Not me and not the project owner. Not the bank, not the community, no one. But I've taken a hit twice because now my rep is damaged because, after all, I too am a contractor.
Someone gets hurt on my job and the cost comes down to me if no one else is insured for it. A material defect? same thing, I pick up the cost and am legally liable to make corrections. None of this applies to those who choose to skirt the law which I and others above board try to adhere to.
I reiterate: turn 'em in. You'll sleep good knowing you did the right thing.
*I think the pamphlet to educate the public is a good move. And, I agree with Rich that these unlicensed folks reflect on our profession and take business away from legitimate businesses. I can't see turning anybody in though. Hell, I bet 3/4 of us did "side jobs" before we got our first license. There's all kinds of folks running around calling themselves every kind of profession. If the customer wants to take their chances with an unlicensed builder, they should have that right. Live and let live.
*Jim, my only contention about "live and let live" is that it should be based on a level playing field. Both Tom and I can take on the competition, but when they are operating on what is really, an illegal basis, the field is no longer level. To me it's like loosing a kitchen remodel to a guy who knowingly bought the cabinets at 25 cents on the dollar because he knew they were stolen.I agree, I was one of those unlicensed types in the past, but that doesn't make my past "incidents" fair or legal. Had I gotten busted, I would not have complained, knowing I was wrong. In fact, it's one of the reasons I did what I had to do to get licensed.If a customer knowlingly wants to hire someone without liability or workers comp, it's their choice, and undoubtedly effects the pricing. And I'm aware of the "buyer beware" phrase, but, the problem has gotten serious here.Besides, what's the point of a state having stringent licensing and permitting laws and procedures if the "live and let live" attitude becomes the norm instead of the exception. It's like creating a spoiled brat. Before you know it, you've got a monster on our hands.I agree with Rich. Nip the problem in the bud.
*Let people hire whoever they want. Sorry if the owner's freedom to GC their own projects cuts into your bottom line.Too much government is dedicated to "getting" someone for violating some rule. In fact, alot of rules are created just to allow burecrats to "get" someone.The idea that people need to be protected from themselves is a bad one. Of course here in NJ, you need a license to pump gas and it's illegal for me to fill my own tank. Not a joke.
*I agree with Jim and Ryan. Educate the consumer then let them decide. If you're losing the sale based on dollar figures, either your not selling/educating enough or they will be choosing the contractor based on the cost....which I can assume you're not the lowest bidder....and hope not to be! Either way the sales not meant to be. I'm all for letting the customer know the laws, and even using a few "what if's" as subtle scare tactics, but a full blow whistle would bother me. At one time, I didn't have insurance, I just worked for people I knew and hoped for the best. Everyone's gotta start somewhere. My bigger concern would be living in a state that discriminates between a third and a fourth story resident! If I was on the fourth or above floor, I'd be pretty pissed! Luckily in Pgh, they can pull their own permits(so far as I know) and PA is a "Right to Work" state, which says(even though some inspectors don't seem to think so) that as a tradesman, I can do any elec./plumbing I feel capable of as long as it's all rough and finish inspected. Jeff
*Sonny,Can you name a profession that doesn't have this problem?Quack Doctors, truck drivers with no commercial licence, bootleg music manufacturers, computer hackers........the list includes every profession and trade I can think of. Even the clergy......have you seen those so called "Christians" on TV?I'm up for the good fight, but no one seems to care. It's everywhere.Ed. Williams
*Sonny,i Besides, what's the point of a state having stringent licensing and permitting laws and procedures That's my beef, that the rules get made with out regard to enforcing them. We don't have licensing in my state but I wish we did. At a minimum it would give me something else to gripe about. My biggest problem is that I have to compete with outfits that pay their employees as subs. It's a pervasive problem here. I figure it not only costs me my 45% labor burden over and above the other guys, but it costs society in general a fortune in unpaid taxes, alimony, child support, worker's comp, unemployment, healthcare, etc. I called the proper state authorities to see what could be done so let me share some responses. Regarding employers who don't pay worker's comp, I was told that the state can do nothing until someone gets hurt! Not a well crafted answer.Regarding employers who do not withhold state taxes, they asked me if I would like to report someone. I told them I thought enforcement was their job. I asked a revenue department official if they are interested in employers who do not withhold state income tax (interestingly enough, I have never seen state tax code that specifies what constitutes an employee for this purpose), and was told that they are more concerned with sales tax because it is a higher percentage.Most of my prospective employees were paid as a sub at one time or another. Virtually none have ever paid taxes on sub wages (or even filed). I have to explain that being paid as a sub is a raw deal for them even though they will take home less on a payroll for the same hourly rate (it is a tough sell believe me). My point is that the closest I come to reporting someone is that when guy is being hammered by the IRS because he didn't pay taxes on sub money, I explain the IRS rules that govern what is and is not an employee. I also tell them that if they were in fact an employee, then their employer is required by law to withold their taxes, and that the need to tell the IRS that they were and employee, but they were paid as a sub. I think that is only fair. Bottom line is that the environment we work in is less than perfect. I try to make a decent living in spite of that, while doing anything I can to shed light on the problems. Tom
*Holy cow, what a subject, eh? Sometimes, I think you guys like to argue just to...argue.No, really I cannot see why rules and regs are crafted if the consensus is folks will do darn well as they please and off the pigs, ya' know? But Sonny beat me to this response. Sure, I too was one of those guys early on; a side job here and there. But it was just that, a side job here and there, always small and always on the side. And I didn't stay that way. I earned--yeah, earned--my license and got above board (insurance, et al) as soon as I went out on my own. Besides, I took the original post to mean it was about those outfits who continue to cheat their way into the system. Yep, there's a system; you either go with it or you run the risk of being shut down. Another thing, even though, early on, I did those side jobs when unlicensed, I made sure to do my very best. I know of some folks out there of whom I can't say the same. I used to try to educate the consumer. I really tried. I put together fact sheets, I had a running ad in the local rag in the format of an informative Q & A, I put together a brochure--not a sales pitch--designed to inform them and bring them up to speed on what to expect from a contractor, what the consumer's responsibilty is, how a project should flow, how to select a contractor, how to resolve conflicts, ad nauseum. In one ear and out the other. The lesson was for me to quit banging my head against the wall. Now, I take it one at a time. Forget trying to change the world, forget trying to educate the buying public. Now, I concentrate only on the clients I have at the moment. Even now, my wife--she is so level headed and reasonable it just sickens me--says I spend too much time talking to people trying to inform them.Yeah, Ryan, I'm all for letting people have the free choice of hiring who they want to hire. And you know what? I don't think some knothead guvmint peon should be able to ride roughshod over me and mine, or you and yours, or them others. Hells bells, I'm the one out there doing the friggin' work while they pour over the papers sucking their java courtesy of their employer. (I only say that because I have had experience with the multitudes of them types) But who is that misguided homeowner going to turn to when their new roof leaks--or a thousand other "little" things--when they can't find their unlicensed contractor who has since made for parts unknown? It's like this: a guy running an underground business because he circumvents the law is not the most stable to begin with. Since he is running undercover, where else do you think he's cutting corners? Is he the one shortnailing your shearwall? Skimping on materials? Illegaly disbursing funds not to payroll but to pay the material costs for the last job? What happens when Mr. I-got-a-great-deal-homeowner gets a knock on the door from an unpaid employee?For me, the bottom line is if I don't obey the laws on the books I risk losing due to penalties and fines. It's a misdemeanor to contract w/o a license in CA. If the dollar value is large enough and there is a defect, it can be a felony. You bettah believe it. Besides, how can I be looking longterm when I'm constantly running hunched down looking over my shoulder? The banks don't like it when you lie to them. Neither does the FTB, IRS, or AG.Ed, should I take it that you mean that because the problem is rampant that we should just let it be? I can recount many stories of which I have direct knowledge of how folks have been swindled by unlicensed contractors. Last thing: I know it's different in other states. And I believe everyone has a right to persue life, liberty, and happiness free from the prosecution of government agencies. However, if I, by law, am to incur costs to cover my ass, I think everyone else in the same game should too. Sounds weak, I know, but that is the way it is right now. You betcha', I'll be the first to "burn" the unlicensed contractor. I will not, after having built my business fair and square, stand idly by and watch it be undermined by those who operate outside the same laws and who would, without hesitation, burn me down.
*Contractor's complaining about the unlicensed guy's alwasys sounds to me like union workers complaining about scabs. Mad cause they're working and aren't part of the club. Taking work away from the "legitimate" workiers.If you're concerned for the good of the home-owners. Be concerned for the thousands, maybe millions that can't afford a licensed contractor and still need that hole in their roof fixed. People that buy junk know they're buying junk. But sometimes just can't afford any better.
*This is where I stand; I think every tradesman should be licensed before he can practice the trade. Requirements for licensing would include some school time, and/or demonstrated experience to a specified standard (I'm 100% in favour of formal apprenticeships too).Contractors should be licensed tradesmen, and licensed as contractors according to whatever local regulations. The local authorities should enforce these standards without exception; if you are playing by the rules on the books (licensed according to regs), and paying taxes into the system as a licensed guy, that would be the least you should expect. I don't know if I would drop a dime on a guy, but what's the point of regulating an industry and not enforcing the regulations? They enforce the building code, right? I think everyone, clients included, are better off this way.Ryan, I don't agree with the "deserving poor are better off with unlicensed guys" argument. It just puts them in a more vulnerable situation in case of an accident or shoddy work. There is always going to be a hungry young guy, playing by the rules, to do the work for a reasonable rate.I know a lot of you free market guys won't agree with me; but if you want to see that model at work, look at Europe, especially countries like Germany. You can't work in the trade until you meet an objective, universal standard. And you can't operate your own business until you meet that standard, and train in business operations for another two years (and qualify as a Master). Applys to carps, cabinetmakers, bakers, everyone in the trades...and it works.
*Let he who is without sin cast the first stone!Ever notice how words are meaningless when they are only for others to observe.As both our countries celebrate freedom, why would anyone want more regulations, is beyond me. We are over-regulated and over-taxed as it is.There will always be those who choose to work outside the system and there will always be those that hire them. The majority of people do follow the rules and turning in people you may think are breaking these rules will only backfire someday.Gabe
*Her's me take on the "live and let live" theory.Before Barb and I got married. I was at several family occasions where Barb's (and my future) sister-in-law, was also present. She - the sister-in-law was vicious, loud, gossipy and ignorant. I asked Barb why everyone - aunts, uncles and the many cousins, let her get away with her vermin. Barb said "Don't create a scene. Just ignore her." I did - until I became a "family member" by marrying Barb. After that, every time I was present and "honey" started with her mouth, I replied with something like "Why would you say such vicious things about (whomever)?" or "Is this what I can expect if I go to the bathroom?" or "Look in the mirror Honey before you continue what your'e saying. Or do you really want "me" to start bringing certain situations up in Mrs. Perfect's life?"Son-of-a-gun! In future family get togethers, Mrs. Mouth stopped when I was present. My point is like Pavlov's "condition and response" concept. There is accountability consequences here to be dealt with. If no one does anything, the sleaze continue to do as they please. Why not; there are no repercussions - no consequences. It's the old "let somebody else do something." Well, I'm that "somebody", and I'll continue to do something.As to Ryan's comments about customer "affordibility." Here's an update on this cabinet company, and by the way, it's their standard MO at serveral locations. The vanity base installers did not remove the existing wall mirrors which they were suppose to do before installing the new 34-1/2" high bases - just installed them against the mirrors, which are now about 4" below the Corian tops. The old vanities were the standard lower height.Built the bases with the wrong door swings, broke one of the marble tiles in the elevator, stole the condo's cart, used to load and unload the cabinets to take them to the 18th floor, installed the slide out trays about 4" above the cabinet floor, instead of about 1/4" above the floor. Chopped out the back of the right vanity for the plumbing instead of cutting out the middle one - the old sink was at the right, and the new one is going in the middle - 7 ft. of vanities - 3 bases. The cabinet company had the Corian tops (both bathrooms) cut out so that the tops hang over the undercounter sink bowls about 1-1/2" instead of only about a 1/4" - 3/8". Understandably, the client is now concerned about the master bath and kitchen cabinets to be done on phase two. Gee, wonder why they're concerned?In this case, the client was uneducated about the permitting laws, regs., etc., and the cabinet company took advantage of "their" client's ignorance. Nice! Now I have to get the screw-ups corrected, which screws up my scheduling, and inconviences the hell out of the client and for what?Fortunately, I was called to do everything except the cabinets and tops. That's cause I was recommended to the client by the cabinet company after they had signed their deal. Doesn't matter - what's right is right, and I told the salesman to make sure he stayed on top of this job if I was going to be involved. Didn't happen.So Ryan, if the situation were different and the "home" was not a $750,000 condo, but instead, a $60,000 house, what monies did the "customer" save by using this company? By the way, the client has since told the cabinet company that they are now paying me to act as a GC to run the rest of this job, and they are to see me for all scheduling, coordinating, etc. My end of this project has gone from about $12,000 to $29,000 with the extras the client now wants, now that they have the perception that they have a professional on the job.Here's a condo with 162 units. Think this owner or the on site, live in manager will ever let this outfit do any more work there again?So what did the cabinet company really save by hiring cheapies as installers, the cheapest countertop company, and who knows who else they use. You see, those who "cheat" and chintz, cheat and chintz on everything they are involved with.And as fellow "contractors", don't you think these types effect every single one of us being in the same "pot" in the public's eye's? They can't help but blemish my own integrity and character as "another contractor". In the public's eye, before I even walk into their homes for the initial sales call, I'm "suspect."When it involves "my" reputation as a contractor, you better know I'll "get involved."
*Sonny,You'll never get them all and frankly, it's not your battle.If the home owner wants to go after them, great...they need their @sses kicked but it's not your job to do it.I live in a world with too many regulations and It's my knee jerk reaction to oppose all of them.The world's a tough place. Your customer made it into a 650K condo. She's not stupid. She can take care of herself and if she makes a mistake now and then or gets taken advantage of now and then, that's part of life. Sorry but it's not the government's job to protect her from making mistakes.I believe in the free market to the point that I'm alittle wacky about it...I admit that.My advice to anyone who lives in this world: Life's tough wear a helmet.
*Ryan, I just have to respond to your post (9.0). First, I will reiterate my position that I am completely against unions. But let's not turn this into a "union thread", okay?My first impression of your post is that you make some sense, but let's turn it around a little. No, not twist, but just turn it a little. Let's substitute architect for contractor. A guy out there practicing below board is typically not up on things. Instead of writing about a job description, I'll direct my comments to the type of person. First, he's skating around the law. This, as I understand it, means he is criminal. What could you say about a person given that information? Since he's writing his own rules, he's quite apt to do whatever he thinks is the right thing. See, he is not honoring nor abiding by an accepted standard. A problem comes up, he's gone! leaving the job unfinished. Another side of this is, if I have to why not him? Then again, because he is not operating within the law as a legitimate business, he is able to cut under me on just about every facet of a project. My experience is that these guys also cut on workmanship as well as materials.Okay, let's move on. Those po' folk you're concerned with end up paying twice, triple, whatever for the shoddy work they get by using this guy and those like him. Ever hear the saw, "Buy a cheap tool, buy it twice"?My father is a fine and wise man. He taught me to buy the very best I could afford. May have to wait a bit while saving for it, but my tools are my life. They are the very best. Okay, sometimes people don't have the luxury of waiting for something they need today. So they go for what they can get by with. That's a ruse if I ever saw one. Here's why.The state lottery. I don't play--I'd rather stand under a clear sky and wait for a lightning strike--but the states are very concerned--because the voice of the people made this so--that the disadvantaged--your po' folk--have the most to lose in the lottery. See, folks with little net worth rely on hope way too much. So, they throw their money--which they don't have--towards that hoped for grand prize. Some people I have met are so impoverished they actually think by adopting a winning attitude they will increase the probability of winning the lottery. I am not kidding!So that guy who can ill afford the unlicensed contrator, who historically does shoddy work, is the exact one the po' dude decides to hire.Unfortunately, many people are swayed by the intial cost of a thing. They don't consider the hidden costs. They don't amoritize the cost and try to figure the actual cost to determine if it's a bargain.My mom didn't do that, even after she sought my opinion. She went with the cop who contracted on the side. What a fkng mess! The guy skated, left his cop job for a new city. Cost her big bucks--about 20% more than a legit bid she recieved--to correct what this hack did. Now my brother is considering hiring an unlicensed contractor. The guy is hounding my brother every night to get 50% cash upfront. I told my brother he's a fool if he caves to this guy. Sounds like he's gonna go with him. after all, he's gonna' "save" $3K. Can't wait to say, "I told you so". Typically, these guys run a cash operation--IRS violation--pocket the money and show up sometime later to hack their way through the cheap ass (or insufficient or misused) materials they bought. They get over their heads real fast trying to do something they are not capable of doing. They're short of cash so they don't have staying power to see a job through and typically won't have a qualified guy come in to do what needs to be done. They either abandon or hack the shit, codes be damned, out of the job.I just got a call yesterday from a homeowner solicitng advice how to procede after the damage. This homeowner thought he'd save some bucks, but he's gonna' lose big time 'cause, if I accept the job--he'll be paying twice. I will not be putting my work over the unlicensed contractor's who caused the whole mess. To do so makes me liable. So, I rip out and start over. This homeowner is know understanding this. Of course he has no knowledge of the whereabouts of the great guy he hired previously.Yeah, I know; I'm a wordy SOB. So, for your sake, I'll cut this now. That thing above about the architect was to show there is a ripple effect produced by these guys. First, yes, they are stealing work. Maybe, maybe not from me. They don't carry their fair share so you and I have to cover their ass. I know I don't dig it when someone is making out just like the rest of us when they only do half the work. Then, my reputation as a contractor is tarnished. I know because I hear people talk about contractors in general and what they sometimes say is'nt pretty.
*Rich,I'm not if favor of sticking my head in the sand, but......There are people who do the right thing, and people who don't. That's the way it's always been in all social and commercial endeavors. Past and present. There are always those who are upset by those who don't give a care if you're upset or not.You want to get up on a soap box and complain, well, then vent on my brother. If it makes you feel good, do it.You want to change human nature? Good luck.If the people who make the rules don't have the time to enforce the rules then you need to talk to the people who made the rules about the enforcment of said rules. It won't do much good to vent in Breaktime.I agree that it's not fair, but I can't stop the Black Market. I think it would be easier to count how many grains of sand there are at the beach.Talk to your local Congressman, Legislature, Alderman, Mayor or whoever. They might take thier hands out of the pockets of the Black Marketeers long enough to stab you in the back.Good Luck,Ed. Williams
*Don't think Rich was "venting" just being guilty of stating his case in "long" post form , ala Lykos.I think his point, and mine, is if every one of us do nothing, the disease continues - and gets worse. Of course, we're not going to get them all. But by "constricting" their opportunities, we keep them in check. By keeping on top of their cases, we reduce their ability to operate. The inspectors can't catch every one of them. But, everytime someone here calls in one one of these jobs, they do go to the job and red tag it with a stop order. And here in Naples, if someone has a ad in the paper, expecially those typical type that state, electrical, plumbing, etc., they get a call from the county asking for a license #. If one cannot be given they are told they have 2 days to cancel the ad, or be prosecuted for operating illegally.I'm tired of being thought of as in the same "pot" as the proverbial used salesman - untrustworthy. And these guys, along with the incompetent licensed and sleazy guys continue to keep the rest of us under that same public's image of our industry.As far as those who make the rules, you know just as well as I do, "they" could never keep up with these types, any more than laws and cops can keep up with the robberers, rapists and so on. Obviously, they will continue to a degree, but if we all throw in the towel, we might as well become the same as they are. Remember that anecdote about the kid on the beach picking up sand dollars and throwing them back into the ocean. His grand father said to him. "Why waste your time. There are thousands of them. You can't save them all so what you're doing makes no difference. " As the kid picked up another one to throw into the ocean he replied: "It makes a difference to that one!" And it makes a difference to each one that we help put out of business.And that's my point. We should all make a difference - when we can , and where we can.The public - that's us - must do their share in helping a lousy situation instead of always calling on someone else to "do it", whatever that "do it" is. If we aren't even going to fight for ourselves, we got no right to ask others to fight for, or along side of us.
*sonny.. sounds like you've got the ideal solution at hand..if son Tom, and all the other members of his Remodeler's Council have a staff to implement their policies.. then i wud urge them to make it a policy of the Council to report these violations to a designated staff person and he can file teh report to the appropraite agency..soon , that staff person will form a relationship with the agency and they will know if he is ((crying wolf )) or not .. he can also follow up on the compalints with the agency..another thing that will happen is the Council will tend to insulate the members from retaliation in the forms of phone calls to OSHA, or the Labor Board to harrass legitimate businesses..the staff person can also screen complaints so the members don't start using this as a form of personal vendetta..this is a legitimate pursuit for organizations such as your local NAHB chapter or NARI chapter....i agree with you, it is of little use to have standard building codes and licensing procedures if we're the only ones in compliance..if we could turn the clock back to the fifties , you would alos notice another thing missing besides a lot of the regulations...namely half of the population of the United States..there are more of us now and life is more complex..licensing .... zoning... regulatory agencies.. and building codes all go hand-in-hand....if you live in rural area that doesn't have these things.. more power to you.. if you are like the restr of us and it is part of your daily life..then compliance is the only way to conduct a business..b sorry 'bout dat
*Rich,I think we'll just disagree on this one.I will say that I personally do not concern myself with the law in any matter. I sometimes follow the law to keep out of trouble but rarely concern myself with it.I pay taxes because I think I should contribute as much as everyone else does, not because the law says I must. I drive safely to be safe, not because the law says I have too. I carry insurance to cover my back side, not because the law tells me to.I live to a very high moral standard. But there are many, many laws I don't agree with and don't follow. I don't see any connection between following the law and doing the right thing.It's concievable to me that a contractor could be unlicenced, and still be reputable.
*Gentlemen,I wish you well. I've banged my head against this wall for many years with nothing to show for it. Perhaps the laws in your parts of this country can be effective. However, in Texas, it's so bad here, with little or no licenceing controlls, that it seems kind of pointless. The licencing is a joke and there is no enforcment. You can't even get the IRS interested down here. Trust me, I have tried.I'm in favor of everyone running an honest business. That's the way I run mine and I always will. I guess that's how choose to fight now. By not giving in and becoming one of "them".Ed. WilliamsGreat American Carpentry Co.Dallas, Texas
*Actually, the CBIA (Collier [county] Building Industry Association) got this started years ago. By being a member, we are automatically a member of the Florida Home Builders Assoc. and NAHB. They have always been smart I think, and maintain a close tie wit hthe Building Services Dept., which includes permitting, licensing, zoning and related issues. They work "with" as opposed to "against" the powers to be. Sure, there is some give and take, but that's in any "marriage" right?With the creation of the RC, members have also taken up the "torch " so to speak - several of the same issues as the CBIA. The relationship is working good, in fact, a model other guys should have their local chapters emulate.Guess theirs, and my own take, is that as long as we must work with the city and county administrators, why not make it easier on both of us and work together on common issues. This particular cabinet company issue came to a head because of the creation of the RC, whereas before, the main issues were those mainly, but not only, effecting builders. Anyway, it's working. For example, the county used to have what they called a "Handyman License". Items like very minor repairs, still no elec., or plbg. or roofing repairs, but repairing sidewalks, maybe changing rotted facia, hang screen doors, change lanai screening, clean gutters - that kind of stuff. But the "handymen" abused their licensing "restrictions" time after time after time, plus the county was getting too many complaints from owners, so guess what? - the county rescinded and eliminated that license category completely.Like spoiled kids. I offered you one piece of candy but behind my back you tried to take 4. Now you get nothing! Yea! My kind of discipline!Even when the licensing departments tried to give them a little leeway they still broke the law - en mass, so BAM! I kick in the arsh - permanently.
*gentlemen Please tell what the requirements are to get a license We only have plumbing licenses here. Does a cabinet guy have to have the same one as a framer? Boyd
*I'm not a big believer in licensing requirements. Sometimes they are a method of locking out newcomers and locking in higher dollars. Here, in the city of Marion proper, contractors are supposed to register with the city and the city keeps a log of consumer comments (read: complaints). But the fee is cheap ($25.00 for me) and no proof of expertise is required. One has to have Work Comp in place if there are employees.All this really does is help enforce the Work Comp requirement since most consumers are unaware of the log.BUT...I do get really irritated when there are rules and they are not enforced. If the rules are unreasonable, reasonably strict enforcement will supply the incentive to relax them. Sometimes allowances should be made, but if a given contractor is consistently ignoring the rules to the detriment of many, then turn him in!!!Rich Beckman
*This may have been covered already forgive me for not reading all the posts. You may be familiar with Home Depot's Expo Design Center and thier regular stores. Both promote installations of kitchens. They will set up the carpenter to install the cabinets and counters leaving the home owner to handle all mechanicals. There is no way Home Depot will get a license and then hire superintendents to over see the work. They are forcing the homeowner to become the GC and get the permit.Point two. I was approached by a company who offers to get leads, pass them on to the contractor and collect the money for the job. They wanted 18 to 28% of the deal. After I finally stopped laughing I pointed out that all they wanted to be was a general contractor without the license yet they wanted a sizeable piece of the pie, no risk and to control the money so they get paid. If you are in this business and don't care about forcing the issue of licenses and permits then the industry is doomed. Eventually the big boxes can take over and all of you can work through them. The vary independance you boast of is at stake. Consider this: Work done in upscale neighborhood by an unlicensed individual and without a permit. As the shoddy workmanship spreads like a cancer in the name of saving money the value of the neighborhood starts to drop. Why? No permit, no conformity to building standards or subdivision requirements. Seems to me I remeber something about "public safety" and decks collapsing at parties.My Sister in law & husband finally built their dream house on 10 acres in a rural comunity. Suddenly the neighbor builds a low cost house and puts up a 50' by 70' screened area to raise pheasants. A lovely site and equally pleasant smell. This is what happens when there are no rules to follow about developement. Realestate values will fall and the number one investment the "American Dream" will be worthless. The big money can advertise to create a percetion of quality and piece of mind. They will turn around and take the big piece of the pie leaving you to do the work for crumbs. Licensing is one of the protections your lively hood has. Wake UP! I'm not fond of inspectors. Oh well. It keeps the playing field level for everyone. I carry pictures of poor work done by other people to show people why a license and experience matters. It is designed to scare people quickly and it does. These cheap fly by nights are the reason the industry has a bad name. The good contractors have to wear the black eye from a consumer's fight with one of these bottom feeders. The news never points out that the consumer went with the cheapest, unlicensed person on their nightmare job. Its always how you have to be careful when dealing with contractors.
*Rick,This is getting off topic, but since you brought it up, I will comment. People like your sister-in-law that buy rural property and then complain when exposed to the natural conditions that exist in rural America, make me sick. They are the "fish out of water". Not the pheasant farmer. If they wanted the protection of zoning and covenants they could have bought land in a developement. But that would have been too expensive. So they bought land they could afford. So did their neighbor.This has little relevance to the original topic, but I just couldn't let it slide.John
*Actually John, since you brought it up. The rural area is actually 10 acre sites with most of the homes 3000 sq ft and up. The pheasant farmer is the fish out of water on this street. As you said though this was not the issue. The issue is no permit, no ordinance, no control, no rules, no license just do whatever you want. Devalued society, devalued property, devalued community, unstable property values and no standards of measure need I continue? I recomended my sister in law start up a ferret farm with holes in the fence.
*> The issue is no permit, no ordinance, no control, no rules, no license just do whatever you want.Rick,I believe that is exactly JRS's point. Your sister-in-law bought and built in an unregulated area, how "nice" all the existing homes are isn't relevant if there is no zoning. They rolled the dice, and apparently they lost. I don't understand how some people can live in subdivisions with all sorts of covenants and rules on top of the expected zoning ordinances, but they do. Others prefer the unregulated area, sounds like she isn't one of them.I'm sure there are folk who would love to live on ten acres next to the pheasant farm, just not enough of them to raise the value of the property.I would suggest a 100' long 10' high privacy fence.Rich Beckman
*Rick,Seems we are back to the original topic. Does this developement have zoning and/or covenants? Is it covered by building codes? If it is the neighbors should be turned in to the local authorities. Shame on them. The problem can be rectified. If not, then I stand on my original statements, shame on your sister-in-law for not researching her "dream house" location to see if her interests in the nieghborhood would be protected. With no zoning or codes, then the neighbor is within his rights. Sounds like he did his homework to protect his interests.John
*off subject (well, 1 of them anyway)but how do two houses on 10 acre lots even know the other exists?.....i suppose that they are 10 acre lots with 10,000 sf of (((BUILDABLE))) land juxtaposed to each other?strange things happen when u ain't got a plan..
*> but how do two houses on 10 acre lots even know the other exists?.. Mike,Excellent point. I was wondering about that too. If I had 10 acres, I would be building as close to the middle as possible, absent some compelling reason (view) to build elsewhere.Rich Beckman
*When we moved from Chicago to about 5 miles from a small Michigan town we purposely built a tudor style ranch house with 5 bedrooms to accomodate my four kids. The house was built on a small hill on a corner lot of a country highway and a small dirt intersecting road. Away for the big city and making the American dream for my family on 6 acres. Oh joy and happiness!I knew I would be building in an agricultural area, and expected to build where smaller homes existed, farms, pig and sheep breeders and the occasional odors that went with living in such a area, typical of our country's rural life. Agreed! Again, after all, we were the "intruders". The American dream is ambiguous - different for each of us. In other words, I was prepared for "real" rural agricultual life, but I still got a surpirse I hadn't expected.As we were building the house a family bought the older farm type house directly accross from us on the gravel road - another corner lot - about 12 acres. Within a few weeks the one bathroom stopped functioning. The family, which incidentally were as friendly as could be, opted to use 5 gallon buckets for toilets, occasionally emptying them out the back door. About that time, the husband, who worked in a local factory, decided to do mechanical work and subsequently the "acreage" become a storage site for cars, trucks, tractors, lawn mowers, and others only he know existed, many of them up on concrete blocks, some on top of each other. No junk yard dog though - yet.One day I was invited to the house for coffee. When I walked in I couldn't find the countertop surfaces since they were covered with generators, starters, and other vehicle "stuff". No transmissions or engines though - to heavy I guess. The "new" linoleum" was installed on the kitchen floor with roofing nails. Three or four - never did find out how many - raccoons ran wild in the house - house pets - droppings and all. I bit my tongue, was careful of my facial expressions and forced down a cup of coffee occasionally, and again, being not obvious, checking to see what might be floating at the top (didn't want to offend her), and after some small talk, excused myself and left."Barb! You will not believe this!"I ended up hiring the 18 year old son. Lived there from '74 to '81. I never complained - and for what? I intruded in their "space" and lifestyle, right? Instead of complaining as a coward to the health department or zoning dept., I tactfully offered to help "organize" the stuff in the yard(?) and to pay for, and help install, a stockade fence to hide the "valuables". Wouldn't have helped me since our house was on a hill, but for the rest of the "neighbors and those driving by. He took offense of my suggestion, but we still stayed "neighborly." Guess by doing the right thing I was an SOB and if I'd done the cowardly thing, I'd still be the SOB."Bring the kids over to play with the raccoons" Yea, right!Incidentaly, 7 years later when we moved, the 5 gallon buckets were still being used. Guess the monies went to the "stuff" and numerous animals instead of repairing the plumbing/septic/drain field problem - even 7 years later. Goes to show, one can get used to anything.So, what determines a "civilized" live style? We're off the subject, and yet we're not. There is a reason for all regulations and ordinances. Obviously, the trick to make them fair, and only as many as are needed. By the way, my neighbors were not the norm but an anomoly in the area. Most were typical farmers and live stock breeders that lived normally(?).Guess I also make JRS sick.
*The stuff in the front yard is correctly termed..."Yard Ornaments"! Jeff
*Sonny,Even rural areas have health depts. and the living conditions you describe would violate health codes almost anywhere. If it didn't in your area then I guess you did learn a tough lesson in life. Everyone needs to make informed decisions about where they live.I've heard people complain because they live in areas with no zoning, and I've heard people complain because local zoning interferes too much.The bottom line is, when you sign the deed you accept the conditions.John
*JRS, I agree. In Naples "Deed Restricted Community" is the norm, and many have a sigan at their entrance that states those exact words. Yet, hardly a week goes by that someone doesn't compain to may about the "restrictions". Go figure. It I were a buyer in one, the first "document" I'd want to read before even making an offer would be the assoication's covenents - their legal documents. In my case, we had a health dept. I just didn't want to seem like a horse's ass and call them. I figured, if and when the time came to sell my place, I'd do that, and I did, about 6 months prior to listing it. So, I was still the SOB to that nice neighborly family, but it was only for that 6 month stint, instead of for 7 years. How can a guy like me tolerate such conditions just to maintain good neighbor relations for over 6 years, yet be so adament about unlicensed contractors, and licensed contractors who don't pull permits? Values? Prioities? Who knows! I know. Da shadow knows!
*I forgot how these forums can take something meaningless and stretch it to the extreme. Actually my sister in law is not complaining about the birds, I am. It is an example of what would be if we eliminate the licensing and permits (the subject of this discussion). Lets go to that extreme for the moment. What is the benefit of eliminating license requirements and permit/inspection?
*WOW!You guys do get excited about all this.Here's my outlook on this. Turn 'em all in if you want to, but it won't change a thing (except turning you into the "snitch") You WILL make enemies in your respective field. You have "turned in" another tradesman, even though he is not really a contractor. If you don't think so, do it, and come back later and tell me the resentment from your fellow contractors and their employees is not there.Secondly, even if ALL tradesmen were licensed, you would still have hacks and whackos running some jobs. Think about this... In every trade, from Doctor, to Lawyer, to Plumber, to Electrician, to Architect, to whatever, you have the UPPER 50%, and you have the LOWER 50%. The lower 50% is still the bottom of the barrel. Homeowners will still hire them, and they will still undercut everybody. Not much will have changed.For every hack you eliminate, one will jump up and take his place. It all still boils down to "cheapest cost" to the homeowner. We do the same thing sometimes. We settle for an el cheapo tool just to get us through this job, rather than spending the money for the more expensive tool. After the job, especially when we see just how poorly this el cheapo tool performed, we buy the better, more expensive tool. We just learned a valuable lesson. Most homeonwers are the same. They learn with the el cheapo remodel/repair, and the next time opt for the better quality, more expensive job. Sonny... you have to look at the situation where you are, and determine if calling in the inspectors and officials is what really needs to be done. Since you and your sons are on several boards, and seem to know every official in Naples, you could just plant a bug in one of those guy's ear. Let them do the rest.Rick...."I forgot how these forums can take something meaningless and stretch it to the extreme"If it was so meaningless, why did you post it?Just a thought...James DuHamel
*I think James has a good point about cheap tools.Hearing Contractor's complain about the unlicensed guys and wanting to get them out of the field sounds like Skill trying to make it illegal for Craftsmen to make circular saws. Sounds like sour grapes.
*James, I don't quite know how I feel about the whole thing. I did a quote last week for a deck collapse, built by, of course, an unlicensed contractor. The ledger was held to the rim by (on a 16' ledger), 8 deck screws. If this had been properly permitted, this would have been caught. Now, in my state, if you're talking about licensed, you're also talking about required insurance and paying into a builder's fund (that pays out to people who have been flim-flammed). So even though I'm not going to argue the point about turning people in, there are basic (even if very basic), protections in place for the general public in some areas.
*I don't have a good answer, but I guess when it comes to licensing, it gets confusing, and I don't like the game myself.I do remodeling, as well as other forms of carpentry and woodworking. I can't legally do electrical and plumbing, but still do. I hate the thought of paying an electrician more than my own wages to do simple things. This is the problem I have with the system, and if I understand the original question, then I am one of the bad guys that Sonny is talking about, and therefore I should turn myself in before someone else does, or cease and decist.I have done it the right way, and thrown away a lot of potential profits too. It burns me up. I do see a need for licensed electricians, don't get me wrong, just where to draw the line?MD
*Sonny, I don't have an opinion that could be stated that would replace what you've already heard. After reading this entire thread,(you posted a good one by the way), I am reminded of one of my mentors in this buisiness who helped to guide me along. Some of the things he preached about was becoming legit, belonging to proffessional organizations, and to allways help to elevate the craft to high standards. I have not had my buisiness affected like your situation,(to my knowledge), but I know when bread gets taken from the table then all bets are off. I think you should do whatever needs to be done to protect your interest's as long as it is helping the "craft". Tough call for someone of my meager brain capacity. Whatever decision you make will affect other lives so make sure that the trade as a buisiness entity benifits so we all benefit. Good luck, Jon J.
*Heres my take on "snitching"(thanks James, for the proper terminology-"informant" may be more palitable to some,but it's all the same thing.)There may be a time for it once in a while, but I think the old adage "Everybody hates a snitch" is true.BTW I'm glad I don't live in Naples, the licensing procedures sound much too complicated. I'm very surprised a homeowner can't act as his own GC-that seems un-American to me. Heres one experiance I had with a snitch. I bid against Mr. X on a roof job. When he loses a job, he always call Workers Comp on whoever beat him(I found this out later from my supplier). Well, that didn't work with me. I'm legit. So he calls anonymously to OSHA. I get inspected, shut down, and fined $2350.00 within 6 hrs. of starting the job.(The job was a $2400 reroof) 3 violations, one of which I discovered before the hearing, was bogus. How many of you folks think you are 100% OSHA compliant every minute of every job? If any of you do think again.Mister X doesn't snitch to make the industry better. He snitches because he's mad he lost the job. Sour grapes, pure and simple. If you educate the customer as to why he should go with a legitimate company, I feel you have done your job. If all he wants is to go with the bottom line, lic., insurance, workers comp, be damned-then so be it. Get over it and go on to the next prospect. In this market, it's hard to believe someone can't find enough good customers to keep busy.Although there are a few communities in my area that require a cabinet and countertop installer to have a license, I stay clear of them. I get plenty of work elsewhere. The only reason they require the license is to make sure they collect city taxes on their income-it has nothing to do with quality control.John
*Jon, what's happened here does not effect either Tom or my business. We're both to busy. But that 's not the point. When someone gets raped doesn't effect me either, nor, do types of white collar crime not effecting me. Doesn't mean I just turn my head.Wrongs exist for many reasons. One of them is apathy. And apathy occurs in every profession. I'm not in another profession. I' m in this one.Let the public worry about themselves - "caveat emptor", right? Does that also go for the little old lady getting conned out of her savings by a financial manipulator. What's right is right. Easy to say and not to difficult to do. When it comes to what's wrong is wrong though, no number of rationalizations will make it OK.I've helped two other people get their licenses. And as with raising my 4 kids, I told them, here's right. Here's wrong. If you want to do what is either not socially acceptable or not legal, and get caught and must bear the "sting", don't come whining to me. Accept the responsibilites of your actions, your choices, something current America has learned to prefer to "shift" to others. Now, they're the victims.It's not a difficult call for me. Especially after what I've gone thru to get my license. And what I went thru to learn what I needed to learn to get my license. And what I continue to do to keep it active and in good standing. As is said about a drivers license - it's a priviledge - not a right. The "priviledge" includes responsibilities the rest of us accept. But, this conversation can go on forever. Guess we can still just agree to disagree about the subject.By the way MD, I've done my share of plumbing and electrical also. I stopped for several reasons, an done was trying to save my clients money after I heard about a "peer" who did the same, and for the same reasons. The house had a fire. Guess who got blamed. The last person doing electrical work in the house. Think the lawyers care whose pockets they dip into. Of course, the "peer" wasn't covered by his liability insurance cause he wasn't licensed to do electrical. Think his client cared that he saved them $75? Whoops! That $75 didn't compare with the tens of thousands they were going to get. Same goes of a flood occurs because a supply slipped from the valve nut, or a drain connection was not sweated/glued good enough. Especially if they go on vacato right after teh job is completed. Oh, Oh. So what did my peer get for the tremendous risks he took on his client's behalf?Yep, the same client who had a cold one with him one night after work, slit his throat several weeks later. Lawyers dingling $1000 bills in front of the owner's faces changed them from "nice guys" to - what? Didn't matter if he was responsibile or not - he worked in a room near where they "think" the fire started. Close enough for lawyers. Personally I think anywhere in the house would have been close enough, and he was a perfect target. And being like attorneys, (ruthless) the owner's homeowner's insurance company joined the owner's attorney in the suit so they would not have to pay, hopefully. The "target", as con men say, set himself up. They didn't even have to bother. Think about that next time you guys want to "save" some money for your clients and maybe a day or two in the schedule for them. That savings comes at the risk of your life's earnings. Is it really worth the potential consequences?
*Well, I have to confess, I was a "snitch" once before - about 14 years ago. I guess once a snitch , always a snitch. I called HRS on a neighbor who, too often beat, I mean beat, his 22 month daughter. How much is too often to beat a 22 month old kid? How long had it been going on? Or is that being a different kind of snitch?Call it what ever you want. I was still a "snitch", right? In that case, I'd do it again too, but I wouldn't wait so long. He's lucky I didn't use a chain saw on his hands, the sick SOB.
*Sonny beat me to the insurance example and in my area the home owners insurance does not cover the home in case of fire when electrical was done without a permit and a licensed electrician. Quite a risk for you trades to assume for saving $75.00.I sense you folks are rather miffed with me. This one ought to really set you off. Gonna see if I can get this thread up to 100 in a day.Let's see, some one asked why I posted something that wasn't important. It was not the main part of my post but a real example of what happens without basic regulations. Didn't know there was a bunch of people out there that love the smell of bird crap. I guess you would call Sanford and Son a "collector." According to the posts I read the integrity of the majority of the people on this forum can be bought quite cheaply. Too bad. That is where the industry can't excell and get above the mediocrity and its bad reputation. Forgive my delusion of an industry of professionals working from a standpoint of integrity and character performing quality work. "Do the job right unless we can save 25.00 then do it however you want," is what you are saying. You preach quality to sell the job then turn around and find the cheapest way to do it. Cry like a baby when you get nailed by an attorney, building inspector or customer who beat you at your own game. Sorry no sympathy here, hope they hang your ass. I have a strong center of right and wrong and I have followed it regardless of finances. Funny thing though, I ended up financially well off. The people who want honesty and performance must still be in the majority. Unfortuneately, there will always be the see more and do less contractor who tries to steal money from the industry by undercutting the market. "Too lazy to work, too nervous to steal, might as well try home improvement" should be on the side of your truck. We have all made a choice on how to run our businesses. I know the results of my choices and if your life style is not what you want maybe you should examine your choices or at least quit complaining, you desrve what you get.
*Sonny: I think it's a question of why you snitched.Do it to help someone and it's noble. Do it because you're upset that someone is in violation of the rules (I'm picturing the architectural review boards) and it's wrong.
*Sure is a pleasure to hear your upbeat thoughts, Rick. Since your incredibly extensive research on all of us and our business practices and integrity as people has resulted in such obvious conclusions, I suggest you find a more elite group of perfectionists to spend time conversing with. After all, why sink so low as to speak from the throne of righteousness to us lowlife, stinking, outlaw future convicts? In one post, my curiosity about your book, ideas, business and personality just died. How's that for integrity?Have a "nice" day.MD
*rick....ur overreacting and your not reading the lay of the land...u took a discussion among yur peers and read it as a manifesto of their beliefs..take a deep breath and apologize to mad dog before he goes off in a huff..y r u upset with the posters here ?..u shud be upset with the sh**ts that sonny is talkin about ... and the creep who uses OSHA as his avenging angel...geesh rick.. i think you've got a lot of gud things to say without makin enemies where u formerly had friends...b from one who's been dere, done dat
*Sonny,C'mon man! Comparing a cabinet installer illegaly installing cabinets in a four story building, when he would be legal in a three story building to rape and child abuse? Get real!John
*Hey Mike, If I reread the posts correctly I was attacked first about a minor issue and am frankly fed up with the BS. If we are to write freely about the way we feel then it is my opinion and I stand by it.I don't find a reason to appologize for my convictions, especially to someone who doesn't use a real name. I stand by them. I pull permits for jobs done at my company, I have the proper licensing right from the beginning not after I tried it for awhile. If your area requires a license to be a GC then you are opperating illegally without one, period. In my area even salesreps are to be licensed. I have paid to make corrections when I made a mistake regardless of the amount. Whether or not Sonny should snitch, I don't know. I think using OSHA against someone is unfair, that I'll agree with. I wouldn't waste my energy trying to police unlicensed contractors they don't last anyway. I know of a pharmacy owner that worked without a license in the name of profits. Is that ok? Where would the line be drawn? Auto mechanics, medical profession, Lawyers? How far do we go with the "it doesn't matter" attitude. I suppose its like the NIMBY's. I want the benfit of lower utility cost but don't put the nuclear plant in my back yard. Although, it could be a modern version of rural charactor. You want me off this forum no problem. Do I preach elitist, not at all. Do i believe in striving for perfection on the journey of life, yes. Do I have a strong opinion of following rules absolutely. This thread asks for opinions, mine is get a license if it is required. Maybe I don't consider all the areas accross the country. I'm speaking of my heavily populated part of the world where public safety is an issue. When decks collapse and people die do to improper work by unlicensed people masquerading as contractors yes hang their ass. As for Mad dog. I don't remeber singling anyone out. If the shoe fits wear it. If you operate legitimately you have no problem with my post.
*OK.I maybe jumped in, since your post followed mine. But even so, I will more politely point out that your judgemental insult is undeserved by most of the people on this forum Rick. If you got bit by someone here, you are far from the first. But one sting is not representative at all.Besides, how can you classify such a group? Shoot, we've got real experts here in all fields, from architects, framers, truss designers, roofers, remodelers to cabinet makers and woodworkers. If you can't get satifaction with someone either through posting or email, it must be a pretty big problem. But don't just assume too much about this place, you may wish you didn't.I guess we all have our days though...MD
*Rick, your comment about the pharmacist who was not licensed was not pertinent. As Ryan stated to me earlier, "It's not my problem". Same with the pharmacist. It's not the problem of other pharmacists either - Caveat Emptor. It's the problem of the public, and his customers particularly.In February, my wife had surgery on a a toe - the one next to the big toe. Seems it was crossing over to the next one and creating a lot of pain. She went to a podiatrist that was recommended by our GP. He broke it, corrected the bone problem and put a pin in it for 3 weeks, and had her wear a short removable cast up to mid calf. Told her to have me move the toes so atrophy would not occur. After about 4 weeks everything would be fine.After 8 weeks she still had pain and limped. He suggested a bone density scan to see if she had osteoporosis(?) - lack of the bones of getting calcium from the body, typical of 55 year old women.It wasn't that. He told her to take calcium pills since he didn't know why it wasn't healing. (?) An Xray determined that no healing of the bone had occured. After 10 weeks I said screw it. Let's go to a specialist. Found one who worked at the New York Hospital. Credentials seems impressive. He's an orthorpedic surgeon.Results:The pediatrist screwed up - big time. Plus he should not have recommended she take calcium pills since there are side effects, including kidney stones. And I should not have manipulated the toes, and a few other things that were done wrong. Apparently, the podiatrist cut all of the blood vessels to that bone. It is now dead and since bones are organs, it can't stay. Has to remove it. But due to medical law and the AMA suggestions, she must still wear a cast up to the knee (and sleep with it on ) for a total of 6 months from the original surgery; so it comes off August 8. Just one last small shot the bone will live again, but the surgeon doubts it will happen.When the bone is subsequently removed, all pressure is then transferred to the next toe, not designed for it, which means that toe will eventually devolop what's called "hammer toe", (when - he doesn't know), which in itself will also require surgery.The surgeon said the podiatrist can perform surgery, but is not Board Acredited. Figure that one out. So much for self industry policing. Guess Barb and I are just two of the dumb schmucks pertaining to Ceveat Emptor. "You'll never catch all of them.""Let the customers who are only worried about the cheapest price handle it." "They get what they deserve.""We have too many regulations.""I'm not for licensing.""I don't have any feelings one way or another about licensing."Petaining to "You'll never catch all of them", wish her podiatrist was one of the one's who did get caught. Of course, that would have mandated industry self policing that was effective. Naw, let's be like the medical and legal associations. It takes pride and professionalism to do otherwise. Dumb shit Barb! She deserved it!I say lets get rid of all licensing, regulatory laws and ordinances. Hell, you can't catch them all anyway, right?Caveat Emptor!
*JRS, you missed my point. A cabinet installer can install them in a garage or a high rise. Likewise, a license carpenter can do carpentry in a house or a high rise. His test includes the pertinent knowledge he must know. This particular cabinet installation company was telling customers to get their own plumbers and electricians, sometimes, unlicensed ones.My point was about the value, when properly created and policed, is rugulations and ordinances. Not excessive, but when and where needed.How about a cabinet installer who installed a new set of kitchen cabinets, and did the plumbing, on the 14th floor of a high rise. A simple plumbing reconnect right? The next day, the owners, went on vacation. As newer owners they wee unaware of the recommendtion we all give, is to shut off the main water valve. While on vacation, their new kitchen plumbing flooded to 7 floors below befor the source wa located, the door ulocked and the water turned off.Great insurance job for who ever go the job. Hope the cabinet installer had coverge.
*ric ... dere u go again... y wud anone want u off dis forum ?even if they disagreed with u ... wch i don't.. my >was that it was just a discussion of the fine points and no one was callin u out.. especially md.. whc BTW if u email him , he'll probably tell u his real name..wch is fredl.....anyhow ric.. i like u ... sonny vouched fer ya.. (ain't that the kiss of death ?)...and as the resident expert on just about anything.. i say stick around ......
*Sonny,Call anytime. I'd be proud to help you beat that SOB within an inch of his life and then turn him in.Ed. Williams
*....sigh......No Sonny ,you missed mine.What does "Calling Bldg. Dept. on unlicensed contractors-yes or no" have to do with rape and child abuse? I guess you're saying that those who don't squeal on the less than legitimate competition will keep their mouths shut while witnessing first degree felonies. Bit of a stretch there big guy.I have no time in my life to worry about getting back at those individuals in our business who don't play by the rules. I'll educate my customers one at a time about the pitfalls of dealing with the fly-by-nights, and leave the public relations education to NARI and HBA.I have gotten frustrated with losing jobs to hucksters, fly-by nights, well meaning incompetants, those living in the cash economy, and I've come close to making one of those phone calls, but after I cool down I just don't see the point. I happen to believe in that old saying "What comes around goes around" They'll get thiers. Meanwhile I sleep at night. I really wanted to get back at Mr. X, the guy who sicked OSHA on me. Shakespear said "revenge is a dish best served cold" I was gonna wait and get him back good. But I realized what a miserable guy he must be to be so obsessed with his failures that he has to keep a personal scorecard. He's hurting himself far more than I could. Think of the time and energy it takes to live a campaign like that. The time I have is more valuable than that.So Sonny, you asked for opinions on your topic and that's what you got, I guess. You didn't really think there would be 100% agreement now did you?John
*John, you're right. I was just surprised at the number of people who replied contrary to my stance.I went over board in making my "case."Will try to learn form that.I agree with you about the OSHA calling guy - must have their number in his cellular phone's memory. I probably would have said to him: "OK. If you want to continue in this vicious vien, I'll play by your rules. I'll hire a guy to follow you two days a week for a month to locate your jobs. Then I'll call OSHA. I'll also call other roofers to do the same. We'll cover your ass for the next year. Is that what to really want to start?" I think that would have ended it, unless he's a real psyco.
*I just realized that I've been hitting the reply button instead of the new message box. I'll get used to this just before you folks run me off.Mad Dog I ain't after ya. I have a tough question for you though; If a house you wired burns down due to your error are you prepared to pay for the house, compensate the owners for lost momentos and god forbid how do you appologize for loss of life? All because you hate to see an electrician make a buck. As I recall all costs are passed on to the home owner anyway so don't they really pay for it, not you?As for these love taps I've had my ribs kicked in on the other site and still held my own. I like a good scrap. If you're looking for a yes man I ain't it. Rest assured my rants are not aimed at any one individual. I would hoist a mug and toast your health over a froth anytime. We debate the ideas not the people. Ok, Group hug already.
*A coupla points....Lets keep in mind that ALL areas DON'T require/have licensing. In my area, ya gotta be registered with the City of Pgh to pull a permit, and that just requires $63 and my insurance info. To get that ins. just cost me another check. How does that system qualify me over another contractor? The state had talked of a license system, at a discussion meeting I found out it would simply require basic contact info and another check. I switched from supporting the proposal to not supporting licensing. Anyone can buy a dog license, anyone can buy a contracting license of this type, just a money maker for the state gov. disguised as helping consumers. Until there is testing, I'm voting no. In my area, I can do elec. and plumbing, and am legal as long as all the regular inspections are followed. So, what's the difference if I(an unlicensed elec./plumb) or an electrician install the ceiling fan? Am I really serving my customers better by getting a plumber to install the faucet on the vanity I just put in? On a final note, I got my start learning from an unlicensed/part time remodeler(my Dad). I went to an accredited trade school and earned an Associates Degree in Carp/Const. Technology. The major lesson I learned was that the old man had been doing it right all along. Could it possibly be that NOT EVERYONE who does side work is a thief??? The people who called my Dad 10-20-30 years ago and are now calling me seem to think it's possible. Jeff....above board now, and the older stuff is still standing!
*Rick...I am the one who asked you why you would post something that really didn't mean anything. I was, and am, curious as to why YOU think it is meaningless. It is very hard in cyber land to get a meaning, or a point across. There are no facial expressions, tone of voice, or other characteristics common to normal conversations. I did not mean to get your panties in a knot over all of this. I was just curious as to why you thought your post was meaningless. Nothing more, nothing less. Slow your pace down a bit, and get to know these guys here. They are a group of fine people, and they have a vast amount of knowledge that is well worth listening to. I have found that people who think they know everything usually don't know very much at all. With that thought in mind, I read all the info here I can, and even jump in once in a while to get in on the discussion.James
*James,The board made an issue of attacking my sister inlaw and how she was responsible for what happened next door. My point was that her investment value dropped when it comes to resale as long as the coupe is there, something that regulations could control. What she should have done with regards to home work before building is not the point. None of you would go to an area of 3000sq ft plus homes and ask about the likelyhood of pheasant farms. As an experienced builder maybe but not as your first time building. She built first, who would have known that in an area of nice homes an idiot would move in and raise pheasants. If the question is licensing without education and testing I'm still for licensing. When you deal with the public you must be accountable. The education requirements will follow as the system developes. Think about it, if the state suddenly said they required 300 hours of education and 3 years of on site experience before testing everyone would be up in arms and call it too hard and unfair. They will grandfather the existing registered businesses and start requirements on the newbies. If an area does not rquire licensing my guess is that it will when the population hits a certain number and complaints of shoddy, unsafe work increase. Its a gradual change. The other issue here is working without a permit since that is the only way a carpenter could do electric or plumbing in most areas. If in your area a license is not required but inspections are then there is still control as long as a permit is pulled.Be honest, you didn't want another dull yes man sucking up to the regulars around here did you? What is wrong with heated debate. Often time s the true man is revealed when enraged. I don't always have the time for this but when I do I want it interesting, don't you? I even buck heads with Sonny on occassion. I can always tell when he has been drinking coffee after 8:00pm. I'm not out to win a popularity contest but I do love thought provoking banter.I will give people the respect of stating their opinion and it is theirs, I just like to make them defend it. As for my panties I keep them in a knot, that way I don't sit around on my ass and neither does anyone around me.
*james... right on... the enforcement and assistance of the regulators is the legitimate pursuit of HBA and Remodelers Councils... and they should be encouraged in that by their board of directors..licensing is good.. it supports the professional image of any profession.. and it usually is forced on us by the legislature after they have had enough of the complaints from their constituents..licensing alsway came in with grandfather rights and easy access.. and was followed on by tougher and tougher requirements..massachusetts was a joke when they started .. now it is a major commitment..which is what i see licensing to be.. another commitment on the part of the professional to bring our business forward..still in the sticks .. fine.. but if you get staewide licensing.. be the first.. not the last to jump on board.. you won't regret it ten years down the lineb but hey, whadda i no ?
*I guess, after reading on this forum and others, and listening to people in general ask why we can't all be Norm Abrahms and why we don't "build things the way they used to", at what point is the general public going to start demanding more action. Like any other industry, if we don't "police" (and I use that term very loosely), ourselves, won't the government step in and do that? Now, I certainly don't want any more governmental regulations, but I'm also tired of paying into builder's funds to clean up the messes that other shoddy people build.
*Jason, the reason that Collier county has such strong licensing and permitting validation and policing, is because of it's memberships in the CBIA (Collier Building Industry Association). Note here that the relationships with the local government powers to be is done through the Board of Directors, and internal committees. I say "done thru them" because they are only the vehicle. Stong membership at the various meetings is where the subjects come up, are discussed and the veracity of the various discussions are what determines if action is mandated or not.I'm sure that happens as well in the national level of NARI and NAHB, but, the input must still come from their respective constituents. No board of directors can operate without knowing just what the hell their constituents want done.In our case, CBIA started with alliances between builders, realtors (also effected by this issue), subcontractors, suppliers and others, including lenders.The new Remodeler's Council has just taken up the torch as well, but for obvious reasons, with the emphasis concerning remodeling jobs in our county. That happened and continues because of strong feelings, not apathy. Because of the tightness between industry and government here, we were even advised two days in advance of OSHA's (surprise) coming into our county from Lee county - Ft. Myers. Also for the above relationships, that roofer calling OSHA on his competitors, would be out of work, possibly even out of business, once his tactics got back to both CBIA and the "Development Services Dept", as our county building is called - that contains the licensing, zoning and permitting departments. I guarantee you neither the DSD not the CBIA want those whores screwing around with our construction industry. I'm sure they, the DSD, feels like local cops would feel when the FBI wants to come in and run amuck. Our licensing discipline department even has non trades people on the committee, as does the zoning dept. The permitting dept. meets monthly with our CBIA board of Directors - an excellent liasion.Also, our permitting dept is fair, in my opinion. For example, if Mrs. Jones wants to have her kitchen and bathrooms faucets changed, she doesn't need a permit. But she does need to have it done by a licensed plumber. Saves her the costs of the permit, plus the plumber's time to obtain it, but she gets the benefit of having an expert, trained in that trade, in do the work. I think that's reasonable, and smart. However, if she wants her kitchen and both baths completely remodeled, permits must be pulled, because that would involve many trades and the county wants to assure each trade is doing things according to codes. That's fair also.Our situation can happen anywhere. It only takes involvement and strong feeling about a particular subject and advising one's local association.I would say, we have just the right mix of regulatory involvement, verification, monitoring, and discipline when needed.Involvement as opposed to apathy. But, as I've stated before, that happens to be the desire of the majority of the subs, GCs, lenders and realtors here - suppliers as well. You see, all of the above benefit by creating the right environment needed to service our respective clients and in a professional manner.Of course we wouldn't catch them all, but we sure make it hard for "them" to operate, keep the numbers down, and sure as hell don't make it easy for them. Imagine what we'd have if we did nothing?But again, what we have in Collier County, based on comments in this discussion, may not be what others want in their areas. So be it.
*Mike Smith,I'm sorry to get off the subject, but what the hell is it with you and spelling? Are you just trying to be funny? Maybe you think it's "cute"? Or are you just stupid. I'm sure I misspell words all the time, and use the wrong punctuation I'm sure, but I try. I just barely got out of high school, but I can type the word "you" instead of using the letter "u".I'm sorry, but I am not amused any more. Get real.Ed. Williams
*Gentlemen,I think every one here has had a good point or two. Some have been more concerened and some less. But we all agree that there is an element out there that makes the rest of us look bad. Unfortunatly, there are those that excel at what they do and those that don't. There are those that are excellent at what they do, but screw up every once in a while. And then there are those that just plain suck at what they do.Buyer beware? That's of little consolation when you made the wrong choice. If you don't know what to look for, how are you gonna know? Like Sonny's poor wife, you trust a professional, and look what happens. God bless her foot. And a speedy recovery.Hang the cheating bastards? Works for me, but who is the judge and jury? Do they wear a sign that says "Hey, watch out for me!". Hind sight is 20/20.There is no way to stop less than standard practices. I don't care what profession you want to point the finger at.Licencing is not the answer. Too easy to get. Government regulation is not the answer, the cost is too high. So cut all the crap. Is there anything we can do? I don't think so. We are not the first of the generations to have to beware of this, and we won't be the last. 100 years from now there will still be people who don't do thier jobs up to parr, or who want to skirt the rules to make a few cheap bucks. so why all the wasted retoric?Seems to me that there are better ways to spend our time. But it's been interesting.Ed. Williams
*Sonny - now, tonight, your posts are all half width on the page. Everyone else's look normal. Did you do something different when you logged on or something? Kinda strange lookin'.
*Let me try just one sentence to see if it happens again. Ok, so it's going to take two sentences. I lied again. If it continues I'll walk backwards to try to figure what happened.
*Sheesh, Ed. Build me up just to let me down. Here I am getting all excited by your voice of reason, your modicom of sanity, I actually think--but for a moment, even so, how refreshing--you will now enlighten us all with the one true answer, but all I get is simply more rhetoric. You accurately depict the problem but stop to hide behind the not so impassioned reason of "we're not the first and we won't be the last".Oh, yeah. There are better ways to spend our time, but the thing is why should we continue to ignore a problem which we all agree exists?
*No, now that looks normal. I know your other posts looked normal last night, or I'd have noticed then. Some kinda stange, huh? I wonder if it's my machine. Does anyone else see Sonny's initial and at least one or two other long posts as one half of the page instead of full width?
*Yes. But it isn't just Sonny's posts. I've had a lot of posts come up using only half the page. Luka's "Questions" thread in the tavern seemed to have several. But in many other places, too.Rich Beckman
*To the best of my knowledge and observation here so far the half page width posts are a result of editing the posts online after making the initial entry. The reason Sonny's are almost always like that is more often than not he can't leave well enough alone and is never satisfied and always ditzing around tinkering.
*ed. who are u to tell me how to spell ?get real .. sorry if it offends u.. but u don't have to read itand ... ur also wrong about licensing... but then if yur ox ain't gettin gored y wud u care ?b what, me worry ?
*Mike Smith,It just makes it dificult to read. That's all. Like those guys who type in all caps. But if that's the style you choose......oh well.And yes, my ox gets gored by these cheats just like you. And I have 20 oxen on the payroll getting gored every day. I'm responsible for keeping these oxen empolyed. So this means a great deal to me. It's not just my sorry ox that I have to worry about.Ed. Williams
*fair enough (god that hurt)ed. i'll try and restrain myselfor maybe i can post doublefair enuf ed.i'll try 'n restain mysef...nah.. that won't worki'll lay off a bit.. where's ther's smoke ther's fire... i no bb has asked the same question... so that's 2.. maybe it really p*sses everyone off and they just don't want to tell mebut it's like a bad habit.. and addictive... just like this board...
*Rich,Sorry to let you down buddy. But there is no answer. There is no button to push or lever to throw to make this issue go away. There are several steps we can take to try to get attention......through state or local government licencing, or a personal crusade of turning in the wrong doer to the proper athoruities and hope that they will actually do something (yeah right), or by example of ourselves running straight up businesses and hoping it will catch on (yeah right again).You can't stop someone from stealing your tools, you can make it harder for them to get at them, but if they really want them they will steal them no matter what you do. You can't stop a person from lying. You can't stop a person from cheating.That's the whole key here is that we are talking about people making personal choices. We all make choices every day to do the right thing or the wrong thing. It's a personal choice that has nothing to do with anybody else. If someone decides to personally do the wrong thing, how are you going to stop that with a licence or a law? You can deter people from doing the wrong thing, and you can punish them if they get caught. But it won't stop them from making the wrong choice again if they have convinced themselves that it's ok behavior. That is a personal choice, they choose to do what they do, and a lot of them know it's wrong and don't care. Education and regulation be damned, some people are just no good. Some people think the world owes them a living. Some people think it's ok to cheat because, hey, everybody else is doing it, so why not me?If you can change a persons mindset, then you can change his actions. We try, with religion, education and regulation, but there will always be the bad apple. Sad but true.Ed. Williams
*Ed, let me extrapolate your post of July 8.First of all, I'm not saying we should go out of our way to look for those people. I'm saying that if we observe it being done we should not just turn our heads away from it.You said that there will always be people who steal our tools, lie and cheat, and I agree they will always exist. But, does the acknowledgement that they will always exist mean that when caught at it, we should again, turn our heads away.And you are also right when you say we all make choices. The way I was reared, their were almost always consequences of our choices, good consequences for our smart and right choices and bad consequences for our bad choices. Both in business and personal life. Are you saying in this particular issue, there should not be any consequences for the bad choices? Let someone else take care of it. That's apathy.You say that goverment should take care of those rogues, but they can't unless someone tells them about the rogue right? - unless you want big brother to take care of us all. That transfers our "responsibities" to the government. Scary, yet people to that every day. But what they don't realize is that every time they do that they also loose a little of their freedom, because by addicating their authority and responsibility they agree to also give away a slice of the freedom pie. I contend that self reliance and self regulation beats government interferrence every day. As for those who do the wrong thing, get caught and do it again because they're convinced it's OK behavior; does that mean so why bother? I say, punish them again, and again, and again, untill they learn and change their behavior. And if they still don't, believe me, they will end up in jail, because the "wrongs" eventually get worse.To a tremendous degree, fear of consequences is what keeps all people in line. It works with raising kids. It's what keeps many from raping, stealing, cheating on a school test, cheating on one's time card, doing 20 miles per hour over the speed limit,or cheating on one's spouse. For one segment of any populaton, what makes them not do those things is their character. But, for another segment, it's back to basic fear - fear of the consequences if caught. If we eliminate those concequences, and that fear, we got big problems. Yesterday by employee and I saw a gorgeous woman. He said the only reason he doesn't cheat on his wife is because of what he would loose if she found out - consequences. See what I mean, not just because it's wrong. Eliminate the fear of the consequences of our choices and what do we have left? Apathy is not the solution. Self action is. It's also a basic human tenet - protecting one's own turf - keeping the playing field level.
*Sonny,I would like to expunge your extrapolation.In the real world we just say "you got the wrong idea".I've never said to turn away from a problem. That's not the answer. My acceptance of the problem should not be confused with apathy. I've learned to accept the things in life I can't change and go on.Your friend who won't cheat on his wife is a prime example of what I've been talking about. Not cheating on one's wife because your afraid of what will happen if you get caught is a sad way to go. You sholdn't cheat on your wife because you love her. If he truly loved his wife, cheating wouldn't be an option. I'm not tempted to run an illegal business and it's not because I'm afraid of getting caught. It's because it's the right thing to do.Don't get me wrong. I'm no goody two shoes. I had a wild youth, and spent some time in the county lock-up. I've lied, stolen and cheated in my past. But what changed me was conscience not jail. Most of the men that I met who broke the law thought that getting caught was just part of the game. They expected it.I'm not going to let the dog bite me, but I'm not going to beat him into submission either. Turning a blind eye is not the answer, but neither is relying on the fear of retrabution. It may work on some, but not everybody. I've had some IRS problems from not filling out paperwork exactly right or being late with a 941 deposit. They hurt you real bad when that happens. But I can't tell you how many people I know who cheat on thier taxes regardless of the penalty.People make bad choices. That is the root of the problem.There is no good and easy fix.Ed. Williams
*OK Ed. Let me cut to the chase and eliminate all further discussion and rhetoric. See, I accept the situation also. I also acknowledge the fact that if just excepting it results in doing nothing about it; it's still called apathy. Apathy means I know it exists, but I just don't care enough about it to do anything to change it.So please answer one simple question for me.Are you willing to do anything to stop these people?
*Sonny,You bet. I have done what you originally proposed to do. I have tried to use the system to stop businesses (construction) who operate out of the back of thier trucks. The guys that sell work on the Black Market. The people who don't play by the rules. I spent about a year going after some businesses that I knew were operating illegaly. They offered shoddy work at cut rate prices and the building comunity here welcomed them with open arms. I spoke with the IRS, the people at SUTA (State Unemployment Tax Association), I spoke to the city building code and licencing enforcment officers, I spoke to the builders that hire these guys. Hell, I even spoke to the crooks themselves.What I got was nothing. The IRS ran me around. The State said they would do something and then did nothing. the City said there was nothing they could do about it. The builders said that they had no liability by hiring them, and the crooks just laughed.You want apathy? Go there.I'm open to all suggestions.Ed. Williams
*Well Mike, I guess I'll make it three. It doesnt piss me off or anything but I have to say it's kinda hard to read. I know, I dont have to read your posts, but they are usually well worth reading. Chuck
*Sonny, I have been thinking about your post for several days. My conclusion is that either the laws (heirarchy of contractors) are wrong or they are being misinterpreted. What I do know is that a condominium owner is a homeowner - at least from the surface of concrete under his carpet to the skin of paint (popcorn) on his ceiling. He is also a part-owner of some share of the entire building (structure, lobby, elevator, landscaping, pool, parking, etc.). As a homeowner, he should be free to do any remodeling he wants within the confines of his actual four walls. The "general contractor" rules should apply to the building structure itself - such as repairing the elevator, painting the exterior, refurbishing the lobby, etc. But you shouldn't have to be a "general contractor" ("able to build bridges") in order to replace a kitchen sink.
*AmenJohn
*Peter, following the laws can be very frustrating at times. My license allows me the option of contracting a structure such as the World Trade Center but will not permit me to install a simple transition fitting to move a sink, install a GFCI or a light switch, reshingle a roof or install HVAC ductwork, all of which I am more than capable of doing. If I build an addition to an existing structure I can truss it, sheath it, dry it in and shingle it BUT I cannot tie the shingles into the existing shingles. For that I have to be a licensed roofer. And, a licensed roofer can't sheath what he can dry in and shingle. You don't have to be a "general contractor" in order to replace a sink, you MUST be a plumber.In spite of not being allowed to do the work, guess who is held totally reponsible for all the work on a project - the GENERAL CONTRACTOR!A home owner can act as his own general contractor as long as he is the one doing the work. He can pull his own permits and call for his own inspections. And, he can do the structural, electrical and plumbing. But, if he farms out ANY of the work then that work falls under the normal requirements for the various trades (electrical, plumbing, structural, etc.) and he must hire a licensed tradesman.The above applies in Florida, where Sonny and I live and work, and may not apply in your location. As others have posted, the rules are different depending upon where you are.What do you think of them apples?
*I guess licensing roofers is important in Florida, since they've had so many problems with bad tradespeople scamming retired people down there, but up here it just sounds funny.It seems like it would be hard to get things done.MD
*Sonny, I live just up the coast from you, and yes I'm a state certified building contractor. There is an other option to this problem, turn in the owner for hiring an unlicensed contractor. It's a $500.00 fine. You bust enough "Johns" the hooker got no one to screw. Or would you rather your clientele base not know you are a snitch.
*Jake, I have no problem with a client, actually they wuldn't be my client anyway, knowing I "snitched' on them since I don't consider it snitching. Since thee people have the same opportunity to obtain a license as I have, but choose not to, they are not my "peers."Simply put, these people are criminals, and they are criminals because they are breaking the law. That goes for the owners as well, and that's why they too get fined if the building dept. finds out about the situation.As you know, Florida is serious about this issue, as well as making sure codes are being met. I mentioned it to our peers here to show that if there is a concerted effort to stop it, or minimize it to the least, it is possible. But it aint't gonna happen unless contractors work with their respective associations and their local govn'ts.Incidentally, the reason the owners get fined also, is to prevent someone buying a house or condo in which one of these previous owners had work done that was not done safely or to code. I just ran across that. Pulled a large mirror off the wall over a set of vanity bases and lo and behold - two separate pieces of live romex with their ends taped, in an old recess for a previous medicine cabinet. Code required conduit or greenfield and a junction box for terminating those wires.
*Just judging by your comments, sounds like it's not working so well in Fla. Except maybe in the sense that it sure helps to limit the competition.Your reference to homeowners being criminals if they hire non-licensedworkers, reminds me of the saying "The more laws we make, the more criminals we create."I guess by living in a lightly regulated state, I miss the headaches and profits that my peers in Fla. and elsewhere enjoy.I am still amazed that a remodeling contractor wishing to work in a four story building must pass the same requirements that a bridge builder must pass. That's way overkill.John
*I saw a guy J-walk today. I couldn't believe it, walked right across the street like there weren't any laws at all. I got it all on film and he'll get his.!!!Actually, I'll leave this guy alone, not because the infractions were small but because first, if a guy wants to cross the street and take a chance, he ought to be able to without the government telling him where he has to cross and secondly, because by crossing the street, he isn't cutting into my profits.I guess if his crossing the street affected my bottom line, I'd turn him in, although I believe in his right to do so. Screw right and wrong, I'm doing what's best for my bank account.
*Sonny, Lighten up! There have been alot of good veiws brought up in the past 80-plus messages. I'm a small contractor doing mostly remodeling and additions. This is a area prime for unlicensed activity. Yeah I'm not real happy competing against unlicensed contractors but if the state is more worried about unpermitted work by licensed contractors than persuing the unlicensed, then I'm not going to do their job for them. That last sentence was in reference to a past news letter by the Construction Industry Licensing Board of the Department of Business and Professional Regulation. The public is aware of the problems of unlicensed contractor and they still hire them. Are we to beat them over the heads with a 2x4? I tend to steer clear of clientes that do not take craftsmanship and material quality in mind when they look at the bottom line. I still get enough that want something for nothing. As far as the unsuspected buyer purchasing a lemon, I believe we have real estate disclosure laws for that. There again, nobody wants to put any more money into something for sale. I do not work for realitors anymore, either. I'm glad to have a license and do nothing to endanger it [read I don't want to take that test again], but I'm not a crusader either. There are enough of my fellow contractor that I'm embarassed about and worried how the general pubic perceives our profession to worry about the unlicensed hacks.ps I can't build a four story condo but I can and have pulled permits to do remodel work in them I don't think you need a license to build a bridge since the state has an inspector on the job at all time, probably more misinformation from continuing education.
*JRS, I was referring to the "contractor" as being the criminal, not the owner. The contractor knows better. The owner often doesn't unless someone tells him.Picture a 6 story condo that uses post tensioning. Along comes an unlicensed contractor who cuts thru a cable. He didn't know better than to have the floor x-rayed to locate any cables. Nor did he know better to get written permission from the condo board to do what he was doing. Why would he? No permit - an under the counter job. GC's learn about post tensioning in their books and tests. Here's another: An 18 story condo with glass porch walls containing structural steel posts. An owner decided to save the cost of hiring a GC and his mark-ups on the subs. About a $120K job. He knew exactly what he was doing when he hired each sub directly. No permitting either. He also eliminated the glass wall removal engineering plans that the permiting department would have required. So, his unlicensed contractor, admittedly a nice guy, but incompetent, just tore out the wall, structural framing and all. Incompetent because obviously the didn't know about the those posts being structural. Wonder who is going to pay for the subsequent damage done to the two units above.This is what happens when otherwise intelligent people do dumb things to save money either for themselve or someone else.
*Jake, I'm not really a crusader here and also don't work for that segment of the public who don't want me to pull a permit. I justt brought up the original Post to get some input. Our CBIA is doing a great job of working with the powers to be to keep it at a minimum.But if and when I see it being done, I do make the phone call - and no guilt assoicated with it.You're right about the test. Florida's contractors test is an open book test yet is still a bear to pass.
*I'm curious about about all the damage in the Holmstead area from Hurricane Andrew .........saw pictures of subdivisions that came through relatively unscathed and some right nearby that were leveled and supposely didn't meet code. Do you feel the regs and codes are fair and that they are evenly enforced?
*Jon, the problem is mutli-facited, and some of it is what the guys have mentioned in this thread.Owners who buy price only and then are shocked at what they end up getting. The inspectors found trusses with only one nail securing them to the top plate, plywood with a half dozen nails per sheet and other similar problems. Granted, some owners pay full price and still get screwed.Also, builders who only hire the absolutely cheapest subs they can find, and then don't supervise. Another problem every city has - a shortage of building inspectors.Here, as of 3 years ago when I got the last "word", inspectors had to make about 25 per day. So, how much time can they really spend per job considering they also spend an hour in the AM and another hour in the PM at their offices. That means 6 hours to cover 25 projects - 14 minutrs per job including traveling time.County and the city want increased budgets to hire mor inspectors. That means increasing the permitting fees. That in turn means complaints form contractors because they know that their respective customers will complain. and the bottom line is that the stinking extra $150 - $250 per house is nothing compared to the benefits to the new house owner.But I guess when you're building a $150,000 or higher house, that extra $200 permit fee could queer the deal with the mortgage company.As to the localization of some of the destruction, was due to some of the tornados spawned by the hurricane, and the gusts of wind which also varies from place to place.Finally, like a lot of other areas in Florida, they are saturated with mobile homes.Asa a consequence of Andrew, you should see some of the new codes going into effect.Regulations are like any other "laws", mainly to the benefit of the public but admittedly with an occasional bad one. Personally, I still think they do more good than harm.So, I think they are fair even considering the weaknesses contained within any bureacratic system. In my own inspections, I've had inspectors bend over backwards to work with me on a problem, and I've had those who would not bend a millimeter. Usually, the older guys who have been inspectors for several years are more inclined to work with contractors."OK, the plumber made a mistake here, but I'll pass the rough in. Just make sure the plumber takes care if it."That only happens if the GC and the plumbing contractor both have excellent reputations with the building dept. If either is known as a hard ass, a trouble maker or someone who frequently takes short cuts, forget it. The inspection fails.You know, it's the "What goes around comes around" philosophy.
*About unlicensed contractors. First understand that a contractor is neither a mechanic nor a materialman. He furnishes neither labor nor materials for the construction of buildings. A journeyman plumber (mechanic) and a master plumber (contractor) are different classes of persons and licenses required of the members of one class does not mean that licenses must be required of members of the other class. Furthermore, it is unconstitutional to require regulatory licenses of certain occupations such as carpenters, masons, paper hangers and painters. For a detailed explanation of this, see the case of Dasch v. Jackson, 170 Md. 251, wherein a Maryland statute requiring licenses of paper hanging contractors and paper hanging mechanics in the city of Baltimore was declared unconstitutional. Only a mechanic can make a contract to perform labor. The other party to the contract is known as the contractor. The contractor can be either the property owner or an agent of the property owner. If a property owner performs his own labor, then he acts in the capacity of a mechanic (journeyman). If the property owner does not perform his own labor, then he must contract with a mechanic (journeyman) to perform the labor. If the owner does this directly, then the owner acts in the capacity of contractor. If the property owner employs an agent to act in the capacity of contractor, then the owner becomes liable for the acts of his agents. In Arizona where I live, the mechanics' and materialmen's lien law states that labor and materials can be furnished at the instance of the owner or his agent and that all contractors and subcontractors are agents of the owner. Other states have similar lien laws with similar language.
*robert.. i think you are applying some specific jargon to a general description.. a contractor is anyone who writes a contract to perform a job.. he can provide labor.. and/or materials...he can do it with in-house trades or subcontractors..also your declaration of ((unconstitutionality ?))) is overly broad... it certainly doesn't apply in RI.. nor in most dates i have read about...licensing and contractors are defined in whichever enabling legislation created them...in most states that have licensing.. it is a refinement process..1st the basic enabling legislation is adopted.. the a bureaucracy is created to implement it.. then the legislation is amended to fix the flaws in the origianl statute...so,...my point is.. what is your point ?
*Mike. As I pointed out, it was not I who declared the licensing of carpenters, masons, painters and the like to be unconstitutional. That edict comes from courts of authority which is why I referred the reader to see the court decision listed. If you do not believe me that a contractor is neither a mechanic who furnishes labor nor a materialman who furnishes materials, then perhaps you might believe the U.S. Supreme Court. See the case of Winder v. Caldwell, 14 Howard 434. By your definition of contractor, any person who makes a contract to perform labor is a contractor and since every person has a constitutional right to make contracts in his occupation, then every carpenter, plumber, electrician, etc. is a contractor. Such a definition would mean that contractor and mechanic are synonymous terms. If you are correct, then the U.S. Supreme Court is wrong. I would venture to say that they know more about the law than we do.Suppose I make a contract with a property owner to frame his house or to construct a staircase. If I say I will do it, then I means myself and not anybody else. Your claim is that if I make such a contract, then I means someone else will do the work. Imagine two carpenters bidding against each other for a job. Carpenter A has a lower bid than carpenter B and is awarded the contract to perform the labor. It is absurd to think that A can then employ B to do the work. A's contract is not to hire B to do the work. It is to perform the labor himself.In Arizona where I live, the legislature has made the proper distinction between contractors and mechanics pursuant to specific trades. In section 32-1122, subsection F of the Arizona Revised Statutes, the phraseology "practical or management trade experience" is used, thereby distinguishing between mechanics (practical trades) and contractors (management trades). In our state, only contractors as defined are required to obtain licenses. However, only the unlicensed mechanics can make contracts to perform labor. A contractor can only make contracts to supervise the job "for the benefit of the property owner". A property owner in our state is allowed to supervise the construction on his own property without a contractor's license only if it is his own residence in which he lives and is not for sale or rent or used for business purposes as defined by statute.Additionally, virtually every state Constitution has a provision that laws shall only be passed on the subject expressed in the title and all else outside the scope of the subject expressed in the title is void. If, as in Arizona, the title says "Contractors", then automatically anyone who works at a trade in the capacity of a mechanic is exempt.
*Robert, it's interesting that your posts were made about 2 days after I read an extensive articel about the Supreme Court. at http://www.sobran.com, whereas the author states, and quite convencinly, that when the SC does make an error and a ruling, it never admits to it at a later date, but instead goes on to make additional decisions based on it's original error.Could this be the reason why Arizona's approach to the definition of the word "contractor" is an anamoly within the US? If not, why hasn't state after state made the same changes, and why haven't state's courts become congested with construction law suits regarding this issue of contractor definition as based on the SC decision?I think that's why Mike said that the information you presented does not apply to this discussion.
*What happens when I am both a "Contractor" and a "Mechanic" in that I am both "supervising the job "for the benefit of the property owner"" (as in I am remodeling their home and in such capacity supervising various trades) and working as a "mechanic" in that I am individually going to design, fabricate and install their new staircase?I've also gotta say that I am amazed that a topic which does little if anything at all to add to our bottom line and increase our profits or improve the quality of the products and services we deliver has generated all this interest? Aren't there more important and interesting things for all of us to be talking about rather than something so trivial as to whether or not we should be spending our time ratting on un-licensed contractors. Are they really a problem? Are they really cutting in to our profits or are we through our own inattention to more critical details and management skills?
*SonnyArizona's definition of contractor is not an anomaly. California, Florida, Nevada, New Mexico and other states use the same definitions. Let me pose this question. If I see a carpenter working on a job site, should I assume that he is the person who made the contract to perform the labor. If he is not the person who made the contract to perform the labor, then why is he doing it. Of course, if he is the property owner, he cannot make a contract with himself since there must be at least two parties to a contract. Obviously, some other person cannot have made the contract to perform the labor or such other person would be doing it. That is, if I see A performing the labor, then I can assume that B did not make the contract to do it. But does this fact make the mechanic performing the labor a contractor. If it does, then the material supplier supplying the lumber must also be deemed a contractor. But the law in all the states that require contractor licensing do not deem the mechanics and materialmen as contractors. The party who orders the carpentry labor and carpentry materials is deemed the carpentry contractor. That is why lien laws generally state that mechanics and materialmen shall have a lien for labor or materials furnished whether furnished at the instance of the owner or his agent and that all contractors and subcontractors are agents of the owner. As has been said before, there cannot be a lien unless there be some debt to be secured by the lien and there cannot be a debt unless there be a contract either express or implied. The mechanic who performs the labor is the creditor of the property owner. The materialman is also the creditor of the property owner. Many people have this bizarre idea that a contractor gives a property owner a set price and then pays for all the labor and materials necessary for the project. Keeping in mind that the law enters into and becomes a part of every contract, how would the labor be paid for? The premise of the 13th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution abolishing slavery and involuntary servitude is that one class of persons shall not be required to work for the benefit of another class of persons. Thus if the person being called contractor is merely paying for labor and another class of persons is performing the labor, then those performing do not have to work for the benefit of those paying. Who would determine how much the mechanics get paid? It certainly could not be the party paying. The party paying could also have no choice in who performed the labor or who furnished the materials.
*robert... that is one convoluted argument..In all states that have licensing.. they define who is subject to the law.. and the terms are defined..just because you chose not to call them ((contractors))in your limited definition doesn't mean that the public almost universally accepts and understands what is meant by a contractor...contract law varies from state to state and the enforcement of those laws is based on hundreds of years of precedent...here in RI the law is called ((The Contractors' Registration Law)))..and Contractor is defined on page one in a lengthy paragraph...Gary Ransome, a member of the CA bar, and a licensed General Building Contractor in CA.. has written extensively on contract law as it pertains to home builders and remodelers...in Massachusetts there are two levels ..the higher is Construction Supervisor and the entry level is ((Home Improvement Contractor)).. the definition of ((contractor)) is shorter but basically the same as RI...since the whole body of law in the United States has the same roots (with the possible exception of some to the former spanish territories)..i find it easy to believe that your narrow definition is the exception in common law in the various states..Construction Law is construction law... and pertains to who the parties are to the agreement.. and who are employees of the parties....what entities can enter into agreements....yada.yada. blah,blah blah..here's my question..are you saying that the various states do not have the legal authority to create laws governing contracts... and the parties that enter into contracts.. including the licensing and regulation of the contractors ?or are you just shooting the breeze ?
*JerraldDo you hold yourself out to the public as someone who is skilled and will personally do the work in the capacity of a mechanic or as someone who does not have the skill of a mechanic and merely orders labor and materials on behalf of the owner as a contracting agent (contractor)? Or do you hold yourself out as someone who will order the services of contractors who will order the labor and materials furnished by mechanics and materialmen? That is another kind of contractor.
*just to butt in ...no one holds themselves out to be a mechanic...or a contractor...what we DO as contractors is administer contracts..the scope of work as defined by the contract documents... the obligations of the owner... any time constraints... and the plans and specifications..ALMOST never will the contract specify who is to physically do the work...so a lot of what you are debating is moot.....b but hey, whadda i no ?
*I'm getting a headache.
*I think I'll just keep doing what I'm doing and not worry too much about what the supreme court wants to call me.
*Mike SmithYou are correct in stating that the general public believes a contractor to be a person who makes a contract. However, when a legislative body defines something, the definition used by the legislature takes precedence if reasonable.In Arizona where I live, section 1-203 of our statute law is called "words and phrases". Under that section the legislature states that all words and phrases in the statute law shall be construed according to their common meaning unless such words and phrases have a technical meaning within the law and then such technical meanings apply. The term "contractor" has a technical meaning.In a case called City of Milwaukee v. Rissling (I don't have the citation at hand but I believe 199 N.W. 61 is one of them) a Milwaukee ordinance requiring licenses of electrical contractors was upheld over the objection that the ordinance did not require licenses of the mechanics (journeymen) who did the electrical work. The court ruled that electrical contractors and journeyman electricians were different classes of persons and thus the legislature could treat them differently. Those who didn't work at the trade were required to obtain a license. Those who did work at the trade were not.You also brought up the term "employee". There are two types of employees. An employee who follows an independent trade and is not subject to the direction or control of his employer is one type. If I employ a doctor to perform surgery on me, he is my employee and he will bill me for his services and will do things as sees fit in using his skills. The other type of employee is a servant in a master and servant relationship. That type of employee is subject to the direction and control of his employer. Now ask yourself this question. Who is more important to the construction industry - the mechanics who perform the labor or the contractor who performs none? To answer, try to visualize the construction industry with no mechanics to perform the labor. This way nothing would ever get built so that the construction industry would cease to exist. That is the proof that the construction industry is labor and all else, including contractors, are secondary and inferior to the mechanic.
*come on robert.. that's bull...<<>>before the mills in new england existed , there were no weavers... they were trained by the mill owners..before henry ford ... there were no auto workers..the history of construction is not one of unrelated mechanics getting things done.. it is a history of contractors organizing companies and hiring a labor force to get the thing built...if there were no ((contractors )) as employers, there would be no efficient means of conveying the product to the public..as it is now, there are a lot of one-man companies out there... but most work is done by companies with employees... and most mechanics (carpenters) are trained OJT by their employers.. so if you want chicken and egg.. it's contractors and employees.. many of which take their training and become independent contractors.......i also know many good companies that were created out of whole cloth by individuals who could no more swing a hammer, than i could fly a navy jet...so, the ((Contractor)) is more important than the mechanic in getting the job done....and contractors are the ones who get licensed..as do plumbers..and electricians...and master pipefitters... robert, what is your relationship to the construction trades ? do you practise law ? is your field of expertise construction law ? or are you just doing a westlaw search ?cause i still have trouble trying to figger what your point is? are you for licensing .../ or agin it ?b but hey, whadda i no ? if i wanted a house built, would i hire a carpenter, or a contractor ? which would you do ?
*Mr. Haugen,I, too, am wondering, just what is your point.Rich Beckman
*I'm glad Sonny has a headache since he started this whole discussion. Sonny if you ever start a discussion like this again the next time you come to visit me you will have to sleep in the garage.Robert, I’ve got to line up along side Mike in that while this is a lot of well considered information I don’t get what your point is? Other than the raw data you are chucking out here what are you trying to tell us? Maybe the moral of all this is if you call yourself a Contractor you can’t file a Mechanics Lien in Arizona???Or is this about the owners rights to perform his own work??? You’ve lost me; I don’t get what you’re getting at yet.To answer you questions back to me from earlier this evening: >"Do you hold yourself out to the public as someone who is skilled and will personally do the work in the capacity of a mechanic or as someone who does not have the skill of a mechanic and merely orders labor and materials on behalf of the owner as a contracting agent (contractor)?"The answer to that is BOTH. It seems to me that you’ve been implying you can be either a Contractor or a Mechanic but you can’t be both. If that was what you were getting at I don’t think that’s makes any sense. The hierarchic management models that support that kind of thinking have been dying for quite a while now. The public sees me as both a talented artisans who they want to do their project because of my trade skill set and also as a manager who can bring together and manage a wide and varied group of talented associates to get their project realized. Plus to confuse this whole thing even further for you I also perform in those same business models in the capacity of a subcontractor to a few other larger builders. What happens to what I am then? I’ve worked projects where I have subs to me and I am a sub to a sub? What the……?>"Or do you hold yourself out as someone who will order the services of contractors who will order the labor and materials furnished by mechanics and materialmen? That is another kind of contractor."I do that too and I also do that at the same time that I am doing what I’ve already mentioned so on some projects I am all three things that you have mentioned and on some projects I am just performing in one or two of those capacities. It all depends on what needs to be done to achieve my clients’ objectives whether that client is the Owner or another (Prime) Contractor.Also I happen to be an employee of Paradigm Associates, Ltd. A Company, which I just, happen to own. As owner of the Contracting Company am I not just employing myself as both a stairbuilding Mechanic at times and a Construction manager at others?Once again what are we getting at here?
*This kind of "debate for exercise" is exactly why I have never been inside a lawyer's office, and hope to never be.
*don't be that way jimbo.. lawyers offices need good cabinet work also so they can display all their law books... you're missing a golden opportunity...also.. most real estate closings take place in lawyer's offices.. and the conversation often comes around to ... who did your work...wouldn't it be great if he said ... ((jim blodgett does all my work)).... oooh.... aaaaahhh !
*I think the discussion of quality regarding liscenses vs. unliscenses contractors is really not the issue. As a quick aside, i've operated a one truck remodeling company for 8 years with a Calif. B 1 liscense. and while my experience with $150,000+ projects has been limited, i find myself called out to finish correctly the work of as many liscenses as unliscensed contractors.The real issue is public safty and the cost we all pay for it. We have all accepted that our property rights are infringed in this regard, but when dealing with state agencies it is a creeping infringement thta knows no bound. anyone care to speculate how soon the day will come when will have to pay a fee to dispose of washing machine grey water? or apply for a permit to install a dimmer switch in the bathroom? How about pay yearly property taxes on your new computer, stereo or food processor. And how about having to renew your tags on your lawnmower and wheel barrel? Who about building inspectors who can remain anonomous, or even wear masks because they 'fear for their safty"? You might find this rediculous, but such was said of much of what we accept today not very long ago either.Growing up, in school I wondered at great length at how pre-war germany could allow their secret police to reach such positions of power that it could turn on the populous so easily. As an adult i've realized that all it took was giving the populous a good reason for the infringement of their right; mostly in the form of some type of security.For myself, I've decided i will not assist the goverment in its endless intrusions into freedom and privacy; and this means really evaluating the issues that we are presented every day and assesing their long term ramifications.
*I think the discussion of quality regarding liscenses vs. unliscenses contractors is really not the issue. As a quick aside, i've operated a one truck remodeling company for 8 years with a Calif. B 1 liscense. and while my experience with $150,000+ projects has been limited, i find myself called out to finish correctly the work of as many liscenses as unliscensed contractors.The real issue is public safty and the cost we all pay for it. We have all accepted that our property rights are infringed in this regard, but when dealing with state agencies it is a creeping infringement that truly knows no bounds. anyone care to speculate how soon the day will come when will have to pay a fee to dispose of washing machine grey water? or apply for a permit to install a dimmer switch in the bathroom? How about pay yearly property taxes on your new computer, stereo or food processor. And how about having to renew your tags on your lawnmower and wheel barrel? Who about building inspectors who can remain anonomous, or even wear masks because they 'fear for their safty"? You might find this rediculous, but such was said of much of what we accept today not very long ago either.Growing up, in school I wondered at great length at how pre-war germany could allow their secret police to reach such positions of power that it could turn on the populous so easily. As an adult i've realized that all it took was giving the populous a good reason for the infringement of their right; mostly in the form of some type of security.For myself, I've decided i will not assist the goverment in its endless intrusions into freedom and privacy; and this means really evaluating the issues that we are presented every day and assesing their long term ramifications.
*Sonny, your book lists are intersting, your ideas novel and your candor refreshing.First it was the two weeks of vacation, then trading the stock market and now calling in the building inspectors.If I read this right, the customers don't know what they want, so you and your group are going to see that they get what they need. If you can't do it in the market, you will do it with bureaucracy. Incidentally, the areas where I work do not require licensing, but I am bonded and I do pull permits when necessary - and I am just an amateur. Sonny, to paraphrase that great American President, "I feel you pain", but I am at loss to suggest an alternative. It is a given of economics that just as soon as you find a profitable way to make a living, some sucker will come in and try and do it for less.Keep posting, I am still learning and I am enjoying this more and more.Dennis
*Your example of Carp A and B happens all the time in commercial cabinetry. It's not absurd.
*“THE INDIVIDUAL MAY STAND UPON HIS CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS AS A CITIZEN. HE IS ENTITLED TO CARRY ON HIS PRIVATE BUSINESS IN HIS OWN WAY. HIS POWER TO CONTRACT IS UNLIMITED.” HALE vs. HENKEL, 201 U.S. 43 at 74 The general misconception is that any statute passed by legislators bearing the appearance of law (such as laws saying I cannot enter into a contract with my neighbor without applying to the state for a license to do so) constitutes a valid law, this is not true. Listen to what the Sixteenth American Jurisprudence (a commentary on the law) has to say.“The general rule is that an unconstitutional statute, though having the form and name of law, is in reality no law, but is wholly void, and ineffective for any purpose; since unconstitutionality dates from the time of its enactment, and not merely from the date of the (court) decision so branding it. An unconstitutional law, in legal contemplation, is as inoperative as if it had never been passed.”“Since an unconstitutional law is void, the general principles follow that it imposes no duties, confers no rights, creats no office, bestows no power or authority on anyone, affords no protection, and justifies no acts performed under it . . . . . . no one is bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce it.” Sixteenth American Jurisprudence Second Edition, Section 256“BECAUSE OF WHAT APPEARS TO BE A LAWFUL COMMAND ON THE SURFACE, MANY CITIZENS, BECAUSE OF THEIR RESPECT FOR WHAT ONLY APPEARS TO BE LAW, ARE CUNNINGLY COERCED INTO WAIVING THEIR RIGHTS DUE TO IGNORANCE.” U.S. VS, MINKER 350 U.S. 179 at 187 “THE CLAIM AND EXERCISE OF A CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT CANNOT BE CONVERTED INTO A CRIME” MILLER vs. U.S. 230 F 486 at 489“THERE CAN BE NO SANCTION OR PENALTY IMPOSED UPON ONE BECAUSE OF HIS EXERCISE OF CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS.” SHERAR vs. CULLEN 481 F 2d 946The right to contract is set in stone at Article I Section 10 of the Constitution. Article one Section 10 has not been amended or repealed, it is still binding on the States. What don't we understand about the supreme law of the land.
*Handyman, pertaining to your last question for my anyway,is taht I'm neither a scholar of our Constitution nor the Supreme Court. Apparently, many state legislatures are not either.However, guess what happens if I let my license go inactive and get nailed by my county or state? They in turn will tell me, after me advising them of your posts, to retain an attorney of the highest order who specializes in Constitutional Law, to plead my case to the Supreme Court. At 58 and with one foot already in the grave, think I'll still be alive when my case is heard, if the Supreme Court even agrees to hear it. Meanwhile, I'll "effectively" be out of business. Mmmmmm. Maybe I can get NARI and NAHB to pay my legal fees. After all, it will be a precedent setting case.I can just see the headlines now: "In Florida vs. Lykos, Lykos claims protection under the Constitution regarding licensing requirement to build the tallest building in Florida." Now all I need are investors!
*Sonny, you're right, in all practicality it is next to impossible to resist the loss of liberty we experience. Probably only one out of 10,000 people are in a position and have the make up to attempt such a workstyle. I contracted with a state contractors license for 15 years, when I mailed my license back to the state in a certified letter, telling them I no longer wished to use their 'permission to work' I included a paragraph telling them that I would now be working under Article 1 section 10 (as above) that was about 8 years ago.Also it is true that to build a building that is designed for use by the public, it does make sense that a government agency oversee and regulate the contractors involved for the safty of the public. For that reason my work is necessarily limited to private residential work.On the other hand we should all be aware of the principles of law I mentioned in my first post if only for the reason that it gives us a better understanding of where a homeowner or ocassional contractor are coming from when they try to exercise a forgotton freedom in the present era. By the way that forgotton freedom is 'working with out asking the state for permission to do so, or altering my own home without asking the local authorities for permis
*To Mark Maynard and Handy ManMark. California licensing laws for contractors are unconstitutional and I will tell you why. The Arizona Supreme Court declared a city of Tucson ordinance unconstitutional which had the following features: Under the ordinance, no electrical contractor could do any electrical installation in the city of Tucson except under the supervision of a licensed supervising electrician. If the contractor was an individual, the supervising electrician could be the individual or someone employed by him. If the contractor was a firm, the supervising electrician could be a member of the firm or someone employed by the firm. If the contractor was a corporation, the supervising electrician could be an officer of the corporation or someone employed by the corporation. All contractors, whether individuals, firms or corporations had to obtain a certificate of registration as a contractor. In other words, all electrical installation was to be done under the supervision of a licensed supervising electrician who must be the holder of a certificate of registration as a contractor or an employee of a certificate holder. This was declared discriminatory and invalid as well as a few choice other expletives. Compare to California law for electrical contractors. Instead of a certificate of registration, a contractor, whether individual, firm or corporation must obtain a license. All electrical work must be done under the supervision of the individual who is the "qualifying party" for the license. Such qualifying party if the contractor is an individual can be the individual or his "responsible managing employee". If the contractor is a firm, the qualifying party can be a member of the firm or a "responsible managing employee". If the contractor is a corporation, the qualifying party can be an officer of the corporation or a "responsible managing employee". This is the same scheme declared unconstitutional and void in the Tucson case (City of Tucson v. Stewart, 45 Ariz. 36, 40 P2d 72, 96 A.L.R. 1492).Notice that in California law, a person can qualify for someone else's license by taking the exam. But he cannot qualify for his own license unless he takes the exam, pays a fee and posts a bond. In other words, it is discriminatory against him. Why all the extra burdens of fee and bond if for your own license and only the exam if qualifying for someone else's license? These are the questions that courts ask. Suppose we apply this same principle to doctors and make the law as follows: To practice surgery, every surgeon shall obtain a license in one of two ways - either attend medical school yourself and pass medical exams or hire someone else to go to medical school and take the exams for you. Which surgeon would you choose to go to?Handy man. Bravo. It was said by one learned judge that if courts allowed these licensing schemes to take root, it would be but a short time before a man would have to purchase a license from some board or commission before he could earn his daily bread. It is true that every person has the right to make contracts in his occupation. This has been stated so many times by courts that it is redundant. The City of Tucson case cited earlier said the same thing. The only thing the state or city may do is prevent you from following the occupation unless licensed. Once a doctor is licensed, he is free to make contracts in that occupation in that jurisdiction. If not licensed, he cannot follow that occupation and therefore cannot make contracts in that occupation. Therefore, if there is legitimate contractor licensing, without the license the occupation cannot be followed at all.
*Robert and to Handy Man, it seems your legal definitions fit my interpretations of PA as a "Right to Work" state, as stated previous. I say push it, and be backed by building to code, and recieving all the needed inspections. If a license just means the check cleared, it's worthless. Jeff
*Jeff; you've mentioned 'right to work' a few times. I'm not a lawyer, but my understanding about right to work is that it refers specifically to mandatory union membership (if you are in a RTW state, union membership is strictly voluntary. You can't lose access to employment because you don't want to sign up). It doesn't have anything to do with trade certification and following licensing regulations as defined by the governing authority. If I'm wrong about this, let me know.You and Ryan have been the most vocal opponents of a more regulated system. James has also spoken up, but he's supported his position with examples and a reasoning; I don't necessarily agree with him, but all I hear from you guys is reaction: "it's un-American"..."doesn't seem right"..."what about my freedom?" In what way are any freedoms intruded upon by requiring that people who propose to do work for money prove they are competent to do that work to an objective standard (like in any other important occupation?) Or by requiring that anyone who is going to call themselves a contractor prove (by passing some form of test) that they have both trade knowledge and the financial stability to finish what they start? The requirements described by Peter above seem really fair to me, especially the formula limiting the size of a contract based on the contractors resources; there is nothing there to prevent anyone moving on to larger and larger contracts, so how is anyones freedom limited?This is what I believe:*it starts at the trade level. If you want to work in a trade, prove it by getting some form of basic training. The apprenticeship system (in school theory + a larger percentage of job site experience + passing an objective test) is the best way of transferring knowledge to entrylevel tradesmen I've seen. Not perfect, but the best I've seen. In Canada, it is considered important to the good of the nation, so apprentices claim unemployment insurance when they are doing the in school part (usually during the off season).* I would like to see all the trades regulated, instead of just some; you want to call yourself a carpenter, train as a carpenter. Will there be some crossover on job sites (a carpenter doing a simple plumbing job for example)? Of course, but in general carpenters do carpentry, plumbers do plumbing, cabinetmakers do cabinets.* we need real licensing for contractors (I agree with you on this point; if it is just a money grab, it's worthless). But it's worth having if it ensures that people in the business, trading with the public, actually have the know how and to do the job and enough financial credibility to protect the consumer. Licensing programs should accomodate the little guy moving up.* hand in hand with licensing, is certification programs for contractors that focus on financial management and business issues (in my perfect world, anybody at this stage would already be trade qualified). An example of this is are the courses run by the RITC (Regional Industrial Training Coucil) in my area; they have a Certified Housing Professional (heavy on money/legal/business practice)program. There are also Builder Certification courses, site supervision courses, Building Analyst courses, Renovation management: all kinds of accessible, affordable training that is geared to raising the standard of profesionalism in the industry, for tradesmen who like most of us, find ourselves running a business, with no specific training for it, and no time to go to university to learn the basics that people in other industries take for granted. BTW, the traditional trade sytem still practised in Europe requires two years of business training past the journeyman level before you are allowed to hang out a shingle. That seems about right, to me.* the final part of the equation would be voluntary membership in industry associations, that would support everything I described above, and dictate a level of service and ethical dealings with the public that might do something to drag all our reputations out of the mud. I don't have much to say about that that hasn't already been said here.So that's where I stand (and I'll shut up after this); the free market guys will call me an elitist (I am; I think we are in elite occupations), or an idealist (I'm that too). This system doesn't have to be expensive, restricting to the individual, or limit anyones opportunities. It is in fact in place and working in many places.But you guys are obviously threatened by this, and I can't understand why any honest capable tradesman would find this in any way threatening. So enlighten me.
*If I'm opposed to something, it has to be because it threatens me?I'm opposed to lots of things that don't effect me at all.I think I've been clear. I'm opposed to any government agency telling any person how they can or can't make a living. I'm opposed to the government telling any person what they can or cant buy or from whom.And, every government regulation eventually creates paperwork and taxes that bog down business even more than it already is. The less government in my life, the better off I am.Besides, governments take on programs for only two reasons. 1) Put money in the state coffers. 2) Put money in the legislator's pockets or the pockets of friends and aquaintances.I believe in the free market.
*actually.... ryan.. licensing usually comes to each state because the public demands it and the homebuilder's association has an about-face and decides to support it..when those two things happen in your state.. you'll have licensing.....
*As a U.S. citizen, I can only speak for what applies in this country. If you have ever read my posts, I cite cases that have been decided by courts of authority (U.S. Supreme Court, state Supreme Courts, etc.). Our constitutional laws take precedence over our emotions. I shall here quote from the Supreme Court of Wisconsin (Winkler v. Benzenberg, 101 Wis. 172, 76 N.W. 345): "Under moder systems of house building and disposal of sewage, the dangers to the health of the entire public, arising from defective plumbing, are so great, and at the same time so insidious, that were the state unable to provide for the proper regulation and supervision of the plumber in his work, so as to minimize the danger to the public health from the escape of sewer gas, the state would certainly be unable to protect the public life and health in a most important particular. This power may be exercised by the legislature by demanding practical knowledge of his business on the part of the plumber, or it may be done by requiring inspection and supervision of his work by experts, or by both means combined; and, when such regulations are brought before the courts, the question simply is whether they are really appropriate and reasonable measures for the promotion of the public health and safety, and hence are a valid exercise of the police power, or whether they go further than this, and unreasonably invade the right of the citizen to pursue a lawful business, under the guise of a police regulation. ... The fourteenth amendment to the federal constitution requires that no state shall deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. In the language quoted with approval in the case of Bittenhaus v. Johnston, 92 Wis. 588, on page 596, it is required "that all persons subject to such legislation shall be treated alike, under like circumstances and conditions, both in the privileges conferred and in the liabilities imposed." Under the law before us, it seems entirely clear that there is discrimination in favor of firms and corporations as against a plumber doing business alone. The plain meaning and effect of the law is that several plumbers may form a partnership or corporation, and all engage in practical plumbing, when only one of their number has obtained, or is perhaps able to obtain, a certificate of competency. Thus, three or four incompetent plumbers may associate themselves with another who has a certificate, and become thus enabled to do business, while a man perfectly competent, but doing business alone, must go through an examination and obtain a certificate. This is certainly discrimination between persons under the same circumstances and conditions. It grants special privileges to members of a firm or corporation, and imposes special restrictions upon persons engaged in the same business, who wish to prosecute their business alone. The supreme court of Ohio has recently held, in a well-considered opinion, that this same provision constitutes discriminating legislation, and that an act substantially like the one before us was on that account void. State v. Gardner, supra. In this conclusion we entirely agree."In a similar case (Henry v. Campbell, 133 Ga. 882, 67 S.E. 390) the Supreme Court of Georgia said: "Giving the ordinance this construction, the conclusion is inevitable that it is discriminatory, for the reason that under its provisions one who is not a member of a firm or corporation, before engaging in or working at the business of plumbing, would have to stand an examination and obtain the license; whereas one who is a member of a firm, and the corporation through officials other than the manager thereof, could engage in or work at the business of plumbing without having stood the examination and obtained the license, if some other member of the firm, or the manager of the corporation, in the case of a corporation, had stood the examination and obtained a license."These decisions and others have set the precedents for equal treatment concerning licensing. However, there are other issues to consider. Most of you are advocating for licensing and regulation under what is known, in U.S. law, as the police power. In declaring a Maryland statute requiring licenses of paper hangers in the city of Baltimore unconstitutional, the court said: "The art of paper hanging is one that requires manual dexterity, skill, and some experience. It differs in that respect not at all from other similar occupations, such as house painting, carpentry, stone cutting, bricklaying, horseshoeing, repairing machinery, wood carving, plastering, and the like, which men have from time immemorial followed without regulation or interference as a matter of common right and which have no substantial relation to the public health or safety. ... There must of necessity be somewhere a limit to the right of the state to regulate the common useful and harmless activities of life beyond which the state may not go without those guarantees, and this statute has passed that limit." (Dasch v. Jackson, 170 Md. 251, 183 A. 534)While at first blush it may seem logical to demand licensing for tradesmen, such is more an emotional response. When tempered with the wisdom of the constitution, we must accede to the supreme law of our land.
*Robert ....you are in the receding minority of people who consider this issue one which is beyond the ken of public health and safety...as you quoted ((There must of necessity be somewhere a limit to the right of the state to regulate the common useful and harmless activities of life beyond which the state may not go without those guarantees, and this statute has passed that limit." (Dasch v. Jackson, 170 Md. 251, 183 A. 534) I reiterate... when the public demands.... and the trades involved, or the leadership thereof, accede..then you will have licensing and inspection in your state..as in so many others, including mine...and the courts will find that this is constitutional...you fly in the face of reality when you deny this...b but hey , whadda i no ?
*MikeI live in a state (Arizona) that has contractor licensing statutes. As a carpenter however, I am not interested in acting as the property owner's agent. Our statutes say that no person shall act as an agent without obtaining a contractor's license. When the contractor is the agent, the property owner is his principle. Our mechanics' lien laws also state that all contractors and subcontractors are agents of the owner. No contractor or subcontractor ever has to pay for labor or materials. Being a contractor is the most risk-free occupation there is. How complex can it be? Instead of the property owner choosing who will work on his property, he pays someone else to choose and then pays the bills of the men who do the work. When a property owner hires a carpentry contractor, the carpenters employed by the carpentry contractor are not his employees. The carpenters are employees of the property owner but not in the capacity of servants. In the construction industry, carpenters are independent tradesmen (that's why they are called journeymen). If I employ a doctor to render service to me, he is my employee. But I do not give him a paycheck with taxes deducted and pay workmen's compensation. Nor do I tell him how to perform his occupation. And when he is done he will bill me. The same goes for lawyers, CPA's and others. By Arizona law, all carpenters bill for there labor. They can purchase workman's compensation if they desire but it is not mandatory. Personally I would not care if the state required licenses of carpenters. I am tired of always having to teach someone else how to do things. They can't figure out how to do backing angles for hip roofs, they don't know how to build stairs, they don't know how to do curved work, they don't know how to do the mathematics for arches and ellipses, and on and on and on.
*rob.. independent contractors paid directly by the owner? the irs must love that.. sounds like a bunch of poor sods twisting in the wind... AND they can purchase WorkmensComp ins if they want.. how wonderful !lemme guess.. the average worker in AZ is NOT covered by Workmen's Comp...so much for independence and the right to live free... we're really talking about the right to exploit the average worker....and the homewowner probably never knows if his back is covered either..is this worker insured ?is he paying his withholding taxes.. is the IRS going to come after me for non-payment of withholding taxes ?what a mess.. and i probably don't understand ..OK straighten me out.. how do you build a custom home in AZ ? do i hire a Gen Contractor ?does he buy the materials ?does he hire the subs ?come on Rob.. in the real every day world of AZ.. how in the hell does anything of consequence get built ?what's going on.. are there 49 states and then there's AZ ?you guys just can't be operating that much differently.. you've got me really confused now...b but then, what else is nu ?
*MikeWho withholds taxes and pays workman's comp. for you?Do you withhold taxes and pay workman's compensation when you employ a doctor, a dentist or an attorney? When a mechanic opens a one man garage do his customers withhold taxes and pay workman's compensation? Are they exploited?You seem to be implying that any person who works at a construction trade must receive a paycheck with taxes deducted and workman's comp. paid. Why can't carpenters and painters operate an independent occupation like a doctor or a lawyer? Is there some sort of secret code that says a doctor can operate an independent profession but carpenters cannot? Try telling a doctor you will give him a check with taxes deducted.Read the federal Miller Act pertaining to federal government projects. All the mechanics must be paid in cash. In Arizona, under what is called the Little Miller Act pertaining to state projects, the law states specifically that the mechanics shall bill the state for their labor and the material suppliers shall bill the state for the materials supplied. I will bet your state law says the same thing pertaining to state projects. Our statutes use phrases such as independent trade or profession. Obviously if they use these phrases they envision independent tradesmen. Our statutes also use phrases such as "whenever a governmental body awards a contract for labor or a contract for materials either directly or through a contractor for the construction of a building". This language seems clear to me. For government projects in state, contractors are required by statute to award contracts to material suppliers whose products are manufactured in state so long as they are within 5% of the low cost bidder. Since the state is paying for labor and materials, they are willing to pay extra to keep it in state. What does it hurt the contractor? He doesn't have to pay.
*I'm not a scholar of American constitutional law (not by a long shot). But the apprenticeship system of trade certification was the norm in the US when the constitution was written, and didn't die out for a generation or two after 1776, and that was more due to a shortage of mastercraftsmen and the industrial revolution than any constitutional issues, as far as I know. Paul Revere would have trained in that system. As far as the law goes, your law is based on Common Law, and all the other countries with legal systems based on it (Britain, Canada, Australia, etc) have trade certification and contractor licensing, at least to some degree. I find the argument against licensing much more based in emotion than the pro side.
*robert..you didn't read my post.. you're just getting exercised... .. i pay the withholding for me.. for my men.. and for their insurance premiums too....i did it as a sole proprietor.. and now my corporation does it for all of us..and as a matter of fact.. anyone i pay more than $600 to is supposed to get a 1099 from me....do the homeowners inAZ. send 1099's to everyone who works on their home.. of course not.. so who is in violation...someone is..and don't talk about the constitutinality of taxes.. or the irs.... or i'll start thinking i'm discussing this topic with some survivalist..is that the case , Robert ?do your views represent the majority of the construction trades in AZ.?..i asked you who reassures the homeowner that the irs isn't going to come after him for uncollected withholding tax...if he is the direct employer.. then he becomes liable..the strategy of the irs is that someone is responsible....if they can't get it from the carpenter (""independent contractor"") then they go after the guy signing the checks.... even if it takes years to straighten out... the homeowner will wind up in tax court..if the roofer falls off the roof .. and he doesn't have Workmen's Comp insurance.. and he's laying in bed , a quadrapelegic, with a wife, five kids, and a million dollar hospital and medical bill..... who is his personal Injury lawyer going after..?the guy who signed the check....either you are blowing smoke .. or the great state of AZ is considerably behind the times.. like a 100 years.. and no.. the state of RI doesn't have <<<<<<<Read the federal Miller Act pertaining to federal government projects. All the mechanics must be paid in cash. In Arizona, under what is called the Little Miller Act pertaining to state projects, the law states specifically that the mechanics shall bill the state for their labor and the material suppliers shall bill the state for the materials supplied. I will bet your state law says the same thing pertaining to state projects. >>>>>a little Miller Act , nor do i believe that workers on federal projects are paid in cash, and i bet that on state projects in AZ. they don't have each individual carpenter billing the state for the work...where do you get this stuff.. just because it's written down in some obscure text, doesn't mean that is how it is actually implemented...I think you are misinterpreting what you are reading..or you are applying a few individual cases to the general state of affairs in AZ..you have certainly not convinced me that you know what you are talking about....b but i been wrong before..
*Mike The U.S. code which comprises the laws of the Unitrd States is not an obscure text. It is current U.S. law. That is where you will see that it states in plain English that the mechanics employed shall be paid in cash using the word cash and stating that there shall be no deductions. Go read it.Somebody has to charge the government for the labor performed on government projects. I am the only one who can charge for my labor. I have never authorized anybody else to do so. It would really be a strange world if a property owner could go to you Mike and say "I would like Robert to do some carpentry work on my property. How much will you charge me for his labor?" Do you think that would be a legally binding contract on me. If I didn't do the work could you be sued for breach of contract? Could you then sue me on the grounds that you charged the property owner for my labor and then I didn't do the work?
*THE MILLER ACTIn the United States, the law requiring contract surety bonds on federal construction projects is known as the Miller Act(1935).This law requires a contractor on a federal project to post two bonds: a performance bond and a labor and material paymentbond. The surety company issuing these bonds must be listed as a qualified surety on the Treasury List, which the U.S.Department of the Treasury issues each year.The Miller Act provides that, before a contract that exceeds $100,000 in amount for the construction, alteration, or repair ofany building or public work of the United States is awarded to any person, that person shall furnish the United States with thefollowing:1.) A performance bond in an amount that the contracting officer regards as adequate for the protection of the United States.The bond amount is normally 100 percent of the contract price.2.) A separate payment bond for the protection of suppliers of labor and materials. The sum of the payment bond is equal to 50percent of the contract price when the contract is less than $l-million and 40 percent when the contract is from 1-million to$5-million. Contracts in excess of $5-million require a payment bond in the amount of $2.5-million.The Miller Act payment bond covers subcontractors and suppliers of material who have direct contracts with the primecontractor. These are called first-tier claimants. Subcontractors and material suppliers who have contracts with a subcontractor,but not those who have contracts with a supplier, are also covered and are called second-tier claimants.Anyone further down the contract chain is considered too remote and cannot assert a claim against a Miller Act payment bondposted by the contractor.A subcontractor or supplier who has a direct contract with the prime contractor has no duty to provide any notice to the primecontractor before filing a suit on the bond.When the claimant is a second-tier subcontractor or material supplier, however, formal notice must be given to the primecontractor within 90 days of the last date the claimant furnished labor or materials for the project.The final step in perfecting a claim on a payment bond is filing a lawsuit. For both first and second-tier claimants, suit must befiled no sooner than 90 days after the last labor and material were furnished and no later than one year after that date.Many states in the U. S. have adapted the Miller Act for use at the state level. These state statutes are known as "Little MillerActs. "
*I don't pretend to be following the subtleties of this arguement (or even the main points!), but in many contexts, "cash" is considered to include "checks". So the federal government is paying "cash" when they send a check.Still curious as to what is the point of all this discussion....Rich Beckman
*My head hurts.
*Robert.. i just gotta believe that you are not the norm for the way construction contracts are administered in AZ...if you don't believe me.. find a knowledgeable lawyer in your jurisdiction and discuss contracts and construction with him/her...they can point out to you , much better than i, where you have gone astray in your interpretations..and how the courts have decided these cases on an ongoing basis...the things you describe as being the ((law of the land)) are not the way contracts or contracting is administered in the US...sorry 'bout dat
*Sign me Ryan....I totally agree w/ your stated philosophy!near the stream watching the rain fall for days...aj
*Sonny...life presents itself through "your eyes" to you...If you see this....i "I'm tired of being thought of as in the same "pot" as the proverbial used salesman-untrustworthy..."....as we all have...then...there is a solution....Stop...Only allow yourself to see..."It sure is satisfying to have built up a clientelle that really respects me, likes me persinally, and is just a pleasure to get a call from..."Aim for what you want...you'll amaze yourself at the results...near the dripping and the stream,aj
*Sign me JRS....the freedom of rural living is granted to you and your neighbors...so suck up,or exercise your right to sell and move!near the stream,aj
*Skil????? it was my first circle saw and drill way back in the seventies, and they were berry berry good to me...Now maybe Sears or Black and Decker DIY lines!!!near the stream,aj
*Rick....You must make one bad neighbor.....When we buy land in the USA, it is yours to do what's allowed...not what your neighbor think's is good or bad....Yeah, if ya want to suck up to your neighbors, then don't piss em off...but please don't live next ot me....please....near the stream buying my adjoining lots so as to use my free choice to control the adjoining lots...aj
*Rediculous Sonny...How live is Romex with tape on the wire?...Nothing will ever happen unless rats eat it up!!!....Thank fully here we have not that problem and we have no licensing at all....And we have very few decks collapsing, electrical fires, etc....Amazing!!!????near the stream,aj
*Sonny...if cutting one cable makes a condo fall down and go boom then the architect sucks cause he isn't designing in future human use and misuse is he!!!!near the stream living with humans cause they're more fun than machines...aj
*So much to learn...Sonny I have been "inspected" over the phone or had a car salesman who just got a job as a eletric inspector pass me on an underground service rewire that I did my way cause the electric company rep (female and new too) had whacky ideas....More...One of our towns has a reputation for being real tough...Well every new home I have been in has local style wiring and plumbing easy to view in the basement and none of it is legal...romex stapled on romex...stapled too close to edges, plumbing that is over or undersloped, cleanouts stupidly installed, crazy drops or lack of, venting that makes no sense at all..and on and on...but most of that kind of stuff will function in use and after all it is the way everyone does it...There is no apprentiship in the US and that's really what needs to be made mandatory including biannual recertification ala the healthcare industry and real estate sales..etc...near the stream...now ya got me going...aj
*Mike, Rich, Jerold and Jim....Wow do I agree but haven't got a headache yet Sonny....Robert...interesting reading but what gives man????]near the stream and thinking of tossing you in it!ajbut do tell us more!
*Mike SmithJust got finished reading Rhode Islands statutes pertaining to the licensing of electrical contractors and the licensing of journeyman electricians (title 5, chapter 6) as well as the licensing of plumbing contractors and the licensing of journeyman plumbers (title 5, chapter 20). Chapter 6 divides electricians into 2 classes - contractors on the one hand and journeymen on the other. Under the provisions of the chapter no electrical contractor can do any actual electrical work. Electrical work is to be done by licensed journeyman electricians.The provisions of the chapter require all electrical contractors, whether person, firm or corporation to obtain a license. In the case of a firm, one member of the firm is to be designated as the contractor and in the case of a corporation, a corporate officer is to be designated as the contractor.Chapter 6 requires all journeyman electricians to obtain a license.Chapter 20 requires the licensing of plumbing contractors and the licensing of journeyman plumbers in the same manner as chapter 6 does for electrical contractors and journeyman electricians. Again, the plumbing contractor is forbidden from doing any actual plumbing work. On all projects undertaken by the plumbing contractor, the actual master plumber (plumbing contractor) must be present at all times to supervise the individuals, firms and corporations who perform the actual plumbing work. All individual journeymen, as well as all the journeymen who have formed firms and corporations must be licensed.This is identical legislation to a city of Memphis ordinance which was declared to be constitutional in the case of State ex rel. Grantham v. City of Memphis, 151 Tenn. 1, 266 S.W. 1038. In that case the city of Memphis required all master plumbers (plumbing contractors) and all journeyman plumbers to obtain a license. As in your legislation, the master plumber who obtained the license was required to supervise. As has been stated before by courts of authority, the provision for supervision is essential to the validity of the legislation for the licensing of contractors.
*dear Robert... where is this going ?I knew all that ... it has been explained to me for twenty-five years by my plumbing and electrical sub-contractors..now.. why don't you look up the RI Contractors Registration Law.. and the most recent amendments to the Workmen's Compensation enableing legislation....then take a deep breath.. and draw up a flow chart..describe to yourself what it is you want to convey to this thread... and then make your points to support that goal...hey... Robert.. i ever need someone to research a legal question for me... what's your rate?do you have access to Westlaw ?another little twist in RI is the Lien laws... especially the provision for having to give written notice in our contracts that we have the right the to file a lien if payment is not made....then we can get into Massachusetts law.... they love to use a lot of words and multi-references..hah, hah,hah
*Mike SmithThe point has now been settled. The original post by Sonny was a complaint that journeymen were performing labor without having first been licensed as contractors and they were performing shoddy work. As your own statutes show, since contractors do not do construction work they can do it neither poorly nor well. And just as your statutes point out, why would a journeyman need a contractors license. It is only journeymen (mechanics) who do good or bad work.
*..i told you .. and i told you..but you just don't get itread the RI Contractors Registration LawContractors do construction work in RI... as a matter of fact.. if you do construction work... you ARE a contractor.. that is the meaning of the law.. don't confuse the issue by applying the term journeyman used in plumbing and electrical...you are a danger to yourself , Robert, you keep applying the specific to the general..you can't see the forest for the trees... buddy
*This is a great discussion....At the end I hope we all learn something....but I'm not sure what yet!near the stream scratching my head and chuckling all at once.aj
*aj... it MIGHT stop raining and this will never get finished.....hah, hah, hah
*Said the plantation owner to the legislator after passage of the 13th amendment abolishing slavery and involuntary servitude: "My whole labor force is going to be taken away. I used to put my slaves to work building barns and houses for the townspeople. I made good money charging for their labor. Deny them the right to work for themselves unless they get a license and post a bond. But make an exception and let them work as my servants without a license so I can still profit from their labor. I'll pay a license fee to the state if you can just keep my slaves from going out and working for themselves."
*robert... don't be making stupid inferences....i've spent twenty-five years providing good wages and good working conditions for my employees... just because you don't have the nerve to meet a payroll every week for twenty-five years is no reason to be dragging others down....now read the RI Contractors Registration Law... and the Mass.Building Code...
*Robert:Maybe you're got something to say but I can't figure it out. For the rest of us, could you sum up your point in a few sentences. If it takes more than five sentences, you'll have lost me again.
*I agree with Ryan.And I used to think the vent/no vent argument took a lot of reading to stay caught up on. At least there was plenty of humor there.Rich Beckman
*so rich.... the rabbi and the priest had a cillision at the intersection.. and after a few heated words.. they both decided that each one was a little at fault..so the rabbi went to his trunk and took out a bottle of ceremonial wine... and offered the priest a drink...the priest took a nice long pull and passed it over to the rabbi.. here ! here's to understanding.........oh, no.. i'll have one after the police get here...
*LOL! Those priests are always ready to take "a nice long pull" from a bottle of ceremonial wine!Thanks, Mike.Rich Beckman
*The Rhode Island mechanics' lien law identifies 4 classes of persons who shall be entitled to liens. They are contractors, subcontractors, materialmen and laborers (carpenters, masons, painters, etc.).Rhode Islands contractor registration laws require all contractors to be registered unless such contractor is an employee of a registered contractor.Since all contractors are entitled to a lien, registered contractors as well as unregistered contractors who are employees of registered contractors are entitled to the lien. If the property owner does not pay the unregistered contractors who are employees of the registered contractors, the unregistered contractors may impose a lien on his property. A lien can only be imposed if there be some debt to be secured by the lien. There can be no debt unless there is some sort of contract - either express or implied. Therefore the unregistered employee contractors must have some sort of contract with the property owner or they wouldn't be entitled to the lien. It seems that the unregistered contractors who are employees of registered contractors are in the best position. As employees of a registered contractor there employer must pay them since employers must pay their employees. Simultaneously, they are entitled to a lien if the property owner does not pay them. The plain meaning of the lien law is that all contractors shall have the lien. There is no language stating that unregistered contractors who are employees of registered contractors shall not have the lien.There is however no definition of employee. The statutes do not say whether the employee is a servant contractor or an independent contractor. The statutes do not make this distinction. However, it would seem to me that all unregistered employee contractors would rather be independent contractors than servant contractors. When they are hired as employees of registered contractors, who decides whether it will be independent or servant status?
*AnonymousThanks for the information. Here is a question I have. If the unregistered contractors are required by statute to be employees of registered contractors, then it is not a free will relationship, but rather a statutory mandate. Without free will there can be no legal contract between the registered and unregistered contractors. How do they determine how much the employee gets paid. I think this would be interesting in a court of law. The unregistered guy wants to be paid and uses the argument that it is a statutory mandate that he be an employee. As such there is no contractual agreement between the parties. On the other hand, the registered guy by accepting the service he knows is not voluntary is liable to pay his compulsory employee. Does the registered guy try to use the argument that they came to a meeting of the minds? There can't be a meeting of the minds if the relationship is compulsory and not voluntary.
*hey...robert... read the law.. there is no compulsory to it... if you want to be an independent contractor.. you get a license and Gen'l. Liability insurance..if you'd rather not.. you go to work for someone who does.. and they have the Liability Insurance... and THEY are required to have W.C. ins. also..if they hire on.. they are an (((at will)) employee..and you know what that means....
*He probably does know what it mean (((at will))) but he'll quote some statute or case and obfuscate the definition.
*MikeSince it is not your property these men will be working on, why should they be employees of some third party? After all, the lien law states that every person shall have a lien. That makes all persons creditors of the property owner and the property owner the debtor to all persons who improve his property.If these unregistered men have a lien, they are giving credit to the property owner. Shouldn't the creditor give the credit upon his own terms?
*The Supreme Court Of Georgia defined master plumbers and employing plumbers to be one and the same, and to be those who did not hold themselves out as personally doing the work, but as contracting to furnish the material and to do the work through others, while journeyman plumbers were defined to be those skilled in the business and holding themselves out as able and willing to do the work themselves. (Felton v. City of Atlanta, 4 Ga. App. 183, 61 S.E. 27) The same definition was used by the Texas legislature. (Trewitt v. City of Dallas, 242 S.W. 1073)"There is a well-recognized difference between a master plumber and a journeyman plumber ... the latter is one who does the actual work of plumbing." (State v. Malory, 168 La. 742, 123 So. 310)"This creates a distinct class to be dealt with by the law, and is founded upon the distinction between the persons who actually perform the work of plumbing (journeymen) and those who merely contract to do plumbing and employ other persons to do the work, the latter class being the employing or master plumbers." (City of Louisville v. Coulter, 177 Ky. 242, 197 S.W. 819)In New York the distinction between a master plumber and a journeyman was that a journeyman performed plumbing work while a master plumber proposed to have the work done by journeyman plumbers under his direction. (People v. Warden of City Prison, 144 N.Y. 529, 39 N.E. 686)"The ordinance in question by its terms is made applicable only to those who are engaged in the contracting business in the electrical field, whether they be individuals, partnerships, or corporations. It thus recognizes a distinction between contractors in this line and journeymen. The council therefore, acting in its legislative capacity, duly created two classes - contractors on the one hand, and journeymen on the other." (City of Milwaukee v. Rissling, 184 Wis. 517, 199 N.W. 61)A contractor is a person who awards contracts to others either directly or through an agent. In the construction of buildings there are but two necessities - labor and materials. Labor is furnished by journeymen (mechanics) and materials are furnished by materialmen. These necessities must be contracted for by either the property owner or his agent. When the property owner negotiates his own contracts, then the property owner is the contractor. When the property owner hires someone else to negotiate contracts on his behalf, then that agent is the contractor.If you don't get it by now you never will.
*look bozos... from time immemorial... builders have organized as employers and employees... it is all by free association.. since the fourteenth amendment.. what is this exercise you are engaged in...?do you want to be an independent contractor.. be one... stop acting like employers are somehow unconstitutional...or that the legislatures don't have the right to regulate business for the common good...if you don't want licensing.. go somewhere that it is not in existence .. and pay close attention because it will follow you....i like it... my men like it.. they make better wages than before licensing became law...their wives like it.. their husbands are covered by Workmen's Comp.. and protected by the labor laws of the state.. the IRS likes it..because it is easier to track hidden income.. consumers like it , they have more security.. real employees... working for real employers.. are covered by state unemployment insurance.. which is a tax on the employer....they are covered by Temporary Disability Insurance.. for non-job related disabilities.. they are covered by Social Security..none of these things are available to the Independent Contractor, unless he incorporates as a one-man corporation.. except of course Social Security, where he pays double...... or to the Underground Employee.. the ones paid off the books... what socially redeeming position do you claim ?can you take on the type of project you want.. if you don't have employees ?are you going to hire subs ? will you get the same consistent product ?if you don't want the responsibility of being a good employer.. don't take it.. but don't put the slam on me...if you don't like it .. more power to you .. just stop acting like you can talk it out of existence..you can't
*Mike; nod...smile...back slowly to the door...avoid eye contact...keep smiling
*psssst ! (do ya think they're packin, adrian ?)sure hope they didn't take offense.. er was that ..a fence...hmmmm
*Suppose there is one and only one carpenter. If this were true he has a monopoly. How could he possibly wind up being the employee of some person who is not the property owner?Now if another person wants to compete against him, he can become a carpenter. There will be equal competition. If another wants to compete, there will be 3 competitors. No matter how many carpenters there are, each has the same rights as the others. The legislature cannot say that by purchasing a license from the state, some carpenters can have more rights than others. To do so would mean that the state took away rights so that all did not have the same rights.To do so constitutes a taking of property since labor is property. When the state takes property they are supposed to pay compensation. The license is a personal right to follow a given occupation. All within the occupation have the same rights as the others. It is arrogant to think that you have more rights than someone else of the same occupation.Wake up. Smell the f____ng coffee.
*so sue me.....it's a jungle out there... and if the state wants to impose a little order.. that's tough on you....carpenters and all the other contractors walk a little taller.. and feel a little more secure since that law went into effect..and the builder's association argued about it for twenty years.. mostly held back by the large companies.....the ((leadership)) of the association..that attitude didn't change until the 'boomers took over..so what rock you hidin under?.... anonymouse
*CORRECTION!!!Licenses, whether trade, drivers, medical, marriage or business licenses and NOT "rights". They are "privileges". Everyone does however, have the "right" to apply for one, and will obtain one if they meet their respective requirements.Furthermore, ownership of a license - any license - carries something else that is foreign to many people - responsibilities! And once one acquires a license, s/he, and only they, are then protected under the law to operate under the restrictions of said license. It's also just one of the prerequisites for most civilized societies to exist -in harmony and a reasonable sense of order. Or perhaps we could become a society ruled by a monarchy.
*Licensing isn't the cause of workman's comp, labor laws, taxes, unemployment, disability, social security, or consistant work from subs. We have all of that and no licensing.I agree that your wages are probably higher, just like I waid, licensing serves to eliminate competition and drive up prices.If your rant was mostly about wierdos who misinterpret law and court rulings without looking at the big picture of how the courts allow business to be practiced, Then I'm with you.
*My grandfather was one of the first people in his home town in Nebraska to own a car. At the time, there was no such thing as a license to drive. Licensing people to stear this machine around was a silly idea. It was just one of the rights free people had, to be able to buy and use the latest gizmo.Then, states decided to take away this right and call it a priviledge. Maybe they'll be doing the same with RV's and Microwaves. Sonny, is it your right to use your computer or is it a priviledge? Does that change if the government decides it wants you to register and pay a fee to do it?And to your second point, don't accuse me of hanving no responsibility because I don't have a license. I spent yesterday fixing a garage door that was sticking. I installed this door about a year ago. I stand behind my work. I handle all the customer's problems, I pay my taxes. I still have no license.
*ryan.. the next time i call you a bozo will be the first time...i'm not even discussing licensing with these two.. now it's a discussion of wether there should be employers and employees.. that's the left turn it took about twenty posts ago...these guys are way beyond having a problem with licensing....hah, hah, hah
*Ryan.. aren't you the one who has the marketing campaign and the newsletter.. and are trying to differentiate yourself from your competition ?ever look at one of the ads of a competitor who gets a lot of calls...he/she has Certainteed Certified Roofer logo....association memebership logo...most of them say (((fully insured)) ...established in 1962...or in business for 20 years..what is that all about ?.. it's an attempt to differentiate and assure the consumer that they can deal with this company in confidence..WHEN licensing comes to NJ.. don't fight it.. be the first on your block to sign up...and use it to your advantage to win the jobs yhou want to get.. the first guys in will have low numbers, easy entry (they'll be ""grandfathered""), and they'll have more credibility... you know they will..so if you don't like licensing , that's ok.. fight it by lobbying.. but WHEN it comes.. don't let your irish get in the way.......i know you moved out of the city so you wouldn't have to fight city hall....but NJ ain't Arizona...
*Ryan, I didn't say you were iresponsible if you didn't have a license. I said the "having" a license carried with it responsibilities.Yea, I can just see 8 - 10 year olds driving whatever they wanted.It's a moot point though. It will just continue to be one of the issues we love to argue about.
*To each his own...ya want a license, get one...you don't then don't....It is a tax period. Fishing licenses....Rediculous...they have you convinced that without it we would destroy all fishing...They're wrong...When there are no fish...people would wake up and volluntarilly do something...like stop fishing or start stocking and start passing the word..Skydiving and hang gliding are voluntarilly regulated....I do both...They are both way more challenging then carpentry or driving, yet thousands particapate...a few never "go thru the system."...Almost all that I know that have died were "in the system." Two years ago a diver died on our lake. He was in a lesson at the time with two instructors in the water with him. Licensing is a way for the Monarchy to rule over his property(including his commoner property.) The way I see it is Americans who hope that they are not commoners or think they are on their way to joining the aristacrats agree with it so as to be able to enjoy the benefits when they finally have a crown...The big house, kids in Ivy leage schools, an Excursion...Another reason people put up with non-freedoms...To enforce the "I got mine but you can't have the same cause you don' already have it" crap that all people exhibit,so we end up Zoning. "My builder license means I am worth more"...Yes if you think you are worth more, then charge more..."use the system to your advantage" That's capitalism and natural survival of the fittest stuff which made the USA what it is today...But b too many rules and you break "natural systems" 'cause man ain't as good at writing rules as nature is at creating them...As Mike would say..."But what do I know"...near the stream,ajSonny...Mike...Try "The Web of Life" Fritjof Capra...
*SonnyReturning to your original point, I will bet that Florida law requires the property owner to have a contractor license in certain situations. In many states, unless it is owner occupied residential property, if the property owner wants to contract directly with the mechanics employed, then the property owner must have a license. The hierarchy is as follows: If The property owner performs his own labor, then he does so in the capacity of a mechanic. If the property owner does not perform his own labor in the capacity of a mechanic, then he must contract for the labor with a mechanic or mechanics. When he contracts for the labor, then the property owner occupies the position of contractor. When the property owner desires not to negotiate the contracts directly either by choice or because of a licensing requirement, then he must employ an agent to contract for him. The agent then occupies the position of contractor. The mechanics make the contracts to perform the labor. The materialmen make the contracts to furnish materials. The other party to their contract is the contractor whether the contractor be the property owner or the property owner's agent. As I stated, some states require contractor licenses of property owners if the owners are acting in the capacity of contractor. Florida law does not require licenses of any person who acts in the capacity of mechanic (journeymen who make contracts to do construction work).The person who contracts for is the contractor.
*Bobby buddy....you are repeating, repeating, repeating yourself so much that I actually know what you are trying to teach us all...Thanks for the lesson.near the stream, not having to write "I am a contractor" on the chalk board a thousand times...aj
*Adrian, I've heard that explanation of RTW as based on unions to be the same of you understanding. I had my version, something completely different, explained to me by a fellow contractor, and backed by an instructor at trade school. Maybe "Right to Work" wouldn't be the "legal" way to describe the situation. As I said before, I still haven't looked into the legalities of it myself, simply because I've not run into a problem doing the work and passing the inspections. Granted, the first time I'm turned down, I'll be doing some real quick reading. One of those things always at the top of the list, but still not done. As for licensing, if my state offered testing and/or certification, I'd be all for it. But just a pay as you go does me no good. Doesn't do the homeowner any good either. The City of Pgh requires registration, which I have, and is basically a check for $63, a copy of ins. and contact info. The only good in this is the required ins. info....and I'm guessing by the way the application was photocopied and filed, that anyone could phony up an app. and work till they go caught. Just a money maker for the city, and a feel good for the consumers. I do believe in training. I worked for my Dad (who was just a part-timer for 40 yrs) while growing up, getting on the job training from the age of about 8 or 10. He did mainly kitchens and baths. When I got back into remodeling, I saw the need for a more structured education and recieved an Associates Degree in Carp/Const Tech. Don't see how any union program could have served me better. If I could test myself against competitors for a real license, I'd do it at the drop of a hat. Licensing doesn't scare me. As for trade regulations, why? I'm kinda a smart guy. Why can't I learn to do carpentry, electric and plumbing? My thoughts against licensing can be served by this example. My Dad was a Signalman on the railroad. They wired those big-assed boxes that work the signal lights and arms at crossings. If he can understand the theories of electricity well enough to work in a live box with thousands of volts buzzing around, why can't he add a circuit to the box in the basement? The only other thing to keep up on is the code. How many of what and where. It's all in books. With electric and plumbing, as well as carpentry, I don't know all the codes, but it's real simple to ask when ya don't. Look it up or make a phone call. As others have stated before, I don't see how the guy working under the electric co.'s license is any better qualified to change the old plug to a gfci. Licensing to protect the consumer. Alot of people don't want to be protected, they want it done cheapest. Ya get what ya pay for, everyone knows that. Let the buyer beware.If they want it cheap, screw them. And licensed contractors will rip someone as much as an unlicensed guy....the license doesn't have a morality test. My bottom line feelings about too much red tape....my Dad did remodeling without anything some here claim is neccessary, and his old customers are calling me now. He must have stumbled thru and accidentally did something right. Times were different then, but a license doesn't make someone competent, and a license doesn't make someone more honest. Jeff
*Relax Mike, handguns have to be licensed. Jeff
*And a license somehow guarantees this idea of responsibility? That's kinda one of my main points here....crooks and hacks can have a license and the most noble of craftsman can operate without one. Even if testing is involved, it doesn't mean the knowledege will be applied in the field. Jeff
*Now ain't this a bitch....here we've been on the same side, and now ya say don't get a fishing license! Why, the fishing license is about the only form of licensing I agree with! I feel, as we all know this licensing crap is just a tax, it's one of the few taxes that directly affect me! Pay this year, catch something next year. Actually, I don't fish for stocked trout and such, but see the fish license as keeping the launches in order and having a few trash cans around. Now that I think about it, I don't fish in stocked areas much at all....but still happy to buy my license each year. Jeff
*aj, I think that 's one of the most insightful philosophical statements I've heard in my life. I will have to remember it, and use it often when appropriate.".......man ain't as good at writing rules as nature is at creating them."I gotta ask: Original or heard it or read it?Thanks
*It's because the license adds to your "I'm afisherman" and to your ability to catch the fish...you will be more likely to catch them if you follow all the procedures known and licensing is one of them...Lucky enough, near the stream,ajHad some great fish last nigth again..our volleyball guys go fishing early every summer and as usual got their limit of stripers, blues etc...we've been eating very well every Wednesday night us boys...
*AJ, live enough since this was a house in an area where new condos were being built and blasting was going on to prepare for a foundation, plus pilings were also being rammed down, all creating many weeks of substantial vibration to the point that it caused many local complaints to the powers to be. Dangerous too since one of the wires was rubbing against the back of a mirror. Glass is not an electrical insulator. Nor is the condensation on it's surface.Occasionally, a freak death occurs due to plain sloppiness by some tradesman. I'd hate to be one of them, or be the employer of an employee who did something like that.
*You worry too much for me Sonny...You forgot to mention that there might even be a huricane wind that moves the wire, just when the owner starts to clean the mirror, after his shower and walk of the dog, and he suddenly breaks thru the mirror, a shard cuts his chest open exposing his beating heart in a non life threatening way, the wire pops out, the tape falls off the end of it, one wire lands on one side of his heart, the other wire end tape falls off, and it goes right to the other side of his heart...Boom, he's fried perfectly to a medium rare...the not so faithful dog, ends up chowing him down over the course of the next few weeks as he is trapped in the rubble after the huricane had wiped out the building, even though it should of stayed up but because the concrete slump was weak due to typically too much water bieng used, and the guy that cut the pre stressed cable thing and all...Well...That dog's lucky to be alive, I tell ya.near the stream hooking 110v to my mirror....Beware when you visit and stick your tongue in strange places!near the stream, drinking Jolt,ajGave up beer this summer...better switch back as they say I use to be more mellow.....yee ha!...cowboys...bring it on!
*Here is my favorite.The proviso at the end of the statutes or ordinances requiring licenses that states that the unconstitutional portions shall not be enforced but that the constitutional portions shall stand.If the lawmaking body knows that certain portions are unconstitutional, why enact those portions. It is absolutely forbidden to enact unconstitutional laws, yet no legislator is ever fined, imprisoned or sentenced to death or hard labor for enacting them. Nor is any governor for signing and approving them.I find this situation to be repugnant.
*
Having a problem here in Naples with either unlicensed contractors,
or those doing jobs with an improper license. For background, any
remodels done in condos above 3 stories high need a GC license, a
opposed to a Residential Lic. (homes to quadplexes) or Builder Lic.
(homes to commercial up to 3 stories). Above 3 stories are
considered "commerical" and require a GC lic., which can also build
bridges, etc. Neither of the 3 licenses can do elec., plbg, HVAC or
roofing, and must use licenses people in those trades.
Home owners can pull permits only in homes - not stores, offices or
condos which are all zoned "commercial" .
We have a cabinet company that does a lot of work either refacing
canbinets or changing existing cab's and tops. They are telling the
owners to get their own electricians, plumbers, tile setters, etc. And
these owners are doing that. Some owners are also initiating
remodels on their own and hiring the carpenter, drywallers, and other
subs. It's illegal to do that since the owners can't pull permits, and in
fact don't. Also have some "handymen" doing the above work - hired
by home owners to save money. These are not cheapo houses, but
houses and condos up to well over a million bucks. I've been hired
by a few home/condo owners to either finish or correct work done by
these people who screwed it up.
Son Tom's frustrated. The building departments, both city and county
make him jump thru hoops to get permits while the above are getting
away with it. Naples is has just created a Remodelers Council
(Tom's in it) and one of the topics on their agenda is to get this
stopped by calling the bldg. dept's on these projects in progress, and
also creating a new brochure educating the public of the legal permit
requirements.
Tom's contention is that the other remodelers should have to go thru
what he and I have to get our licenses, get the proper insurances,
take the mandated annual educational classes and go thru the
permitting procedures as we do. Of course that also means up to
8-10 inspections per remodel and the subsequent time lost waiting
for them - usually 1/2 to a full day. Not a lot, but still increasing the
project completion.
On the other hand, owners who do a remodel with no permit, and
especially who use a contractor without a license or the proper
license, cannot sue him if a problem occurs, and the contractor
cannot sue the owner either - a dangerous situation of both owners
and these contractors.
So, call the building departments or not? Is it being a "squealer", or
protectng the professionalism of our local industry members and
their livelihoods while educating the home owners of the pros and
cons, and subsequent ramifications.