*
Here in BC we have the new home warranty program
and the government will be bringing in contractor licensing this year ever since the leaky condo issue.This also brought about rainscreen inspections
Discussion Forum
Discussion Forum
Up Next
Video Shorts
Featured Story
You don't have to sacrifice historical elements of a house in the name of energy efficiency.
Featured Video
Highlights
"I have learned so much thanks to the searchable articles on the FHB website. I can confidently say that I expect to be a life-long subscriber." - M.K.
Replies
*
I have to agree with Gabe. Here in Alaska, we are required to be a licensed G.C. if doing the work for anyone other than ourselves. You must also be insured and bonded, which most major insurance companies will take care of. We also have the Alaska Craftsman Program, which offers courses and refreshers on a range of topics. The state has established a rating system for residential construction based on the air tightness and insulation value. In some cases, the cost of the extra's outdo the return on the dollar over 30 years.
If you are the land owner, you are allowed to build or add on to one structure per year, from residential to a 4-plex. The only required permits are (in my locale): driveway ($25), site use ($50) and have the septic system approved by the D.E.C. Other inspections are required only if you are financing via a bank (something most do). Also, in order to sell a home through the various low-mid income projects (HUD, Fannie Mae, AHFC, 000 down for military, etc.) you are required to be a G.C. and have all the inspections done thru the construction process.
My main concern with our situation is not exactly with the administration of permits (you can't fight city hall!), but rather with the quality and style of architecture that seems to unfold from a lack of architectural experience. We end up with some real hodge-podge messes: i.e., I sold one lot with an awesome mountain view and nearly 2 acres, simply because I would not be able to get the right amount of money out of a house on the land, due to the what atrocities my neighbors constructed.
There are few local covenants, and where there are, they are either so lax, or they are vigoursly fought down. On the last spec I built, in a nice quiet subdivision with 1 acre lots, not more than a mile away (on the main road) is a shanty that I jokingly call "dogpatch" (Lil' Abner?). The problem here is that he is literally on the "wrong side" of the tracks. He is simply on the other side of the sub line and does not have to comply with any regulations.
I think what needs to be done is more of a local interest in defining what is acceptable in their muni and where zoning should be enforced. Another horror story: same area (within 5 miles), 2 years ago, a developer got the bright idea to turn a few vacant acres into a race track. This didn't go over well with the 50-75 residents who lived virtually next door. They moved to the area (35,000) from Anchorage (300,000) for the peace and quiet. All the complaining they did amounted to nothing... the area they are in has NO zoning restrictions AT ALL.
While big government is definitely a self feeder, we still need some basic, common sense approaches at ensuring the quality of life for our communities.
*
Licensing is just another way to indenture the tradesman!
In our state, we are required to have a residntial builders license. This supposedly helps to protect the homeowner from unscrupulous contractors. There is a seperate insurance fund for contractor failures that initially costs 50$ and is refunded when needed. It's never needed more that the original 50$ and that was 15 years ago! That must tell you how many people are collecting!
The licinsing act is a needless layer, a governmental intrusion. It effectively limits blue collar tradespeople from practicing their trade by requiring them to know neeless information such as: There are 9 member on the board, you mustfile a change of address within 30 days,etc. Those are the only thing I remember about the builders classes that I took!
There are already many remedies available to victims of bad contractors. The civil court system will effectively punish any builder, or tradesman that delivers poor product. The criminal sourt system deals with those contractors that engage in fraud, extreme cases of poor workmanship, and misleading claims.
The licenseing act is nothing more than a step in the direction that George Orwell foresaw!
The licensing act puts the money managing aspect out of the reach of semi literate workers, who may be excellent craftsman. The money mangers themselves don't need to have any tangible skills in the building process!
It is an absurd piece of legislation, written by laywers, for lawyers and bankers.
Example: My employee was going to take out a construction loan to finance the building of his foundation, and site work to receive his manufactured home. He was moving it frm another location. His wife presented all the paperwork, estimates, etc. The banker required a "licensed" builder to recieve the checks. The banker gave her several numbers of builders who would work with her. They chose the closest one, and aranged for him to become their buildr, in name only, for a fee of $1500. They were still going to handle all the work, and scheduling, as it was already set up and ready to go.
The builder needed a signed contract to seal the deal. He showed up the next day, jumped out of his pickup holding a 40 oz. beer!
They regretfully signed, and the only holdup that occured during the entire building process was when the "needed" builder delayed in submitting the paperwork that she prepared and mailed to him for signing!
Thank you legislatures for your wonderful wisdom in helping us prtect us froom ourselves!
My advice? Fight for your freedom by fighting against any additional licensing acts!
Incidently, MI had a director of licensing and regulation that recomended repealing most of the licensing laws. He explained that it was a useless, needless burden. He didn't last long as director!
Also, the state bureau can go after the licensed contractors, but have no authority to act against the unlicensed contractors!
libetarily yours,
"Born free... Taxed to death."
*Blue said, "Licensing is just another way to indenture the tradesman". I most certainly agree.Here in CA, you are required to hold a license if you bid on any job over $300. That amount includes labor and material. Some get around this by either going underground or by offering their services at a severly discounted rate. Needless to say, they are not serious about staying in business. But, aside form the occassional sting operation, these cutthroats go free, happily bouncing from one uninformed customer to the next.To acquire a license, one must pass a proficiency exam and be able to show minimum 4 years experience. The test is very simple. Two hours and you're done. Since the state considers self-employment in satisfying the 4 years--remember those unlicensed underground butchers?--I can only wonder how concerned the state is about actual proficiency.The license costs $300/year and a contractor needs to have a $7,500 bond at all times. The bond premium is around $150/year.If a consumer has a problem with an unlicensed contractor, too bad for the customer. Unless they want to go through the civil court. If the contractor is licensed, contractor beware! The state will track you down, boy! All the consumer has to do is make a complaint about the contractor to the state. No effort is made to establish the veracity of the claim.I have had exactly one complaint filed against me in 12 years. It was so frivolous I laughed. Yet, it is a misdemeanor not to respond.So, the bottom line is the state justs wants my money. And they have created a bureaucracy to make sure they take it. I get none, zero, nada, zip, zilch, nothing in return.
*
Licensing laws in NC require a General contractors license for any project exceeding 30k.This apparently gives those who are starting out on their own a chance did build a reputation as well as a bank account. This is necessary because licensing is directly related to financial stabilty.(not experience unfortunatly) To obtain a license for limited building contracting(30k to 250k), 12.5k of CURRENT assets must be available. Intermediate licensing(250k to 500k) requires 50k current assets and unlimited licensing requires 100k in current assets. Remember that I stated that building experience is not a requirement for license consideration? Then consider this equation. Wealty real estate agent - building experience + contractors license + dependence on subcontractors = homeowners nightmare in 2 years.
*I have been courious about this for a long time and am interested in what you all have to say. This has been a subject of great debate here in N.J. We currently license plumbers, electricians and code officials(experiance, education & testing required, also continuing ed for renewal) and we "register" new home builders ($200 bi-annually required) which includes a new home warranty program. Nothing else required! The warranty program works fairly well. There is usually an extensive list of revoked and suspended builders. The problem is they find ways around it or go to home improvements. So now new home building for the most part is OK here and the major problem now is home improvement contractors and senior citizens are the major targets for all the scams. In case you guys don't know, this is one of the leading forms of senior abuse in this country and ranks No.1 in many states. This state is right now considering a registration act for home improvement contractors. Despite the pros and cons of this, and I truthly read all of yours, the community of good contractors here is viewing this favorably and as a way to weed out some of the unworthy competition. Here's another thought, here there are many towns requiring a local license, it actually serves no purpose but is a sourse of revenue for the town. By the way they would lose it if the bill passes. One contractor told me between 8 towns in 50 sq.mi it cost about $1000 per year for the privilage to work. I sense that we all agree that many of these programs offer little to nothing for your fee. That's unfortunate, I think you should at least offer training, code updates and industry information. This may take involvement and organization by the contractors to get. Here at least here we have a fairly effective code enforcement program and I think it will help. No card, no permit! NO permit, no work! Work without a permit, open your wallet. I have heard in other states this works fine. If your law doesn't work then it serves no purpose. It's only as good as it's enforcement. I need to ask some questions? I see some laws require bonds or security, how effective is this? Do you think member organized regional programs or private assocations, giving recoginition to competent and reliable contractors may be a better solution? Do you think there should be any requirements to become licensed? If so, what? Do you feel there could be a legitimate intent to these laws? And lastly, do you feel if these laws could be beneficial to the construction industry then they would in turn serve the public interest? I would welcome any constructive comments on the pros and cons of this subject. Please feel free to E-Mail them. You never know how you might effect the outcome here. Thanks, Keith
*
Keith, add these thoughts to your debate.
Why can't the legislators set up a voluntary licensing, bonding type program that actually would be attractive to contractors?
If the program is good enough, contractors would be motivated to join, similar to the builder's associations.
*
I work for a small architecture firm in Montana, before that in California. I have fairly extensive work experience in the construction trades, both commercial and residential. In many of the commercial and publicly bid jobs, a bid bond and performance bond is required. This does two things:
1. It weeds out incompetent, unexperienced bidders.
2. It creates a financial source of leverage for the owner in the event that the contractor fails to perform to the specified criteria/schedule.
Residential construction isn't usually this demanding. Fly-by-night contractors come and go with the hail storms, building booms and seasons.
I've long favored a system to test contractors (and subs?) for proficiency and ability. I think that continuing education is a great idea for ALL trades. If you want to be a general contractor, you should have some experience, knowledge of how to build AND how to run a business, and be willing to provide an honest, earnest service to the customer.
I don't believe for one minute that anyone is going to voluntarily get bonding, licensing or insurance (it takes time & money).
A fair system of testing and licensing can only improve the image and abilities of the trades (and trades-persons), provide a better work environment for builders and customers, and help to prevent some of the schmucks that call themselves contractors from doing business.
There are a lot of us out here that take pride in our work and rely on our reputation among our peers for references. We have nothing to fear from testing, licensing, bonding or insurance requirements.
Enough rambling. Who's next???
*
Well this should be a good topic............
After just spending the better part of a day bidding a huge trim job and losing it to a unlicensened crew. The loop hole 1099 employee's. The GC hired these guy's and will cover insurance for them and they will complete for x number of dollars. (Fixed fee) I done a bunch of work for this GC and was really upset over this. The GC now wants me to sign a contract to do the crown on this job because he feels his new "employee's don't have the toolss for this. He wants this done at the contract price that included all the work. Doesn't understand why I refused to do so.
Ok feel beter now that I've vented. Working in the Washington DC metro area I have 6(that's right 6) differant licenses. This to cover all the area's that I work in. I for one would love to see a national uniflied code of some sort. Well for the little guy who is trying to be legel and having to contant with all this it's a wonder we have so many people trying to scrit the edges of the law.
*Chad, if they tested and rated tradesmen that would make sense. They don't though. Instead they set up paperwork hoops that many trademen have trouble dealing with. That effectively eliminates a large portion of the trades from becomming self employed. In their place, those "paper pushers" take over. Then, since they are the boss, they make the decisions concerning materials, which dictate technique, style etc. It becomes the blind leading the knowledgable.There are many ways to set up a system that induces trademen to want to join. The builders association that I belong to costs me $300 per year. Why do I join? To save $3000 per year in insurance fees.What do I get for my annual license fee sent to the state? A threat to take it away!Keep the government out of it!When are we going to learn that sending our money to the gov is worse than burning it! Why? Because now we have a beauracracy set up that is currently thinking of expanding!Bill, if the 1099er's are illegal, report them! If they are legal, you'll have to learn to overcome that price advantage in your presentation. It is very hard to be legal 1099er's today.Blue
*Glad to see this discussion up again. If I recall correctly it was started around the time of the great breaktime crash of '99!!and we lost it all.Some info on licencing from down under.Licencing varies from state to state. Here in Queensland it's as follows.All building works of $500 or more must be carried out by a licenced contractor. ( that includes materials and labour ). If you are not licenced and want to build your own home you can do so bit you must first attend a course on management etc. and pass a small exam. Once you have done this you can build however you can only do this once every 6 years and when you want to sell you must notify the buyer that the house has been "owner built". Oh yes, and before you can even list the house you must get written permission from the Building Services Authority to sell.Contractors.There are three main categorys.BuildersSub-contractorsSupervisorsFor each of these there are requirements to be met, starting with the supervisor. All must be able to show at least 7 years in the trade of licence application ( this can include time indentured as an apprentice )A supervisor can only work on wages and cannot do any work for the public. He/she is issued with a card ( like a credit card stating relevant info.A sub-contractor has to show the same amount of time plus do a financial management course.A sub-contractor will be issued with either a silver card ( he can only work on wages with this ) or a gold card ( with this he can work on wages and or do work for the public )If he applies for a gold card he has to show accountants figures that he has assets of $5,000 or a bank gaurantee of $5,000 and can be audited at any time.He can only do work for the class of licence his card shows.i.e. if his card shows carpentry he cannot paint, concrete, hang drywall etc.The next class is as a house builder ( gold card ) and for this you need to show again assetts or bank gaurantee of this time $25,000. You also have to attend college courses that cover subjects like Site management, surveying and leveling, financial management, quantities and estimating, bracing requirements etc and you have to submit assignments and pass exams!!As a builder I have to warrant my work as follows. Minor defects ( cracks in plaster, sticking doors etc.) 6months from hand over. Structural defects 6 years from hand over and any defect within that period is covered again for a 6 year period. All this has to be rectified at my cost. If I am directed by the Authority to rectify and I refuse or do not comply I can lose my licence. The work is then carried out by another contractor and paid for under the insurance scheme built into our licence fees. I would not get my licence back.The next licence is commercial work and it is broken up into three categories. Single storey construction not exceeding (I think from memory) $2mill.Then multi story and I'm not sure on the requirements for these except more college time with subjects such as properties of concrete/steel/wood ( bending moments and all that tough math stuff )services, fire and noise controlbuilding codes.Benefits.Mainly consumer protection. Does help eliminate competition from the roughs and shonks but only when effectively policed.
*I registered here in Massachusetts for the Home Improvement License when the program started. Last year I tried to change the registration to cover my partnership. They wrote back stating that I needed to pay in to the "fund" again. So I reapplied in the partnership name. They made me pay the guarrantee money with a certified check! This is an example of how much the state trusts honest contractors!I for one have never heard of anyone collecting from the fund. Of course the people getting burned are still not working with registered contractors.I'd be first in line to vote for a fund that repays contractors for money lost to deadbeat clients.Jon
*
We need more laws, more regulations to spend our time and money on, a new bureauacracy to make sure we are all in compliance with all of the regulations, more lawyers to write the laws and we probally need a goverment appointed nanny to go to the porta let with us to make sure we dont use too much paper.
*
...and don't write on the walls!
Rich Beckman
*
First Ken Starr and the sex police, now Gov. Rowland and the building police. I guess Ct. needs the fees to pay for the new Patriot stadium. Licensing is no guarantee against shoddy work. We ask the government to do what we should do for ourselves..... ask for references and referrals, ask your neighbors and friends. The state should be the last resort, not the first. As it is, the state overwhelms our lives, choking out freedom with excessive regulation and taxation approaching socialist countries' rates without benefits such as health insurance. As builders, the answer is to educate people and BUILD WELL! I guess that's why we read FH. jc
*
Presently the Connecticut State Legislature is contiplating revising the registering program for Home improvement contractors. Currently only home improvement contractors need be registered with the state. There is no testing or qualifying of any party seeking to register you simply have to pay the Department of Consumer Protection and you are a Home Improvement Contractor. Registration allows the contractor to obtain building permits for home renovation.(electrical plumbing and heating permits are responsbility of trades or subs) The fee (@180.00/year) is used to fund a guarentee fund for homeowners who are deemed to be victim's of unscrupulous contractors. It pays up to ten thousand dollars per instance to correct/complete work which will not be completed by the original contractor. This fund does not cover work done by an unregistered contractor. Furthermore I do not believe developers or Homebuilders are required to have either a license or be registered with any state orgaization.
So this is how it is here in Southern New England I would like to hear from others around the country and beyond. What are your requirements. Are they fair? Does it help to maintain a standard of building? Can Home owners pull thier own permits for work on thier own Home? Do builders Have to be licensed? What are the requirements if there is licensing process?
Thanks
Kevin
*Home Warrantee programs are a great make work project that do nothing to protect the consumer, nothing to regulate the bad contractors and simply cost the good guys money.Here in Ontario, you don't have to belong to Home Warrantee if you are building your own home and some people build themselves a lot of homes, one after the next. You can register your house with Home Warrantee but you don't have to be a registered builder.If you as a home owner want to file a claim for damages, you would have better luck filing an insurance claim with a fly by night insurance company. Yes we cover you for lightning, but only if your hit twice on the 5th Sunday of every month.Provinces like Nova Scotia have a voluntary system that only pays a limited amount in coverage.I beleive in good history.We work at building houses and leave behind a legacy of good houses and satisfied customers.The consumer should take some responsibility for checking out the references of builders.Regardless of the intent of regulatory bodies, they are only self serving in the end.
*GabeYour aprehension of Governemnt regulatory bodies is well founded and I would agree with you. I have done very little advertising and depend on clients telling thier freinds about my remodeling firm. This has worked well for three years. I do have to belong /register with the state and carry my I.D.. Presently we depend on building inspectors to insure the integrity of what is being built in Connecticut. It is however pretty hard to catch all mistakes with four visits to a job. They do have a tough job and for the most part I have not met a building inspector who is unreasonable. The point is while all my subcontractors are licensed In Connecticut the guys who put the whole thing together are not. Is this the norm acrros the country?Recently the State has begun a program of educating consumers concerning what they should be looking for in a remodeler or builder. Still there are horror stories out there and I am always amazed that people will spend that amount of money on thier homes without minimal research into what they are getting or who is giving it to them.
*Here in Taxachusetts they have figured out several ways to squeeze some extra cash out of contractors. We have a program similar to the one that Kevin describes,this is called the Home Improvement Contractor Registration, costs $150.00 plus $50.00 per employee every two years. The money is supposed to go to a fund that would pay a homeowner if he was screwed by a registered contractor. The state would then try to recover the money from the contractor. You cannot pull a permit to work on an existing home without this license, there is no qualifying test (other than the ability to write a check), and I would hate to think about the hassle that the homeowner would have to go through to recover any losses. The second license that is required is mainly for new construction and is called a Construction Supervisors License.To get this license you must pass a two hour multiple choice test on the Massachusetts State Building Code. You can apply for either a residential ( 1 and 2 family homes only),a masonry, or a combination license ( commercial less than 35,000 sq ft / residential unrestricted ) The test for the combo license is more involved and has questions about concrete and steel construction, fire resistant construction, etc. in addition to the standard residential test.This is the license that I have and it cost me $150.00 to take the test and I have to renew the license every 2 tears at a cost of $200.00. You cannot pull a permit to do new construction without a Construction Supervisors license unless you are the homeowner. What often happens is the homeowner pulls the permit and then hires some unlicensed, uninsured, lowball contractor to do the work. In many of these cases the " no free lunch,you get what you pay for" rule comes into play. You can't compete with these guys, so it's best to not even get involved. The regulations here may help to regulate who is doing the commercial work but do little to control unlicensed residential work. Interesting, in that about 75% of the licenses are restricted to residential only. As a general rule of thumb I have found that the men and women who take the time and spend the money required to play by the rules are the ones running a sucessful business and doing the quality work. Happy hammering... Scott
*Here in BC we have the new home warranty programand the government will be bringing in contractor licensing this year ever since the leaky condo issue.This also brought about rainscreen inspections
*Ya Dan you're going to see a lot of new taxes and user fees and new programs in BC, somebody has to pay for that 100% cost overrun on the cat ferry.They will use all kinds of excuses and stories but none will be for the benefit of the consumer and less for the builder.Remember, in Ontario, for the Home Warrantee registration, the criteria as a builder is your net worth. A new builder applying for registration, after paying all the fees, must undergo a test. However the test is open book and you can bring in a professional to take the test for you.Do you think for one minute that if they were serious about the qualifications, this would be allowed.They couldn't care less about your qualifications, what they want is your money so that they can carry on business and collect pay checks.
*
Here in Washington State they kind-of keep the regulation in the private sector. The state requires you to be insured and bonded,.then feed the bureaucracy some money and they'll give you a license. The insurance companies won't insure someone unless they're insurable! You have to prove to them by a resume, history of related work, etc. that you are.
As far as work on ones own home, you can do pretty much whatever you want, although there are some local county restrictions which vary.
RE: Homeowners Pulling Permits
Last City I worked in Massachusetts recently had a 'clause' in the building permit process. If a homeowner pulls a permit and does the work themselves, the City would still add on the "Prevailing Wage, Materials, and Total Job Cost" figure to the permit fee. Thus, if the homeowner installs a window themselves, the permit fee would be based on the price if a professional did the installation. I know of one contractor who went for a permit to install a roof and got into a dispute when the "total cost" the City came up with, was 2 times his estimate, for the permit. Same City also has the "ALL work, except painting, wallpapering and flooring" will require a permit, period, including any form of repair work, no matter how small.
Another way to squeeze tax revenue...
The problem with the "guartee" fund,is if the homeowner does't have a contract with the 12+ clauses specified by the State of MA, they are screwed. No clauses in contract, they can't file for a claim. And if they file a claim, the process can take up to a year+, due to the number of complaints.
The "Cheapest Price gets the job, I don't care about licenses" mentality from the homeowner still rules around here also.