Marchel, the new code was enacted in the last session, and up until now, I had not heard any of the details, just that it was going to be required. The discussion among several inspectors on Friday was how were we going to ensure ethical behavior on the part of those involved in the process. The current program for the state could allow some issues to slip, because they require the basic information from the county inspector. Did you inspect it? Did it pass? Period. We asked that there should be a form commenting on why it did not pass among other suggestions to help prevent fraud.

I have been reviewing the proposed changes to the inspection report and SOP codes for inspectors. I was preparing to send of my comments next week. The idea behind the draft is to change the terminology of the report to reflect more accurately what is happening. They are making it clear that no repairs are required to be made on the part of the seller or buyer. Moreover, the term "in need of repair" has been changed to "deficiencies" to reflect that an item may function, but it is not set up as it should be. For example, a missing anti-siphon device on a hose bib does not prevent function, but it does prevent a possible health hazard. So it does not really need to be repaired; it needs to be corrected. I have a copy of the draft of the report or code if you are anyone wants me to send them along for a look. The wording in the first section of the report is much longer. Plainer English with a better explanation, I think. Just let me know if you would like a copy.

Joan, currently the county inspectors would be people already in business, like myself. There is a question as to whether the builder would hire us or if we remain independent. The inspection community leans towards remaining apart from the builders to help ensure an unbiased judgement. Cost to the consumer would be hard to determine, but it would not be so great as to significantly increase the cost of the home, but I could see a builder claiming such a statement to increase his profits. (However, I do not think this would be the case with most builders). I could see the cost to the builder in the range of $350 to $500 for all of the inspections. Building it right the first time: priceless :)

Read this story of what happened in Hutto, Texas. Lennar really screwed up on this one, and this is why such a requirement could benefit the consumer in the long run.

Marchel, I could not agree more, and I think that the TRCC is trying to do just that. As one inspector mentioned when some problems were pointed out in the system: baby steps people, baby steps; we are heading in the right direction. This code may not resolve everything, but we are moving that way.

Dale, one of the most frequent questions posed to me is if a homeowner needed a permit for that remodel. It is amazing what is built in municipalities, and no one is watching. However, I am quite familar with the building department here in Houston, and I have to say the staff there is working hard, and trying to stay on top of things, which I imagine is the case in most cities. At least some steps are being taken, and the folks at the TRCC do seem like they really want to help out.

Kevin, I could not agree with you more on the new home construction. Most buyers do not realize what is involved in the process of building a home from a company that has gone over to production building. Site managers or foremen cannot watch what is happening at each stage for every home, because they are busy with many homes at once. Plus with subcontractors and managers trying to meet tight budgets, some things slip. All of this depends from site to site too. The link in the comment above was about Lennar, but to be honest, I have inspected several of their homes were I was impressed by the quality, and others were I was not too impressed. Overall, I have suggested Lennar homes to people who are looking for particular features that I thought Lennar did well. I also have found that it is easier to work with Lennar as an inspector; they are more open with me than other builders. It is just too much of a mixed bag. Buyers need the protection, and a system which does not allow for fraud has to be developed. I am just glad that we are heading in that direction.