State Contractor Licensing

Actually, the lawyers are dead-set agasinsnt licensing....There workload would diminish substantially....

I'll take a bet against that statement.

"JSC....The sub-games' going on in CA?....How could that be, especially with the recent WC requirement?"

Not very legally, and I'm pondering whether to turn one contractor in particular in. He's taken some pretty premium accounts by being able to price without a labor burden.

Have a real hesitation to be a snitch, but what do you guys think?

Twill....That's crazy!....Sounds like Florida's Contractor Licensing Board is messed up.....So that leaves the consumer to utilize the court system? Just like a state w/o licensing.

Actually, the lawyers are dead-set agasinsnt licensing....There workload would diminish substantially.... Like I said...."buyer beware"....Lawyers love it!...Shysters love it!....Jacklegs love it!....See the simalarities?

4th gen....439858 (1983)...inactive since 92'....I keep it, just to "have a license"

Martin....Your comparing apples to oranges, in more ways than one....A craftmen/tradesman is respected across the pond....Here, us Yanks, are very low on the totem pole....just have a look at the workforce, and your competition....BTW, aside from possibly language issues, you will have no problem with any testing....You should embrace any licensing, as it eliminates the riff-raff.

JSC....The sub-games' going on in CA?....How could that be, especially with the recent WC requirement?

I don't get this inspection thing with licensing in Florida....Inspections/code compliance should be left to the local bldg. depts....Not the State Licensing Board!!!!!(Huh????)

TomB Said: Yes...All states should sbsolutely have contractor licensing! I can speak from hands-on experience, having done business in both arenas. The state licensing must, however, be of the authentic nature....The only states that I know of, to have any sort of authentic licensing are Washington, Oregon, California, Arizona, Utah, New Mexico.....Pretty sure Hawaii has viable contractor licensing....Not sure about Alaska....Then theres Florida, all by itself down there with similar licensing as the western states mentioned above. The rest of the country is pretty-much a free-for-all.

The states that have no licensing certainly dont bolster the publics opinion of contractors in general. Theyre typically a buyer beware market....No consumer protection what-so-ever....Theyre also breeding grounds for unscrupulous/opportunistic contractors.

With state licensing theres typically work/trade experience requirements, testing to ensure the applicant has actual trade knowledge, as well as basic business management/accounting ability/skills, credit check/verification, and a minimal bond,($10,000 - $ 25,000)....This alone, would eliminate most of our competitors here in Colorado....It DEFINITELY puts the KA-BOSCH on the sub-game.

With good state licensing, the consumer enjoys protected....A contractor must resolve a complaint or risk his license suspeneded or revoked....No happy home owner = No license = No workeee....your done. Kinda kool for the consumer, isnt it?

I could go on & on, the benifits of state licensing....For both the contractor & consumer....Its just plain idiocy that all states dont have it....No, actually, its big business & corruption that keeps it out. At least here in Colorado....The HBAs are adamently against it....The glutenous big/production home builders will spend big $ whenever such a referendum/what-have-you, comes up, to defeat it.

Just my 1/100 of a cant worth....

That should stir it up :lol:

You forgot to mention California, which is a very tough state to do business in without permits and licenses etc. Oh.....isn't that the state that is going bankrupt?

Do you see a correlation?

I'm a Libertarian and believe in personal responsibility and freedom. I respect your need and desire for licensing but I don't understand why we both can't have what we want. Couldn't the state create licenses, voluntary or course, and then the consumer could choose between licensed contractors and unlicensed contractors.

Viola...the best of both worlds. It won't ever be implemented because it makes too much sense.

For the record, I would not be afraid to use unlicensed lawyers, doctors, dentists etc. They would have to prove competency to me, but that piece of state paper is useless in my opinion.

I see licensing as a needless redundancy in consumer protection. The consumers can check credentials in a variety of ways. Then there are municipal inspections. Then, there is a court system for substandard performance.

License laws were created by lawyers, so they (the lawyers) could make more money. It also eliminates a lot of blue collar workers from the opportunity to perform work for pay because they can't pass the paperwork tests.

I don't want to hire paper pushing "builders" and "general contractors"...I want to hire skilled tradesmen....the kind of guys that have devoted their lives to their tools, not their pens.

This roof is less than one year old. . The city requires registration and a permit. The job took about 3 months. Never was a permit pulled. So for 3 months no one did their job and protected the homeowner

Yes...All states should sbsolutely have contractor licensing! I can speak from hands-on experience, having done business in both arena's. The "state licensing must, however, be of the "authentic" nature....The only states that I know of, to have any sort of "authentic" licensing are Washington, Oregon, California, Arizona, Utah, New Mexico.....Pretty sure Hawaii has viable contractor licensing....Not sure about Alaska....Then there's Florida, all by itself down there with similar licensing as the western states mentioned above. The rest of the country is pretty-much a free-for-all.

The states that have no licensing certainly don't bolster the public's opinion of contractors in general. They're typically a "buyer beware" market....No consumer protection what-so-ever....They're also breeding grounds for unscrupulous/opportunistic "contractors".

With state licensing there's typically work/trade experience requirements, testing to ensure the applicant has actual trade knowledge, as well as basic business management/accounting ability/skills, credit check/verification, and a minimal bond,($10,000 - $ 25,000)....This alone, would eliminate most of our competitors here in Colorado....It DEFINITELY puts the KA-BOSCH on the "sub-game".

With good state licensing, the consumer enjoys protected....A contractor must resolve a complaint or risk his license suspeneded or revoked....No happy home owner = No license = No workeee....your done. Kinda kool for the consumer, isn't it?

I could go on & on, the benifits of state licensing....For both the contractor & consumer....It's just plain idiocy that all states don't have it....No, actually, it's big business & corruption that keeps it out. At least here in Colorado....The HBA's are adamently against it....The glutenous big/production home builders will spend big $ whenever such a referendum/what-have-you, comes up, to defeat it.

Just my 1/100 of a cant worth....

That should stir it up :lol:

We starting our 9th year here in the FL market area. There has only been one other state that we operated a dealership in that required licensing and that was TN where it was a simple HI (home improvement) license. Florida was a real eye opener when it came to all the rules and regulations. Every county, city building dept. has their own forms, rules, inspection schedules and requirements, etc. They're supposed to all follow mandates from the state but each has their own little "twist" on the rules. I thought licensing would keep the jacklegs at bay but man was I wrong. They operate with total impunity because the customers think they're saving a buck by going jackleg. Lots of times it works but many times it doesn't and these are the very same customers who then cry to the codes dept. about being screwed. I have absolutely no sympathy for them........you get what you pay for. I just did my two year required CE courses (online this time) and my insurance just renewed for another year so I guess we'll see if the hurricane season will pay off. Other than that happening I don't see much of a future for many roofing companies here in FL (and probably elsewhere as well). Over 64 roofing companies have gone out of business or BK in central FL alone this year. One just went under for nearly $2M. All the supply houses have been bought up and consolidated so there is virtually no competition now on material pricing. I dunno boys, went through a very similar economy in the late 70's and I think this one is way worse. If you don't have a niche or good credit the end could be very near.

JET

I think licensing is more of a tax collecting/tracking device for the govt than a qualifier.

It does offer some protection however for the legitimate contractor (the wc requirements for instance), but it sure hasn't eliminated renegade competition.

The ole subcontracting scam when they are really employees seems to be rampant in every state, no matter what the licensing requirements are.

Still, there's something about it being a privilege rather than a right to make a living sticks in my craw.

I don`t under stand that I need a roofing license with my experience !!!!

I have learnd and got a worker license, then I worked 5 years as a supervisor.

After this I visited 9 month a special roofer school, it`s like a university in the states.

I`ve got my "Master titel" and the titel "Techincal Manager for Roof,-Wall and Sealing techniques" it`s the same like a Beachelor Degree here in the US.

In Florida I need to learn by a GC again the job, I must go to the school 5 month again, to do a test, I must have my insurance (that`s ok) and I need to have 20000 $ on a bank That`s all bull-shit.

Who want to take a German Certified Roofer Master under contract, and want to help me to change my E2 Visa in a E2 Employee Visa ??

I have no other chance here in the US

Take care Martin take a look on my web site and let me know if I need to do a roofing license

http://germanroofconsulting.com/

I vote no.

Enough with the nanny state.

For Sure!! Testing is definitely necessary!!! It weeds out non qualifed people, and requires you to be bonded and carry workmans comp. And also gives a time line on how long your company has been in business. For instance here in California my lic number is in the 88.000's (2006)and my grandfathers is in the 23.000's(1965)

I believe in testing. i would rather see the licensing like it is in florida with out all the crazy inspections they have. Real hard to hget jobs done timely when you wait for an inspection all day and you have 4 of them on a simple shingle roof.

they call it a reg. here in pa. no testing at all. just show proff of $50,000.00 liab insurance and you are a reg contractor.