Win The Storm Conference!

More importantly, this is fundamental stuff here and it's alarming to me that so many people do not even grasp the concept of freedom that our Founders wanted for us. Whether one can remember the exact quotes isn't important - you either grasp the concept or you don't.

twill59 Said: Yes Tim, Paraphrasing Wildly! At least you admit it. Good man. Not too many people have no problem at all putting modern verbage into the mouths of our Founding Fathers.....talking FaceBook here :)

I'm waiting...:-)

It was a very clean paraphrase of a very significant and venerable quote. You did good.

While we're on that subject, George Washington, even though he turned down offers to make him exponentially more powerful personally (and in so doing put this country onto its stellar path,) was quite a bit less comfortable with personal freedoms for the general populace than Jefferson was. We couldn't have made it this far without either of them.

Roofguy: No "misconception" - It's how it is plain & simple.

I will however agree with you on your Amarillo analogy - Much the same takes place here in a lot of Colorado municipalities - It is indeed a farce/racket. Makes my case so-to-speak.

Colorado is all about salesmanship. California is all about efficiency/pricing.

CO. has far many more roofers than Ca. Mostly of which are what I refer to as "tin-men" (the old door-to-door siding shysters - much like the "travelers"/driveway coating shenanigan types), & simply put: Naive wannabe's,(as CO. lacks licensing, affording any warm body that so has the notion, to become a "contractor"). The burden in totally on the consumer.

CA. on the other hand, has it's issues as well; The biggest being the underground economy - There is admit-tingly substantial unlicensed activity that goes on. But that's the risk the consumer takes-on at their free will. From a contractor's position, you are generally competing with like peers - The difference from CO. is that they're all licensed, are for the most part, "on-their game", (knowledgeable, know what they're doing & are good at it), so the competition is fierce. Far more so than CO. where it's more of a "sales game".

JM $.02

Hence - The "Winning the storm game" seminars.....LOL

CO. has far many more roofers than Ca.

Not sure where you learned that but it seems highly unlikely.

My dad started out on the Front Range, I know a little about that market.

The Win a the Storm conference was mostly for public adjusters, which I am not. I also took the Low Slope a Hail Damage Assessment course at Haag Engineering many years ago, in spite of me not believing anything they say or stand for. Sometimes it's good to peek in on the methodology used, no?

It also helps to replace misconceptions one has about concepts he can only critique because he hasn't educated himself in them.

Here in the hailbelt it is my job to see to it that my customer doesn't come out on the short end with the carrier. The more I understand about "the game" the better prepared I am to help my customer not get screwed. And you - as a roofer on the Front Range or in Texas have to admit - you don't have any choice but to deal with hail claims on your customers' roofs. Period! So saying you don't get involved in the game means that somehow your customers magically dodge the hail damage, or you're walking from them when they do get it.

Where I learned that? I live it!

Roofguy Said: Here ya go Mr. Twill:

I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty, than those attending too small a degree of it. ---Thomas Jefferson

Now, shouldnt you admit that I had it pretty darn close? ;-)

Thanks Tim. The term "overregulation" is what caught my attention. I don't believe it to be a word common to the 18th century :)

It is better to tend to the pitfalls of too much freedom, than to endure the perils of overregulation."

"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty, than those attending too small a degree of it."

Close in spirit. Miles apart in words.

:side:

twill59 Said: It is better to tend to the pitfalls of too much freedom, than to endure the perils of overregulation.

I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty, than those attending too small a degree of it.

Close in spirit. Miles apart in words.

:side:

You're ARE grasping at straws dude! :-)

Overregulation was a word I chose to link it with licensure in Texas. In the context I used, overregulation is the same as liberty, or loss thereof.

That aside, my point remains exactly the same. The risk to a free society is far greater when legislators work too hard to keep us completely safe...often from ourselves. Last time I sent out a postcard to all roofers in the U.S., there were 44,000 of them. So all 44k are supposed to be saddled with collectively millions of hours of additional work each year, at a cost of tens of millions of dollars, in the hopes that it will reliably stop a crooked roofer from cheating a careless property owner?

It doesn't wash. That is forcing EVERY property owner who buys a roof, to pay 5% more (guess) for it in order to protect less than 1% of the property owners who are both in a position to buy a roof, and are too ignorant to qualify their roofer.

After buying a permit and registering my business recently in my small town. I was told by the clerk that they are "protecting the public" "Nonsense" said I. "If they want proof of insurance (which is all the "license" provides) they can contact my insurance company. I can provide it in advance." No reason for you to charge them $25 .....for nothing.

"Furthermore" said I "if you want to protect the public, then get on the roof, check for correct nailing, flashing, neatness of installation" blah, blah blah

But then I shut up as the police station is in the next room...

In the real world, building inspectors generally fall into 3 categories:

1. Are clueless as to the proper "placement of nails," flashings, etc. (and don't give a damn about "neatness'). 2. Are a failed contractor themselves who now see it as their job to stroke their ego by telling successful contractors how to do a job they couldn't do. 3. Are friends of a contractor or are taking kickbacks, and handing out passed final inspections without even going on the roof.

Reality has made me cynical.

This is not rocket science and most property owners grasp it. Pick a roofer who can show you roofs older than the guarantees he is offering, and check his references. Google: v. XYZ roofing and you'll learn of any lawsuits.

We're not going to settle anything here and it's not my intention to try, but I really do think the insurance business and the license business are two separate (maybe somehow related) issues. I think I side with TomB on the face of it while at the same time admitting a ton of respect to Tim for his overall approach to the reality he is in, and I am not in, facing day to day operations. We don't have hail claims here. As a matter of fact, unless the wind blows something away or a foreign object strikes the roof, a branch for instance, homeowners aren't entitled to new roofs or even repairs of existing roofs. If a tree falls onto a house it gets serious.

As to licensing, I'm now pretty certain there is a tremendous functional difference between commercial /industrial operations and residential operations. Barrier to entry is way more difficult for commercial. You can't field a large crew, bring in expensive equipment and execute on a thousand square job if you are a complete flake. Googling prior lawsuits and checking past performance in the commercial/industrial arena is one thing.

Resi is another. Everybody has to start out somewhere, some time. Over forty years ago I did it with virtually no track record, virtually no money, no employees, no insurance, no truck (I had a station wagon) and a bucket of hand tools. I had two dozen roof brackets and a cheap extension ladder from Montgomery Wards. But I was already extremely gifted at the trade, honest, extremely hardworking, and I got traction and ended up with a successful, though small, business. Many of my peers started out the same way and weren't so lucky in the end. Maybe not as honest, maybe not as hardworking, maybe not as skilled. Who knows.

But I did have a license and had I failed, it could have provided some bond protection to an unfortunate client in case of roof failure. It curbed any, and I mean any, temptation to screw up. It didn't cost much to get and it didn't cost the clients any more because I had it. Homeowners, code enforcement jurisdictions, suppliers, subs, employees and the prime contractors are all nominally but significantly linked together in mutual protection by license law. It forces new entrants to the business world (and I think if we're interested in freedom we have to allow new entrants) to meet a minimal nominal standard of competence and accountability. A little test, a little fee, a little insurance, and if you mess up you don't get away with a little "Sorry."

If you want a gold-plate, stellar company of long standing to do your roof, then you can check history and you can get that. But if you're a homeowner one step away from foreclosure or running on a shoestring budget and you need a cheaper roofing company, the license law tends to save you from complete flakes, of which there are, have been, and always will be many.

Well said, Egg.

We seem to have competent enough inspectors here Tim. Thing is, for roofing, (probably all secondary trades) they are just paper pushers. They don't actually go out and inspect anything.

Some towns / counties, force an Ice & Water Shield rule on us, where they either do a drive by, or we have to document (photograph) appropriate I&W installation.

Which is treating the symptom, not the disease anyway :silly: