ReplyI would imagine jail time could be a possibility. Most I've ever known to happen to anyone, is a stiff fine, and not ever being eligible for a license in the future.
Regular Guest
What is the worst thing that ever happened to an unlicensed HVAC contractor, assuming a license was required in his state?
Professional Member
I would imagine jail time could be a possibility. Most I've ever known to happen to anyone, is a stiff fine, and not ever being eligible for a license in the future.
Regular Guest
I think the death sentence would be appropriate for such an infraction.
Regular Guest
I can live with that. I think the jail time is a bluff, but I'm checking on that.Originally Posted by the dangling wrangler
There are services in my area that are required to be licensed, I know they are not, and they are in plain sight and making huge sums.
This home improvement license is costing me a pretty penny and I am not living large on this source of income.
Professional Member
I used to get upset about stuff like that too. Not any more. It took too much out of me. There's more of them, than there are of you.
Good Luck though.
Professional Member
Don't be ridiculous...amputation of the hands is severe enough.
If he's unlicensed and has a waiver signed by the homeowner to install it under substandard conditions; then the death sentence.
“Your biggest risk is not taking one..."
Professional Member*
Kentucky has convicted several of statute violations. No jail time, but plenty of fines levied.
Perhaps you should have read the instructions before calling.
Regular Guest
Our gov. Sanford don't seem to mind. He seems to want to leave the door open.
R. 342, H. 4595--ORDERED PRINTED IN THE JOURNAL
The SPEAKER ordered the following veto printed in the Journal:
May 31, 2006
The Honorable Robert W. Harrell, Jr.
Speaker of the House of Representatives
Post Office Box 11867
Columbia, South Carolina 29211
Dear Mr. Speaker and Members of the House:
I am hereby vetoing and returning without my approval H. 4595, R-342.
H. 4595 (Word version) would set requirements for the sale and installation of residential heating and air conditioning systems, and would allow the Department of Labor, Licensing and Registration to set civil penalties for violating regulations.
There are many licensed contractors in South Carolina who do a great job in providing heating and air services for people in our state. They are to be commended. Unfortunately, as just mentioned, this bill goes well beyond simple licensing requirements. It is for this reason that I am vetoing this Bill.
I don't believe it is government's role to tell a willing buyer and seller that a transaction is illegal when the consequence of that transaction does not entail material harm to the public at large. If the buyer knows that the installer is not licensed and proceeds anyway, it is the buyer's right to do so. This Bill will eliminate competition, and drive the cost of selling and installing heating and air conditioning systems higher. For example, one legislator happens to have a close family member who graduated from a technical college and has a great deal of knowledge in the area of heating and cooling, but happens not to be licensed. This Bill would make it illegal for this legislator to purchase the services of his own son, even though he is fully cognizant of the fact that his son isn't licensed. Leaving aside the above example, I think that is misguided for anyone not to be able to use their handyman of choice, including those that might be a cousin or relative.
A law saying that a potential buyer must be informed as to whether an installer is licensed, and/or one that makes the fraudulent claim of being licensed may be sufficiently narrow to protect the public interest without severely restricting the right to contract. But this Bill injects the State too firmly into the market. The quality of work of the licensed installers should speak for itself, without the need for the state government to create a captive market.
Therefore, I am returning H. 4595 without my signature.
Sincerely,
Mark Sanford
Governor
Received as information.
R. 342, H. 4595--GOVERNOR'S VETO SUSTAINED
The Veto on the following Act was taken up:
(R342) H. 4595 (Word version) -- Reps. Cato, Walker, Jennings, Battle, Cobb-Hunter, Sandifer, Haley, Kennedy, Bales, Ballentine, Branham, Emory, Hayes, J. Hines, Littlejohn, Mahaffey, Miller, Neilson, Rivers, Sinclair, Umphlett, Vick and Bingham: AN ACT TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING SECTION 40-59-35 SO AS TO PROHIBIT PROVIDING A POTENTIAL BUYER A CONTRACT OR PROPOSAL FOR SALE OR INSTALLATION OF RESIDENTIAL HEATING AND AIR CONDITIONING, OTHER THAN A WRITTEN ESTIMATE, BEFORE THE SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE SYSTEM HAVE BEEN REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY A LICENSED EMPLOYEE OF THE RETAIL SELLER; TO REQUIRE THE PERSON INSTALLING THE SYSTEM TO BE LICENSED PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 59, TITLE 40; TO FURTHER SPECIFY CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS FOR THE SALE AND INSTALLATION OF A HEATING AND AIR CONDITIONING SYSTEM; AND TO AUTHORIZE THE DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, LICENSING AND REGULATION TO PROMULGATE REGULATIONS ESTABLISHING A CIVIL PENALTY FOR VIOLATIONS.
Rep. CATO explained the Veto.
The question was put, shall the Act become a part of the law, the veto of his Excellency, the Governor to the contrary notwithstanding, the yeas and nays were taken resulting as follows:
Yeas 26; Nays 77
Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Bales Ballentine Battle
Bingham Cato Cobb-Hunter
Emory Funderburk Haley
Hardwick Hayes J. Hines
M. Hines Huggins Littlejohn
Mack Mahaffey McCraw
McLeod Perry M. A. Pitts
Rivers Sandifer Scarborough
Thompson Walker
Total--26
Those who voted in the negative are:
Agnew Anthony Bailey
Bannister Barfield Bowers
Brady Breeland G. Brown
J. Brown R. Brown Chalk
Chellis Clark Clemmons
Clyburn Cotty Dantzler
Davenport Delleney Duncan
Edge Frye Hagood
Hamilton Harrell Harrison
Harvin Haskins Herbkersman
Hinson Hiott Hodges
Hosey Howard Jefferson
Kirsh Leach Limehouse
Loftis Lucas Martin
McGee Merrill Miller
Mitchell Moody-Lawrence Neilson
Norman Ott Owens
Parks Pinson E. H. Pitts
Rhoad Rice Scott
Simrill Skelton D. C. Smith
G. M. Smith G. R. Smith J. R. Smith
Stewart Talley Taylor
Toole Townsend Tripp
Umphlett Vaughn Vick
Viers Weeks White
Witherspoon Young
Total--77
So, the Veto of the Governor was sustained and a message was ordered sent to the Senate accordingly.
RECORD FOR VOTING
My intent was to override the Governor's veto on H. 4595.
Rep. Joan Brady
Any comments?
Professional Member*
"handyman of their choice" Now were handymen. Incrediable!!!!!!!
Its a good Life!
Regular Guest
just did a re write on quote above change a couple of the words and it completely different , or is it??? ( I hope he is not a republican)
Professional Member
come on guys, the guys without licenses make the real techs look good. How many times have you ever gotten a call and the unit is all hacked up. You go and tell the customer whats going on and then fix it. Iv'e deal with alot of customers that had something hacked by an unlicensed contractor and now they call us. Most of those customers are the ones that never question a bid or service charge anymore, they've learn't they get what they pay for.
Regular Guest
The thing is, only one HO has ever asked me if I have a license. They don't know and they don't care.
Professional Member
There's a coupla states that don't require any state licensing. If I recall correctly, one of the more knowledgeable members here, is from one of those states. By no means would I call him a "Hack".
Professional Member*
Just curious....
What's your hourly rate?
Perhaps you should have read the instructions before calling.
Professional Member
Must be Bigbird and me.
Regular Guest
What smells so bad here in my opinion is the fact that it says "does not entail material harm to the public at large". I wonder, how many times that house will be sold? How many people will enter it in the life of that install? If not that, Is the public at large all we care to protect? The truth is only a small percent of people that don't have a lic. and actually know what they are doing will be doing this work.
Why do I spend my time and money to obtain a lic., pay my fees to the state to maintain my lic., seek and attend continueing education classes at my expense when my state will allow anyone with a drill and screw to install a unit?
The Mechanical Association is working on this. That is evident. Most supply houses require you to have a lic. To bad the state will not inforce the very lic they are receiving revenues for. This makes no "cents".
Last edited by absoair; 10-17-2009 at 07:15 AM. Reason: adding to and taking from
Regular Guest
Maybe that's what going on in my state.
They put out this licensing thing blah blah to bluff contractors into paying them, but since enforcement costs money it would cut into their revenue stream, so they don't do it.
If homeowners complain enough, maybe the state will be shamed into making some additional effort at enforcement, for a while.
I think now that I have been a sucker, so I have some decisions to make when my license runs out.
If licensing works, the amount of harm done to the public should be significantly less after licensing than before. Assuming all states care equally about the well-being of their residents, and some states don't have licensing req'mts, I have to wonder what is really going on here.
God Speed, Jim. We'll miss you - 2-26-23
PA just changed over to having a license.
So your saying every contractor in PA. Was a hack because PA had no license?
Professional Member
I think I understand. But, not positive.
Your state/city doesn't require licensing,however,you are licensed?
That should be a good thing for you. Something to make you stand above the rest of the crowd. That's how I see it anyway.
If I mis-understood,sorry,
Professional Member*
4th time you get caught you get a stern warning.
Posting Permissions
