I’ve sung Jay’s praises often to friends and strangers inquiring about our remodel and the master behind the plan. And I thought of Jay, the owner of a one-man, residential remodeling company, when I read a Columbian story last week: “Agency wants to hear tales of woe about home work.” The state Department of Licensing was in town Friday seeking feedback from people who have experiences with residential contractors. The Legislature asked the department to do a “sunrise study” to find out if it is feasible or desirable for the government to license those in the residential construction industry.

The study will help legislators decide whether to add a layer of bureaucracy to the residential construction business. An unsuccessful 2007 effort to pass a so-called consumer-protection measure requiring licensing, a written exam and increased bonding levels for contractors prompted this quest. (Residential contractors already carry a bonding level of $12,000, and all contractors here must be registered with the Department of Labor and Industries and carry general liability insurance.) 

I’m not sure how licensing would affect my favorite residential contractor, Jay. But I felt defensive for Jay and his kind reading that headline that asked for “tales of woe” and after hearing proponents of licensing say that consumers have little recourse for shoddy work completed (or not completed) by such contractors.

My gut reaction when I read that consumers have little recourse against x, y or z in our litigation-happy society is, “Really?” My reaction when I hear the government exploring more oversight is, “How much will it cost consumers and taxpayers?” That’s especially true as I have a list of bad experiences with government-permitting entities but rave reviews for contractors I have hired.

Input of all types

After reading the headline I thought, what about success stories surrounding home construction? Doesn’t the government want to hear those stories, too? I called DOL and they assured me they were looking for those kinds of tales. And if you didn’t get that from the headline in our paper or couldn’t attend Friday’s meeting, there’s still time to weigh in with wonderful words (or tales of woe) via an online survey found at www.dol.wa.gov/about/sunrise.html. 

The Building Industry Association of Washington, an opponent of increased regulation, assured me DOL was seeking input of all types. DOL rightly notified the BIAW and other groups about its quest so they could urge people to give feedback.  A BIAW spokesperson said she believes the department truly wants to discover if complaints are widespread or anecdotal so they can prescribe an appropriate remedy. Is better consumer education and enforcement of current laws the right route to avoid grievances? Is the status quo acceptable? Is licensing of residential contractors needed to protect people?  Legitimate questions are being raised, BIAW says.

Still, BIAW worries more regulation will mean the end of small contractors in our state. Regulation such as the kind posed in 2007 “would open the door to additional litigation. … Our primary concern is how that affects the availability of liability insurance.” More regulation could result in insurance premiums spiking, creating a cost-prohibitive situation for small contractors. That wouldn’t serve the industry or consumers. Residential construction work is expensive. If increased regulation resulted in added burdens to contractors, you can bet your roof the cost would be passed on to customers. Sometimes the government protects consumers best when it stays clear of intense, unnecessary regulation.

If you need a contractor, read about hiring tips (www.atg.wa.gov or www.contractors.lni.wa.gov) or call 800-647-0982.  And ask your friends if they have a Jay and hire him.