Mr. Spicer's comments from 12/15 are particularly interesting, from a consumer's standpoint.  Our family had problems with our home.  The inspectors gave us information, mostly of a mathematical standpoint.  There were some pictures, but upon further examination by us and those in the industry, no particularyly helpful.  Nothing in those reports gave us any basis of what the numbers meant, other than that they were "high."

We were told to almost a degree of certainty  that they had identified the problem and that they would solve the problem.

We were then given a bid to remediate.  It was a lot of money, but at that point we were desperate and signed a contract.

The job as it was explained was not delivered.  Direct questions were not answered.  We have done a lot of work researching what transpired in our dealings with this company, and we conclude that there was an intentional effort to sell the job up front for financial gain.  We have had another company, who we find to be knowedgable and responsive, to come in and assess our situation.  They are appalled at the sequence of events in our dealings with the first company.

The principals involved in the company that we dealt with are represented in this Town Hall as favoring allowing the testing company and the remediating company to be the same company.  They are posting seperately, but two of the individuals were in my home representing the same company and one other is clearly listed as an associate (unless he has left the company.)  A fourth posting on the Town Hall simply cut and pasted the comments of the third individual.

You should not have the people who the legislation is aiming to control dictating what the regulations will be.