[Here are a few great tips for forward-thinking US private home decision makers who are always passionate about ensuring that we get the best possible results from the people we hire in the home improvement field.]

*Special Note In Relation To Part 2

In Part 2 of this three-part series, our primary focus was on having a reliable standard for hiring building trades personnel who work in home repair and improvement. Since we are considering priorities specifically for the home setting, this standard falls in the category of “house rules.” In other words, it is an integral part of conditions we have for ensuring things are done around the house towards the benefit of all.

Subsequently, it can be fair to state that having special requirements for making the most reasonable contractor hiring decisions are constituent to “house rules.” In this conclusive article, we will occasionally refer to our hiring requirements, respectively.

*Key Points From Part 2

1. Our primary sub-topic was “Is Our Decision To Hire Sound?” To this effect, we took into consideration if whether or not we have an unbreakable “house rule” for deciding well in resident-contractor relations. In other words, the concern was for if we had reliable home protocol for ensuring our decision to hire is based on verified facts - or none.

2. The prospect of our arriving at a hiring decision based primarily on how related building trades personnel present themselves, may not be within the best interests of the household.

To illustrate, let us consider a recent report about a malicious group of building tradespersons who preyed on unsuspecting homeowners. Perhaps, this will inspire even more residents to invest the extra time and effort to “first” conduct a thorough search of contractors’ reputations before deciding to hire.

*Why Our Decision Must Be Sound

Although home improvement fraud believably runs wild throughout the U.S., let us focus on a report which originates from the state of New York. A trio of scandalous building trades personnel (such as home improvement contractors) were indicted on multiple felonies. Notwithstanding the fact that they were also dishonest with commercial entities, let it suffice to allow at this time, focus on the “social entity” of the home setting. Reportedly, there was a homeowner who received a U.S. Housing and Urban Development Loan of roughly $200,000. It was to go towards massive interior-exterior renovation on the resident’s property.

Briefly, two of the three defendants did the actual work. The third, reportedly a licensed and certified housing inspector (in this case, also a contractor), approved it. It followed that the two home improvement tradesmen knew the inspector from prior dealings. Hence, this may not have been a coincidence that he was selected "by the victim" for doing the inspection. It can be reasonably inferred that "examination" of the property by this accomplice was while it was in progress. This is mentioned since, according to the report, none of what was to be done was in any state of completion.

Excerpt: "the homeowner was left living in a house with no siding, broken windows, no working kitchen, and old windows and siding strewn across the yard. The home was left in this disarray for more than eight months.” (Ref. Resource Box ahead)

The contractor duo solicited variations of home repair work. Although much of their work (as documented above) was shoddy and incomplete, the inspector signed off on it. This means, irrespective of the fact that the work was below standard, the inspector approved it – in writing. This enabled he and the others to fraudulently collect federal monies for their personal spending.

*Summary

These corrupt individuals were able to do this because the homeowner apparently "believed" that since they were authorized via HUD contract to attend to the home that they could be trusted. Invariably, the victim “thought,” as perhaps others, that the decision to hire these predators was a reasonably sober one. Instead, in each case, it was disastrous.

This happens often when residents mistakenly "assume" contractors authorized to work on our properties by HUD, FEMA, Lowe's, Home Depot, Home Advisor, Angie’s List, American Home Shield, or other third-parties are automatically safe. No doubt, we have quite a bit of catching up to do on our hiring priorities in home improvement. But we can begin by developing more solid standards or "house rules" for first checking out unknown contractors, regardless of where they are from or who "sent them". HGRBS offers critical homeowner's guides which can be helpful to this end. Among these: "Who Is This Contractor?" [access link via Resource Box ahead]

Comments always welcome.

Edited with special assistance from M. Conti

Public Courtesy – HGRBS – Since 2009