Re: Florida Statute According to RLB

["Bob Worthy" <securinc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

You noticed how he stays out of it while others have seemed to jump to the
same misunderstanding as he has, did ya?
But I promised I would get out of it, so I am done with this thread. Bye!

"Roland" <roland@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:4591b42e$0$8997$4c368faf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Someone needs to send Bass a new box of adult diapers. I am sure he has
gone
> through the last ones he had crapping his pants laughing so hard and you
> guys.
>
> "Bob Worthy" <securinc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:kJhkh.11362$_X.9958@xxxxxxxxx
> > Post the link where you read your interpetation and I'll show you where
it
> > changed. Since you posted the wrong statute to begin with, I have know
> > idea
> > where to start.  I don't know where you would have read it. As far as
RBL
> > and the enforcement goes, keep up with the thread. I have already said,
> > the
> > state wouldn't do anything on their own. He stepped on someone's toes a
> > year
> > ago and got investigated. He slipped by on that one. They must, by law,
> > investigate complaints, but he is really not a threat to the health,
> > safety
> > and welfare of the public as stated in the statute to be a big concern
to
> > them. In other words he isn't worth the time or money.  His BBB report
may
> > come to their attention by wat of a consumer complaint. Again, I don't
> > give
> > two rats asses about his activities, just his over inflated ego. I have
> > been
> > asked to stop since it is boring. I don't if it was his activities or
his
> > ego that is boring, but either way I heard what they said.
> >
> > "Si Ballenger" <shb*NO*SPAM*@comporium.net> wrote in message
> > news:459195e2.228254140@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >> On Tue, 26 Dec 2006 15:53:37 -0500, "Bob Worthy"
> >> <securinc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>
> >> >The State Statute that govern alarm system activities is F.S. Chapter
> >> >489
> >> >Part II, as well as, a Rules Chapter, which I will let RLB find for
> > himself
> >> >and a Florida Administrative Code Chapter of the Florida Statutes.
There
> > is
> >> >also the Uniform Building Code and Florida Fire Pervention Code and
the
> >> >State Fire Marshals Statute. These are also enforced by the Electrical
> >> >Contractors Licensing Board of the Department of Business and
> > Professional
> >> >Regulation along with interrelated Regulatory Agencies like the
> > Department
> >> >of State, Department of Financial Services, the IRS, and the State
> >> >Department of Revenue.You quoted out of Chapter 489 Part I. This is
the
> >> >statute that is governed by the Contractors Industry Licencing Board.
> >> >Although they are a State board, they are not even located in
> > Tallahassee.
> >> >They are located in Jacksonville, FL. The CLIB is the board that
handles
> > all
> >> >other trades, ie plumbers, roofers, AC contractors, etc. They have
> > nothing
> >> >to do with electrical or low voltage. Alarm contracting is very well
> > defined
> >> >in the proper statute.
> >> >
> >> >Not when I have been involved legislatively over the last nine years
to
> >> >craft the statute as it is written today and to teach the statute to
the
> >> >state investigators, as to how it pertains to our industry. Those that
> > skim
> >> >read, don't deal with the Attorney General's office, think they are
> >> >above
> >> >the law, and don't keep up with the changes after the legislative
> >> >session
> > is
> >> >over are the ones to be easily confused.
> >>
> >> Interesting point. I would think that with nine years of training
> >> the investigators would act to stop the alleged violations
> >> (supposidly reported to the state by various posters here over
> >> the years) . Seeing how they haven't I would guess that the
> >> alleged violations are not valid, or the state of Florida just
> >> doesn't care about actual enforcement. As for alarm contracting,
> >> the statute I read states that an alarm contractor is one who
> >> engages in a contract for compensation. With no contract or no
> >> compensation, the state probably has no case (probably why they
> >> never act on the issue). As for the electrical part, I doubt that
> >> much has changed in the last couple of years since I read thru
> >> the applicable statutes. Back then a license was needed if a
> >> person was performing actual wiring installation/maintaince, or
> >> directing the activities of those performing actual wiring
> >> installation/maintaince. Since you are very familiar with the
> >> subject, post up a link that shows that this has changed.
> >
> >
>
>