Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

Re: California Plan Stamping

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Dennis,

There is a big difference in why things may not happen due "not following
through" by bringing it the Attorney General's office and things not
happening due to the Attorney General's office choosing to put other
crimes at a higher priority.

In otherwords, take the case that you mentioned.  Are you sure that
nothing happened cause BORPELS did not even take it to the AG or did that
case go no where cause the AG's office decided that it was not as
important as say murders, etc?  If you know for sure that it was BORPELS
that did not push it far enough, then you would be correct...they are the
problem.  If on the other hand, the AG's office did nothing with it, then
I doubt there is much that BORPELs can do about it.

I am not rationalizing.  I am pointing out that maybe there are other
factors that may have resulted in the nothing happening...other factors
that you (and I) may not be aware of.  Based upon this I usually excercise
a little caution before "flinging mud" at others as I might not know all
the facts.  In this situation, you seemed to state that BORPELs dropped
the ball and did not "follow through".  Do you know that for fact?  Or did
nothing happen because another entity (i.e. maybe the AG or a local
prosecutor) decided that they had better things to do?

Regards,

Scott
Adrian, MI

On Sun, 17 Jul 2005, Dennis S. Wish, PE wrote:

> Scott and others:
> The California Business and Professions Act defines the law by which any
> individual may practice or represent themselves as engineer (nurse,
> doctors etc.). There is no circular logic to this and it is the
> responsibility of the Department of Consumer Affairs and any sub-office
> that regulates the practice to address abuse by professionals or
> misrepresentation by non-professionals. In the past, BORPELS has brought
> legal action either by way of complaints or by being an active party in
> the prosecution of fraud. Being unlicensed does not take the issue from
> the responsibility of BORPELS, but requires BORPELS to carry it further
> to the state Attorney General's office since it is the Department of
> Consumer Affairs that BORPELS is run by and they are as bound to
> bringing justified complaints to the attention of the State offices on
> fraud - acting on behalf of the complainant.
>
> I understand Scotts rationalization, but any party who is aware of a
> violation of the law (this is a violation of business and professions
> act) is required to follow through rather than just drop the case with a
> lame excuse that since the party is not licensed it does not fall under
> their jurisdiction. Their responsibility is to the safety of the public
> and this includes protecting them from an unlicensed individual who
> claims to be qualified or licensed.
>
> Once again, BORPELS has published an annual document that lists the
> legal actions against those charged with incompetence and
> misrepresentation or fraud. There are many such documented cases from
> the past of people who may have skills in architecture and engineering
> but who are discovered to be unlicensed or falsifying wet seals to pass
> themselves off as licensed professionals.
>
> No, the problem here is one of not enough investigators and the lack of
> state funding to protect the public from fraud. BORPELS is as
> responsible as you are I to bring fraud to the attention of the Attorney
> Generals Office and especially so since the complaint was initiated by
> one of the professional community through proper channels.
>
> Dennis
> --
>
> --
>
> *Dennis S. Wish, PE*
> *California Professional Engineer
> Structural Engineering Consultant
> http://wish92253.blogspot.com/ (Photo Blog)
> http://www.structuralist.net/Professional.htm (Launch to Professional
> Discussion Blogs)
> *
> *dennis.wish(--nospam--at)verizon.net*
> *
> 760.564.0884 (office - fax)
> *
>
>     */This e-mail is intended to be delivered only to the named
>     addressee(s) and may contain information that is confidential and
>     proprietary. If this information is received by anyone other than
>     the named addressee(s), the recipient(s) should immediately notify
>     the sender by e-mail and promptly delete the transmitted material
>     from your computer and server. In no event shall this material be
>     read, used, stored, or retained by anyone other than the named
>     addressee(s) without the express written consent of the sender or
>     the named addressee(s)./*
>
>

******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
*   Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
* 
*   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers 
*   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To 
*   subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
*
*   http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
*
*   Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. Remember, any email you 
*   send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted 
*   without your permission. Make sure you visit our web 
*   site at: http://www.seaint.org 
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********