CSLB Application Processing in Action

CSLB application processing in actionHere is an example of the CSLB application processing in action.

04/21/2014 – APPLICATION RECEIVED
04/25/2014 – PRINTED ACKNLDGMNT LTTR TO APPLCNT
05/12/2014 – APP TO CASE MGMT FOR FLAG REVIEW
05/30/2014 – INSTRUCTIONS RETURNED FRM CASE MGMT
05/30/2014 – AIU REQUESTED APP TO BE POSTED
06/03/2014 – APPLICATION REJECTED FOR CORRECTION
06/03/2014 – REJECT – CONFIRM LEGAL NAME
06/03/2014 – CRITICAL CLASS DUTIES NOT SPECIFIC
06/20/2014 – REJECTED APP RECEIVED BACK AT CSLB
06/20/2014 – CORRECTIONS SENT TO BE SCANNED
06/20/2014 – ADD’L REJECT TO APPLICNT TO CORRECT
07/24/2014 – REJECTED APP RECEIVED BACK AT CSLB
07/24/2014 – CORRECTIONS SENT TO BE SCANNED
07/24/2014 – APPLICATION REJECTED FOR CORRECTION
07/24/2014 – NEED TRADE WORK DESCRIBED
07/25/2014 – APPLICATION POSTED
07/25/2014 – REFERRED TO EXAM SCHEDULING – BOTH
07/28/2014 – NOTICE TO APPEAR FOR EXM 08/18/2014
08/18/2014 – EXAM SCHEDULED FOR BOTH LAW & TRADE
08/18/2014 – PASSED BOTH LAW AND TRADE EXAM
09/18/2014 – APP SENT TO SUPERVISOR FOR REVIEW
09/18/2014 – APPLICATION RETURNED TO PROGRM TECH
09/23/2014 – APP TO AIU FOR INVESTIGATION

Rejected not once, not twice, but three times. Then, after providing the corrections requested and passing both exams, they sent this app to the AIU. Which, from what the CSLB has said, no longer exists.

Government, by definition, is a cluster…. But the CSLB has taken ineptitude to a whole new level.

Let’s break it down:

5/12 the app is sent to Case Management. Probably because the applicants name is the same or similar to someone else’s. There is 2+ weeks wasted.

5/30 AIU requests the app to be posted. Wait… AIU? I thought the app was in Case Management? One would think the app was good to go since the AIU said it could be posted. (Posted means accepted and that the applicant can proceed to testing)

6/3 Rejected for correction. On 5/30 the AIU said it could be posted. Now it’s being rejected for correction?

6/20 Corrections received and sent to be scanned… AND rejected again! My assumption here is that they didn’t get back what they requested, or they are playing with the applicant in the hopes that he’ll withdraw the app.

7/24 Corrections received, sent to be scanned… AND rejected again!! “Need Trade Work Description” Was this not included in the original reject? Did the applicant not provide this with the original reject? Or is the CSLB just rejecting it again because they didn’t bother to include it in the original rejection?

7/25 App posted and exam date scheduled. This would suggest that everything the applicant submitted was accepted. That is how any logical person would view this comment.

8/18 Exams passed. Bonding and insurance purchased, business cards ordered, ready to move forward… but wait…

9/18 One month later.. the app is sent to the supervisor for review. Review of what? The supervisor sends it back to the tech with instructions to send the app to AIU. Again, I thought the AIU was no longer?

9/23 5 days later the app is sent to the AIU, where the investigator will ask for all of the same documents the tech would have asked for months ago and 5 months after the app was submitted.

So there you have it. The utterly inept CSLB application processing in action.

Will this applicant get his license? I hope so! He proved his knowledge by passing the State mandated, CSLB created exams.

 

Please follow and like us:
error

CSLB Explains B General Experience

Finally, something in writing from the CSLB that explains the B General Experience requirements.

B Acceptable Experience per CSLB

And there is nothing in the law that backs this up!

What you see here was sent to a client of mine from Indiana. The highlighting was done by the Contractors State License Board application technician.

The bottom two lines clearly state [Experience in framing and at least any two…], but there is nothing in any law or regulation that states this. Now it’s always been this way, it was this way when I worked at the CSLB from 2001 to 2005, but just because it’s been this way for a long time doesn’t make it right. This is a CSLB underground reg that needs to be corrected and/or stopped!

The law does state: “The application is, as determined by the registrar, for a classification that is closely related to the classification or classifications in which the licensee is licensed, or the qualifying individual is associated with a licensed general engineering contractor or licensed general building contractor and is applying for a classification that is a significant
component of the licensed contractor’s construction business as determined by the registrar.” “As determined by the registrar” is the key phrase here. Other than in this CSLB provided text, where is it stated that Framing is a requirement?

As determined by the registrar is a dangerous statement. The registrar could “determine” any number of policies or procedures that would have a very negative effect to applicants, licensees, construction companies, and the industry as a whole. I think “As determined by the registrar” needs to be removed from the law.

7057. General building contractor

(a) Except as provided in this section, a general building contractor is a contractor whose principal contracting business is in connection with any structure built, being built, or to be built, for the support, shelter, and enclosure of persons, animals, chattels, or movable property of any kind, requiring in its construction the use of at least two unrelated building trades or crafts, or to do or superintend the whole or any part thereof.

This does not include anyone who merely furnishes materials or supplies under Section 7045 without fabricating them into, or consuming them in the performance of, the work of the general building contractor.

(b) A general building contractor may take a prime contract or a subcontract for a framing or carpentry project. However, a general building contractor shall not take a prime contract for any project involving trades other than framing or carpentry unless the prime contract requires at least two unrelated building trades or crafts other than framing or carpentry, or unless the general building contractor holds the appropriate license classification or subcontracts with an
appropriately licensed contractor to perform the work. A general building contractor shall not take a subcontract involving trades other than framing or carpentry, unless the subcontract requires at least two unrelated trades or crafts other than framing or carpentry, or unless the general building contractor holds the appropriate license classification. The general building contractor shall not count framing or carpentry in calculating the two unrelated trades necessary in order for the general building contractor to be able to take a prime contract or subcontract for a project involving other trades.

Please follow and like us:
error

Whats New in California Contractors Licensing

Whats New in California Contractors Licensing?

Well, there doesn’t appear to be much new happening in the world of California contractors licensing. I haven’t heard from anyone new about their license application struggles.

Could everything be going smoothly at the CSLB? I highly doubt that. They haven’t been able to get their act together over the last 15 years.

Are you, or someone you know, in need of application advise? Do you need an application prepared or reviewed? Are you looking for high quality, low cost exam study materials? If so, please feel free to contact me. I reply to emails even after business hours, so don’t hesitate in dropping me a line.

 

Please follow and like us:
error

Email from a License Guru Blog Reader

Below is an email from a License Guru Blog reader describing her CSLB experience review nightmare.

CSLB Red Tape“I have been following the license guru blog for about 7 months now which is just 3 months short of the full year my husband has been getting the run around from the investigator assigned to his file.  On 06/13/13 the application was submitted and from there everything that you could possibly imagine in your worst nightmare happened.  The investigator began with requests for additional documentation to support the work experience forms that were submitted by two previous employers.  So the dog and pony show began.

We would get the documents and then submit them  only to find out that she needed one more thing…something she did not request the first go around,  and on and on this went on with the two employers, her, us and then she asked for more 1099’s which led to more people being sent forms for work experience, permits, pretty much everything but them signing in blood.  Even with certified mail it seemed she just did not have all the items to find the 4 years of experience she needed.  Or her other excuse was she could not contact the people….which is totally a lie since each and every person never received phone calls from her and we checked with them and found that she had not left messages or attempted.  Finally it was to the point that she made it her mission to deny this application.  Literally a day before his test date she said you might as well just not take it since you will not be approved for your work experience anyway.  It was amazing the total inexperience and lack of support.  Something that we felt needed to be brought the attention of her supervisors.  So, we called a meeting and did just that.  We went with the full binder of documentation with all supporting documents on a job by job basis from each previous employer and we also asked for each employer prior to that day if they would mind being called on our meeting day if necessary to speak with CSLB or answer any questions.  All agreed and were on stand by.  Also realize we ended up pulling 1099’s over 12 year period…and had letters written to explain what each job entailed along with building permits and copies of receipts.  I mean we were prepared!  When we got into the meeting we sat down with the investigator and two supervisors.  She said, “So what are we hear for today?”  Of course I wanted to say are you freaking kidding me?  But I let my husband start and so he said Basically we are confused why this is taking so long to verify my work experience.  All of this information is so detailed and we have letters, permits, 1099’s, W2’s, and even have pictures (even thought she said they were not acceptable) we brought them to show the quality work he has done.  She said, “Well i have only been able to verify 14 months and there is just not all the pieces to support the rest.  So that is when I said, I have prepared this binder with all the documents that have been sent to you.  But it has been organized in a way to show each job, timeframes, support, pictures, etc.  So, I handed it to the Supervisors and they started to view and started to ask the investigator what she could not verify.  She flipped through her mess of folders, which was all scribble and unorganized and when I said what is missing with employer #1, as she looked for that persons name she said oh I don’t see that one.  Hmmm was that one returned to me?  And so the meeting rolled on with much more of this same thing…her fumbling, us proving, Supervisors eyebrows raising, questions  about why this had not proceeded, etc…finally the last straw was when she called out one employer as not being able to specify that my husband did structural work for them.  She literally put words into the employers mouth and how we know that is what transpired next.  A phone call was made per the request of her supervisors to call the employer in question (one that would support 3 years of experience) the employer got on the phone and the investigator started the manipulation right in front of us.  She said remember when i asked you about what “my husband” did for you?  I asked if he did structural work and you said that he did sheetrock and remodels.  The employer said yes that is true, so the investigator said so he did not do any structural work on the jobs he did for you.  The employer said well wait a minute i guess the way it was asked of me made me think of it as new construction work, so no our work has not been brand new construction…but the work he has done is basically taking everything on old construction down to wood and foundation and rebuilding with new electrical, plumbing and framing, pretty much the works.  Plus he has supervised a crew to do so…so yes if that means structural then absolutely.  Well, bingo it was pretty much a given that the original conversation with no one to witness was most definately manipulated.  After the phone call, I just stated that I did not feel as if the investigator really understood her job, and that she was not in any way helpful.  The Supervisor asked if I could leave the binder.  I said I was uncomfortable with that since it was clear that the investigator had obviously lost documents previously sent via certified mail and that I would prefer they make another copy of all the documents that she should already all have at the meeting today.

So they sent her to make some copies.  Meanwhile they agreed that there was plenty of documentation and that we would not need to go to the hearing….it would be moved on from the investigator to the next step.  Upon her arrival back into the room one of the Supervisors was clearly irritated with her and said they were hiring for investigator positions and wondered if I was interested in applying!  He went on to say he was very impressed by the documentation binder that was presented by us and our presentation of it.  The investigator gave out a loud scowl and stormed out of the room.  Well I guess she does not like me!

Anyway,  we are still waiting for the final paperwork to come back…we have called and CSLB says it is in final stage and paperwork should be coming to tell us about securing the bond so that the license number can be issued.  That was 2 weeks ago!  I can’t believe this and I also realize now that majority of people that have this happen would just give up.  It has been a fight and something I would not wish on my worst enemy.

Any recommendations on what to do now?  When you check his application number online it just says application denied, do not schedule exam, but that has been that way since right after his exam was scheduled and he passed!  Amazing, what to do?  I feel like this is borderline unethical, and borderline against the law!  In addition there have been 3 major jobs that have come and gone that my husband could have bid on had he been licensed.  Possible loss of income not to mention the hours spent on phone, document preparation, mail and on and on.

Very tired and very frustrated.”

I want to thank this reader for sharing her CSLB experience with us. She has shown that the CSLB does not know how to handle people who are prepared and willing to stand up to them. As of this posting, the app is still in limbo. My guess is, the CSLB is trying to resolve this without making themselves look any worse than they already do.

If you find yourself in this situation…. put together a neatly prepared, organized binder and request a meeting with the CSLB. And remember…. DOCUMENT EVERYTHING, including phone calls!! Always ask the CSLB to put their requests in writing! This is vital!

Please follow and like us:
error

CalOSHA Targets Construction Sites for Inspections

CSLB Industry Bulletin

Following a series of fatal accidents involving construction workers, CSLB is passing along an announcement from the California Department of Industrial Relations about upcoming inspections of construction sites in the San Francisco Bay Area. CSLB likewise encourages rigorous training programs and on-site safety measures to protect construction workers from danger. 

Cal/OSHA TargeCAL OSHAts Construction Sites for Inspections

OAKLAND — Cal/OSHA is focusing on safety compliance at construction sites in the San Francisco Bay Area, following a recent series of fatal accidents in the region. Investigators have been deployed to inspect construction work sites throughout the coming weeks to determine whether adequate measures have been taken to identify safety hazards and prevent injury.

“Construction sites present special challenges to worker safety,” said Christine Baker, Director of the Department of Industrial Relations (DIR). “Employers need to have strong safety programs in place and train their workers to follow procedures.”

Cal/OSHA is a division of state Department of Industrial Relations.

Hazards at construction sites include open trenches and moving equipment at ground level, but elevated areas are particularly dangerous. Four recent incidents in California illustrate the danger.

On May 21, a worker at a residential project in San Jose fell to his death from a three-story building. On May 20, a worker on a San Mateo project tumbled nine feet from a wall, sustaining fatal head injuries. The same day in San Diego, a worker near the top of 22-foot rebar column was killed when the column fell on him. On May 18, a construction worker was killed when the train bridge he was dismantling in downtown Riverside collapsed, crushing him. All four accidents are under investigation by Cal/OSHA.

Falls are the leading cause of death for construction workers, which is one reason why the federal Occupational Safety & Health Administration (OSHA) has designatedJune 2-6 as “National Safety Stand-Down” week to encourage employers to talk with workers about fall hazards and prevention.

Cal/OSHA has posted an industry-specific fact sheet on fall protection online, and will be participating with federal OSHA in a series of “Safety Stand-Down” events at construction sites across the state to bring emphasis to the importance of fall protection and other safety measures at construction sites.

“Our goal is to raise awareness for everyone working in construction that hazards can be identified and corrected,” said acting Cal/OSHA Chief Juliann Sum. “Preparation and vigilance are vital to preventing workplace fatalities.”

Fall protection will be among the items Cal/OSHA inspectors will be checking during its inspections, from railings on buildings to personal devices such as hooks that attach to vests. Cal/OSHA’s teams will also examine trench safety, equipment safety and potential site hazards such as power lines. If inspectors find a lack of protection or a serious hazard, they can stop work at the site until the hazards are abated. Employers who fail to comply with Cal/OSHA safety regulations will be cited and ordered to correct the violations.

Cal/OSHA has resources available for employers and employees on its website, including safety publications for industries such as construction. Cal/OSHA’sConsultation Program provides free and voluntary assistance to employers and employee organizations to improve their health and safety programs. For assistance from the Cal/OSHA Consultation Program, employers can call (800) 963-9424.

Additional information on specific issues and work-related topics are available on the DIR website as well as on Facebook and Twitter.

Please follow and like us:
error

CSLB Investigation Opinion

I received an email via my contact form on my website. I don’t know what prompted this person to send me this, other than to give their opinion about the CSLB investigators.

Here’s their comment, untouched and not modified. cslb investigation opinion

“with and in fact most likely shoved into someone elses pile of folders. Make sure to cover yourself with confirmations of documents received. Make sure to double check with the people that filled out work experience forms on your behalf to see if they received phone calls or further documentation to fill out…because investigators will say they left messages but never was able to verify with previous employers. It’s part of the game, job security for them. Request to speak with a supervisor when you get nowhere with an investigator. Get a face to face meeting and bring a binder with each job tabbed showing, length of time, 1099 or W2 to back it up, permits (if applicable), work experience form filled out by the verifier, and a letter from the verifier stating specific duties you performed in relation to the classification you are going to be licensed for. Cross your T’s and dot your I’s and document everything, organize it and state your case. Do it sooner rather than later because they will give you no more than 30 days to do so, and when they extend it to 60 make sure you request a legal hearing to protect yourself, or you will have to start all over again! Don’t take the investigators word that they are still reviewing because they are not, you must be pro-active and get that face to face meeting with the supervisor. This is the only way that CSLB will start realizing that most of the investigators are really not even doing their job and most likely don’t have a clue on how to do it! I was shocked at the lack of organization and mess of notes and scribble the investigator showed me…they should be ashamed of such a poor representation of their investigative department.”

Do you have a CSLB Investigation Opinion that you’d like to share. Please, feel free to email me. I will keep your name anonymous.

Please follow and like us:
error

Contractors State License Board Exams Part 2

Don't Tread On Me Flag

Continuing the conversation with Betsy Figueira regarding Contractors State License Board Exams Part 2.

Phil,

I have submitted an IT request to correct the website statement regarding exam waivers –

  • Within the last five years, you have passed both the Law and Business Examination and the trade examination in the same classification for which you are applying, and the license for which you took the examinations was not denied due to lack of work experience.

Regarding your other concerns about applicants taking examinations and then ultimately not getting licensed, that can happen under multiple scenarios – an applicant can fail to provide the required bond or workers’ compensation documentation, an applicant can fail to be cleared by the Criminal Background Unit, an applicant can fail to provide requested experience documentation, etc.  As a governmental agency that processed tens of thousands of applications annually, we have procedures that address the vast majority of our applications – allowing them to test as soon as possible to avoid delays in licensure… which I believe most of them are appreciative of.

If you know of an applicant who does not want to take the examination until all of his/her other licensure requirements have been met, please have them submit a written request to me to have the examination process set aside while the entire rest of the licensure process is complete.  I will consider the request.  Of course, even if such a request is granted, we would still need to confirm that all of the licensure requirements are still valid after the applicant has passed the examinations and is at the point of licensure issuance.

Also, be please be aware that pursuant to CCR Section 816 (c), “nothing in this Rule shall be interpreted to limit the Registrar’s authority to require an applicant to provide any other information necessary to determine the applicant’s qualifications.”

Betsy Figueira CSLB, Licensing Division Manager 916-255-3369

My opinion (which I didn’t share with Ms. Figueira):

Contractors State License Board Exams Part 1

Website update:

It’s a banner day when the CSLB actually admits (almost) to making a mistake. Requesting to have the website updated to remove the “license denied due to lack of work experience” is a victory. This non-admittance to a mistake basically proves that cslb staff makes decisions on a whim without regards to the law. Somebody at a high level had to request that text be added to their website.

My “other” concerns:

Her list of why licenses are denied is correct, but she was side-stepping my comments/concerns that certain classifications are being unfairly targeted. Again, there is no specific rule, regulation, or law that gives the cslb the authority to do this.

Her comment about “procedures” for the thousands of applications they process a year is, well, ridiculous. Again, she side-stepped my comments that there are many instances, rules, regulations, laws that state that the applicant will be sent to the exams AFTER they have determined that the applicant meets the minimum requirements. Obviously they follow the procedures they want, and ignore the rules, regulations, and laws they don’t want.

She believes most of the applicants are appreciative. Granted, I do not speak with every applicant who has been sent to the exams and their app to investigation. I can only speak to the number of people who have called me with questions about what they should do. And listen to how they are unhappy with how they’ve been treated by the cslb. So unless Ms. Figueira has taken it upon herself to speak with every applicant, or even some of them, about how they feel regarding the run-around these applicants are receiving, her “belief” is, at best, a guess on her part.

CCR Section 816 (c):

This is my all time favorite regulation! “nothing shall be interpreted to limit the Registrar’s authority.” If you are a cslb employee or manager in licensing, this means you have carte blanche to do whatever you want. How much better can it get if you are a State agency? They actually wrote a regulation that says they can make up the rules on a daily basis. Today ~ they have 8 critical classifications that they will scrutinize beyond belief. Tomorrow ~ you might have take a lie detector test, or make a personal appearance in front of an experience review committee. If the Registrar’s authority is limitless, where does it end?

We live in a democracy! A democracy I volunteered to protect. How can we allow any governmental agency the power of limitless authority?

If you would like to comment on Contractors State License Board Exams Part 2, please feel free to use the comment link below, or send me an email. If you’d prefer to remain anonymous, just let me know.

Navy history…. The flag above is the first Navy Jack.

Please follow and like us:
error

CSLB Applications must be notarized

I was told today that CSLB applications must be notarized if you are applying from out-of-state.

notary publicOr at least the work experience form must be notarized. The reason given: it’s the only way they can verify signatures of out-of-state applicants and/or certifiers.

This would suggest that they verify ALL signatures, wouldn’t it? And how would they do that? Call, send a letter, or an email? Perhaps they use smoke signals, or two cups and a string?

One thing we know for a fact… they certainly don’t verify all signatures in person of in-state applicants! Does the CSLB think that out-of-state applicants don’t have phones, mailing addresses, or email accounts?

This is a new low for the Contractors State License Board. And another example of they make up the rules as they go along. Seriously, the only way to verify signatures of out-of-state applicants?

What this really looks like is another off the cuff decision by a CSLB employee in some bizarre attempt to profile, harass, classify, sectionalize, and deter out-of-state applicants.

So not only have they trivialized the State mandated exams by making you prove your experience on paper, but now you have to get your certifier to notarize his signature.

Good luck finding this requirement in the application instructions or in any California law or regulation!

Please follow and like us:
error

Contractors State License Board Exams

Email exchange I had with Betsy Figueira on 3/28/2014 regarding the Contractors State License Board exams.

Basically, I wanted to know how and why the CSLB is allowing applicants to take the CSLB exams when they are sending the applications to the investigation unit. The conversation went as follows:

Update at the bottom. 4/4/14

License Guru: Can you provide me with the rule, regulation, or law that gives the CSLB the authority to allow an applicant to take the exams, but still send their application to enforcement for investigation?

Ms. Figueira: Hello Phil,

California Code of Regulations (CCR) Section 825 (a) requires the qualifier to have 4 years of journey-level work experience within the last 10 years in the relevant classification.

Business and Professions Code (BPC) Section 7065, CCR Section 825 (e), and CCR Section 840 require the qualifier is to take the examination.

CCR Section 824 requires a comprehensive field audit of a minimum of 3% of the applications.

There is nothing in the law that specifically dictates the order in which the exam must be taken and the experience must be verified.  As a service to the applicant, CSLB allows the consecutive processing of the examination and the experience investigation in order to save time, as opposed to making the applicant wait until his/her experience has been verified before taking the examination, which can take months.

Passed examinations remain valid for 5 years after the exam date, as provided in BPC Section 7065 (d).  Therefore, even if an applicant’s experience is not verified under a particular application, the applicant may be able to make use of that passed exam to qualify for licensure on a subsequent application when he/she is able to sufficiently document his/her work experience.

Thanks,

Betsy Figueira
CSLB, Licensing Division Manager
916-255-3369

License Guru: Thank you for the reply.

So I understand this correctly… since the law does not “specifically” dictate the order in which the exam must be taken, a CSLB staff member has decided to allow applicants to take the exams, even though their application hasn’t been accepted and/or approved. I know the CSLB has different definitions for “accepted” and “approved” and uses either word when it best fits the situation.

What can I expect when my exam application has been accepted?

This step will outline some of the procedures you can expect when your exam application is accepted.

  • You will receive a Fingerprinting Live Scan packet
  • You will receive a Notice to Appear for Examination. You should receive your examination notice at least three weeks prior to the examination date.

The above statement on the website is misleading and does not fall in line with your statement.

I’ve talked to many applicants who are confused as to why they’re being allowed to take the exams when their application is being sent to investigation. At the very least, the CSLB is sending mixed messages.

From what I have been told, most applicants find it more stressful to take the exams not knowing if their application is going to be processed/accepted/approved etc., or not. So from my experience, you are not doing them any favors.

Then there is this page on the website. Note the last line of the third bullet point.

http://www.cslb.ca.gov/Applicants/ContractorsLicense/NoExamApplication/ApplyingForLicense.asp

Under what circumstances am I not required to take the examination?

You are not required to take the examination if the qualifying individual meets one of the following requirements:

  • You are currently a qualifier on a license in good standing in the same classification(s) for which you are applying;
  • You have been a qualifier within the past five years in the same classification(s) for which you are applying;
  • Within the last five years, you have passed both the Law and Business Examination and the trade examination in the same classification for which you are applying, and the license for which you took the examinations was not denied due to lack of work experience.

I have research the B&P Code and the CCR and can not find any rule, regulation, or law that gives the CSLB the authority to have an applicant re-take exams that he/she has passed within the prior five years because of a prior denied application. This statement on the website also differs from your statement regarding 7065.

Applicants are being put through the wringer when it comes to providing paper documentation when the law clearly states that the “registrar shall investigate, classify, and qualify applicants for contractors’ licenses by written examination.” 7065 (a)

Regarding Section 824. It does not specifically dictate the creation of a list of “critical classifications.” Therefore, those applying for one of the “critical classifications” should not be considered part of the 3% minimum. Those applicants are being required to provide additional documentation based solely on the classification they are applying for. Therefore, Section 824 does not apply.

At the very least, the CSLB should be putting out a consistent message that follows the law as written, not as interpreted by CSLB staff.

Thank you again.

End

I haven’t received a response to my reply, but it was yesterday (Friday) so I may or may not hear back from her until next week… if at all. It seems that whenever I ask for information regarding their licensing processes, they always give me Section 824, 825, 840 and 7065. None of which actually give them the authority to do what their doing if they followed the letter of the law.

The bottom line is… the Contractors State License Board Exam unit does whatever they want and they always seem to manipulate the law to fit their needs or to justify their whims.

Update: 4/4/14

Below is a portion of a reject letter that was sent in March. You will notice the last paragraph states the following:

Inline image 1

If this is true, then why are these applicants being sent to investigation? The fact that they are being sent to the exams suggests that licensing has verified the minimum experience required.

Continue reading the discussion at Contractors State License Board Exams Part 2.

Please follow and like us:
error

Contractors Exam Prep Kits Slashing Prices

The Contractors License Guru is slashing prices on our California Contractors exam prep materials to all time lows.

At these prices, I’m practically selling them at cost. All of my kits are now less than $300… and that’s including tax and UPS ground shipping!

We will also offer a FREE contractors license application review with the purchase of our Complete Study Kit. A $75 value.

Contractors Trade Manual with Discs

Contractors Law & Business Kit with Discs

Contractors Law & Business Kit with Discs

Order your kit today from the Contractors License Guru!

Our kits are sold by many schools and services around the State, but you won’t find these prices anywhere else.

A complete kit for the Law & Business Exam and your specific Trade exam WITH audio lectures, WITH video lectures, WITH discs covering Math and Health & Safety, WITH online practice exams for 6 months?!?! I dare you to find a lower price for this all inclusive contractors license exam prep kit.

Let’s compare!

Contractors Intelligence ~ Their DVD only kit starts at $295. That doesn’t include tax or shipping. And they only offer 3 months of online practice exam access.

Contractors State License Service ~ Here is a transcript of an online chat I had with one of their counselors:

The program will include: Home-Study Law and Trade: $495 Study Materials Two Day Crash Course One day Sat. Live Instruction on Law One day weekday self-paced on Trade Construction Math Review DVD Health and Safety DVD 30 Day Online Law and Trade Practice Question Subscription Application Preparation Guaranteed Pass

First thing that you pay is your tuition then within 90 days your application fee then 4-6 weeks your fingerprint then when pass exam within 30 days your bond and 2yr license fee.

He was very giving of this information. Too bad it isn’t all true. Giving timelines as if they were fact is very misleading. They also state their “successful Mizener Method is our exclusive home-study material” but what they don’t say is that they are re-selling the same materials I offer. Only at a much higher cost. And they only offer 30 day online practice exam access.

ContractorExam.com ~ $249 for the “Comprehensive Tutorial” for either the Law/Business exam OR the trade exam, and that doesn’t include CD’s, DVD’s, or online practice exams.

Contractors Licensing Consultants ~ Their kit costs over $450 with tax and shipping but it doesn’t include any online practice exams. My kit for the Law/Bus and Trade with online practice exams costs less than $300… Total! Out the door!

UPDATE: ContractorsLicense.com ~ Their complete kit is $399, and that doesn’t include tax!

There you have it! Now that you can compare kits and prices, it’s clear who offers the best value for your money!

Order your kit today from the Contractors License Guru!

Please follow and like us:
error