SB202 - California

Rick von Geldern on behalf of 9,000 Licensed Private Investigators said

SB202 has finally run it's course and is dead. We should NEVER again allow any trade association the opportunity to take control of our licenses. We should NEVER again throw so many association dollars toward politicicans. SB202 is a perfect example of a trade association attempting to be a political organization. Please, leave that to the professionals.

Frankenstein is dead. Thanks Egor.

CA-DCA-BSIS said

THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DEPARTMENT OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS, BUREAU OF SECURITY AND INVESTIGATIVE SERVICES******OPPOSES THIS BILL!

State of California
Department of Consumer Affairs
Division of Legislative Policy and Review
1625 North Market Boulevard, Suite S-204
Sacramento, CA 95834
P: 916-574-7800
F: 916-574-6855
www.dca.gov

July 16, 2009

The Honorable Tom Harman
California State Senate
State Capitol, Room 3070
Sacramento, CA 95818

RE: SB 202 - OPPOSE

Dear Senator Harman:

The Department of Consumer Affairs (Department) must respectfully take a position of OPPOSE on your bill, SB 202, which would require private investigators, as a condition of license renewal, to complete 12 hours of continuing education in privacy rights, professional ethics, recent legal developments, and other subjects related to the profession.

The Department believes that this bill is unsubstantiated, overly punitive, and would significantly increase the workload of the Bureau, taking away from enforcement activities that could better benefit consumers. There is no demonstrated need for the continuing education that would be required by this bill. Mandated continuing education programs always impose a burden on working Californians; without a demonstrated threat to the public health, safety or welfare, this burden is unreasonable. Further, this bill structures the continuing education provider approval process in a way that effectively requires the Bureau to license these educational providers, which could significantly add to the Bureau’s existing workload.

Should you have any questions regarding our position, please contact me at 574-7800.

Sincerely,

s/
Brian Warren
Deputy Director
Division of Legislative and Regulatory Review

cc: Michael Prosio, Legislative Secretary, Office of the Governor
Laura Zuniga, Acting Deputy Secretary, Legislation, State and Consumer
Services Agency

Rick von Geldern said

I wanted to ask the Author, Sponsor or Supporters of SB202, how will it be paid for? The numbers didn't add up before the Senate Appropriations Committee by about 108K. They still voted unamiously to pass it through their committee and then the bill was amended to charge CEPs a $20.00 fee per class to make up the difference. Folks, the math still doesn't add up, so, how would MCE be paid for?

Also, why haven't they factored in the "holiday licenses" that will not be renewed as a result of MCE that will further pinch DCA/BSIS and ultimately us licensed investigators? Shouldn't we look at the ID Card failure and consider that the same brains (or lack thereof) are behind that as are behind MCE?

It's crazy, isn't it? If you agree that continuing education is good but that SB202 is bad, please check out other web sites dedicated to the topic. www.piinformer.com; www.flymoster.com; freekali@yahoogroups.com

anonymous said

With specific regard to SB202, the Mandatory Continuing Education bill authored by Senator Tom Harman and after reading SB202 I am OPPOSED to SB202, the Mandatory Continuing Education bill.
SB202 is a Special Interest bill designed to gain power and money - not protect consumers.

Licensed in CA Living Elsewhere said

This Bill was proposed by the people who want to create the MCE to make money for themselves. It is not because they care about the consumers, they care about their bank accounts. Legislators beware, this Bill will not do anything except cause those of us licensed in other states to withdraw our licensure and ensure your state loses money. PI's in CA will drop out of those organizations forcing them to attend MCE. Those organizations will then lose money. CA PI's won't attend the educational conferences hosted by other PI Associations because they are forced to choose a CA MCE course for continued licensure. Thus, other PI educational Associations lose money and possibly memberships. Perhaps we will just have to drop out of those organizations that are forcing this requirement to make our point.

John said

I oppose this bill because it is a waste of time, money, and does nothing to protect consumers. There are other means of providing legal updates. Ethics...you either have them or you don't. An ethics class is not going to change that person. I have been a licensed PI for more than 11 years. I retired honorably from a police department. Don't punish the whole for the sins of the few. Go after those who damage the reputations of PI. Almost all PI's I know are honorable and providing a necessary service to businesses, attorneys and private parties. CALI is wrong is stating most PI's are for this. I would venture to guess that most are in favor of continuing education, not mandatory continuing education.

Jesse Bosque, President of Professional Solutions said

We're very busy and clients love us because we don't screw up our cases. Our CE is daily, on the job training, working with attorneys and sometimes law enforcement. If you're not that good at being a P.I., you need education to get better - go for it because if your not good, clients won't use you. However, for those who don't want it, MCE should not be forced upon us so some (who can't make it as a P.I.) can make a buck.

anonymous said

I oppose this bill as most licensed investigators do. It does not address any consumer need and does not protect the public from unethical conduct or illegal activities.

Walker Confidential LLC said

I just read the most outrageous lie to date regarding the CALI membership support of this bill. What a crock of shit. To say that the entire membership was in fact polled is pure mythology at its poorest. Then skewing the results is even worse, if that were possible. This BS about the poll being conducted 3 times is nothing less than a total insult to the intelligence of every PI in this state. Lying about the results rightfully places these folks right where they truly belong, at the bottom of the garbage can, along with the rest of the lairs, thieves and degenerates we have to deal with every day. They should be the first ones slated to take any mandatory ethics classes, since they cannot even tell the truth to their own membership.

Dennis Raymond, CPIC said

Dear Concerned Represetatives of the Citizens of California,

I am a licensed investigator. I investigate...that is what we do! I have taken an investigative look at SB202 and where it came from and how it got to where it is.

Sure, maybe more can be said, added and learned. But, it would not be significant enough to change my professional opinion lending from my professional inspection.

SB202 is suppose to correct a problem. The problem is a perceived danger to the consumer from lack of mandated continuing education. The solution to remove the danger is SB202.

What danger? I found none, except unbridled unlicensed practices and deception.

What is the problem? I found none, except unbridled unlicensed practices and deception.

I did not find a problem, however, there is a movement by a very "Small Group" attempting to create a false impression of the Professional Private Investigator, a false perception of a danger to the Consumer, using the California Legislative process and TaxPayer Dollar$ to create a Cottage Industry for personal gain and recognition.

That is my professional finding. It is that simple.

My solution would be to remove the "Small Group" from ourselves, and/or take away their financial and political support, and/or standup and tell the truth of the matter.

Our PI industry has been hijacked by a "Small Group" who are wasting organizational and taxpayer money. Unless "WE" speak-up, "WE" will become their SUBJECTS. Slaves to the "Small Group". "They" already think we are uneducated and no more than "entry level material".

BSIS is mandated with the responsibility to protect the Consumer from our profession. They take no action because there is not problem. If the "Small Group" sees a problem, then why didn't they tell BSIS to do something about it. Its funny that the "Small Group" reports to see the problem, but "they" do not ask BSIS to live up to its lawful mandate.

Instead, the "Small Group" wants to do nothing for the PI, but to end-run around BSIS to take advantage of the PI Industry and their available disposable income. For what? Why?

Did anyone approach you and tell you that you are a danger to the Consumer so that you can stop. NO!

Did anyone offer you accessible and cost effective professional continuing education opportunities. NO!

Were you told that if you belong to a certain association that you would receive CE opportunities? Yes!

Does that certain association offer its members effective professional continuing education opportunities? NO!

Have you stood up and told anyone that you are not a danger to the Consumer. Some have!

If you haven't, than maybe you are! You are being represented as an uneducated danger to the Consumer.

Some law makers were paid enough to believe you are a danger to the Consumer.

WELL ARE YOU? If not, tell someone who cares....your local state representative and the Governor of California, for a start.

Your silence is an evil tool used by the "Small Group".

Your voice is a threat to their deception and misrepresentations. Keep’em honest!

Thank you.

Dennis Raymond, CPIC
PI12370 CPIC0003

Rocky J. Pipkin said

Darren, your comments are on the mark. Thanks for your words of wisdom!

Darren Davison said

PI 16688 I oppose this bill because it is mandatory. Of course, continuing education is good. The problem is the quality and usefulness of the continuing education. I previously worked for several years as an investigator for the State Bar of California. I also worked several years for a legal malpractice insurance company. Mandatory continuing education has done little to prevent unethical behavior or malpractice by California's lawyers. The unethical behavior and malpractice has increased right along with the increase in the number of lawyers. Faster actually, since many licensed lawyers in California do not actually practice law. You still find far too many lawyers who want to learn how to do their job - on your dime. The legal profession pretends that continuing education makes their profession more "professional" and more acceptable to the public. This has not improved the reputation of lawyers or the legal profession one iota. The public's opinion of lawyers and the legal profession is still terrible. Lower than used car salespeople. There are no statistics supporting any intrinsic value of mandatory education. PIs are constantly looking for some kind of validation of the professional nature of their work. They are not going to get it from lawyers, insurance companies, politicians or mandatory education requirements. I don't believe that PIs should follow the examplesof the legal profession, the real estate profession or any other profession that is looking to improve its public image with smoke and mirrors mandatory education. It hasn't done anything for those professions and it won't do anything for ours except enrich a few who are interested in making money off of continuing education.