handy3

If a home-owner thoroughly understands physical and legal constraints, I'm fine while executing his or her instructions. This is roughly equivalent to apprenticeship under union rule. For this to apply, the owner would assure me that permitting is in order and that I'm only a helper. With these conditions met, I've little risk of being held liable.

More typically, people think they can handle something like doing a ceiling-fan installation. Then, having bitten-off more than they can chew, they call me. This is a very different situation from that given above. When I say it's done, I become liable for all future pain and suffering the thing inflicts. And my luck is bad. I do try harder than others. In my mind, I've not once succeeded. Having not actually failed yet either poses somewhat of a curiosity. That nobody noticed I'd failed only makes me a charlatan. Somehow instead, little-understood quirks always topple my empire to fall across the finish line. I'd never hoped to count on that. Knowing my own frailty means I won't accept a challenge unless I really believe it's possible. Looking at the do-able, I enjoy trying. Thwarted, I fall short. My shortcomings being rooted in deeply held principles make the difference every time. Nobody had the audacity to fail me when they've asked that I break a law of physics. We shared a curiosity about physical constraints going in. We revealed the nature of the constraints with our foray. Data and procedures come under scrutiny. With best practices in place, acceptance is mine.
In one instance, I was dispatched to install a paddle-fan. I'm taken up three flights of spiral-staircase into a top floor living room. Steeply sloping, a cement-slab jutted-up 20 feet, from above sliding glass patio doors. The lady wanted her fan mounted to the middle of the slab. There was no fixture there. Twenty-five feet of scaffolding might have changed my answer. But it wouldn't be worth the hassle for her, or the expense. She needed something I didn't offer: overhead cement work. I told her, maybe it was a job for a pro. Sometimes there's a trick that makes such a job easier. I knew of none.

Our dispatcher scolded me: "You never suggest brand X! Do you hear me?! 'Professionals?!' As opposed to what?!" He offered "company tools," pointing at a fold-up ladder. The premise of his tirade was that ours exceeded all the other offerings on the market. I wasn't trying hard enough.
      What were customers seeing, as we spoke? Val-Pak Coupons catch the eye with "$50 off" emblazoned across colorful copy. With a one-year warranty backed by national franchise, chance of this being a hoax appears nil. Presuming "safety in numbers" customers accept refuge with us. The service proves price competitive.
     Speed is the predominant criteria for customer satisfaction in our targeted segment. Lack of permitting promises to beat the general contractor on this score, without fail. Thus, cheating confers a competitive edge. Meanwhile, homeowners don't think permitting applies. Nor do handypeople. Added risk quickly blends with the "predictable-risks" insurance companies do cover. But technically speaking, the incorporation of unlicensed workmanship implicitly voids any such policy. Homeowners unknowingly engage in insurance fraud, from the signing of the estimate, and thereafter. This issue vanishes with insurance carrier changeover. Existing risk is what they promise to cover, at the time of policy issuance.
     Does Handyman Connection really beat the other offerings of the marketplace? I think not. I now understand that my handiwork carried with it, the dubious distinction of becoming criminally punishible if not expunged within one day of discovery. From Alaska, I couldn't possibly comply. In this light Brand-X compares favorably. All noteworthy benefits become liabilities given perfect information flow. This is hardly an offering by any standard. I could be jailed for setting foot in the state today. How would I know in advance? Periodic calls to the warrants department are in order. The judge would say I'm a flight risk. It'd probably take two years to navigate the proceedings. Then retrieval of my freedom could become possible: I'd probably get "time served." And I'd probably find my wages garnished in lieu of fines, restitution, pain and suffering, etc. They'd probably make me an example, if my track record holds up.
     Forces described in Adam Smith's "Invisible Hand" essay set competitive standards. For such standards to be meaningful, the playing-field must must be self leveling, through perfect information flow. The Handyman Connection business model fails "light of day" testing. Exposed, the dirty secret reveals a curse, not a promise.

Another example can be given hypothetically: Let's take the guy who buys a Costco hot tub. And let's say he calls me to install it. Then by hooking it up, I prepare him to evade taxation of the asset for the life of it. Permitting is how assessed value is calculated fairly. So customers will feel a little "too good" while enjoying my offering. Some may be finding out it's "a lot too-good:" and even punishable by fines and/or imprisonment. For now our hypothetical hot-tub owner feels safe. If there were any awareness of the foul play, he'd feel smug knowing his is undetectable tax fraud. But undetectable it isn't. My home town had the ingenuity to apprehend such offenders. They would nab him within the year. Detection is done by placing an airial-photo negative from last year over this year's positive. Changes turn up as light dots. Revenuer's shake down tax and permission cheats promptly. No arrests have been made to date. Lots of good work gets expunged. It's a good thing we don't know that trick here. Fairness hurts. Nobody wants it.

Handypeople don't know they're breaking any laws until they get caught. Clients unknowingly engage in tax and insurance fraud whenever buying into such a scheme.

Given the above; dispatchers, franchise owners, top brass, even the lowly handyperson; all engage in criminal facilitation: federally recognized under organized crime statutes. Federal prosecution under RICO is an eventuality that should concern all involved, whenever they promote or offer unlicensed fix-asset modification.

But then how much value could I add? Less, and accordingly, we'd command less in terms of financial reward.