Interior Design Protection Consulting

February 7, 2010

IDPC: “Florida Interior Design Law Struck Down!”


On February 4th, Judge Robert Hinkle issued a ruling on the Institute for Justice’s legal challenge to Florida’s restrictive, anti-competitive, and unconstitutional interior design law. His decision will benefit the Florida design community in TWO very important ways:

  1. TITLE.  The statute barring a person who provides lawful residential interior-design services without a license from advertising [him]herself as an “interior designer” violates the First Amendment.  Accordingly, it is declared that § 481.223(1)(c) and the proviso in § 481.229(6)(a) prohibiting advertising or representing oneself as an interior designer are unconstitutional.  You are now permanently and legally able to use the title or to otherwise market yourself as “Interior Designer” and to use terms such as “interior design,” “space planning,” and any other term that accurately describes work you are lawfully performing without restraint or fear of prosecution.
  2. PRACTICE.  In his written decision, Judge Hinkle proclaims that the statue “is not a model of clarity.” In order to save the practice act from the “substantial constitutional issues” it would otherwise raise, both Judge Hinkle and the BOAID significantly narrowed the meaning of the term “interior design” as it is normally understood (and as it had been interpreted by the Board before the legal challenge). Although it is still far from clear exactly what “interior design” under the law is as reinterpreted in the judge’s legal ruling, the BOAID has been forced to substantially limit its definition of interior design and to (apparently) admit that anything that could be construed as “interior decorator services” in a commercial setting (and this would include the specification of and floor plans depicting ALL “surface materials, window treatments, wallcoverings, paint, floor coverings, surface-mounted lighting, surface-mounted fixtures, and loose furnishings not subject to regulation under applicable building codes) may now be done by nonlicensees.  According to the judge’s ruling, the only thing that remains covered by the practice act is “an unlicensed person from providing design services to a client relating to nonstructural interior elements of a nonresidential building or structure.”  A key question that will have to be clarified is exactly what constitute the “nonstructural interior elements” of a building, but Judge Hinkle’s ruling makes clear that it does NOT include loose furniture and probably does NOT include such things as lighting, window treatments, wallcoverings, floor coverings, and other similar items.

Click here to read Judge Hinkle’s full decision:


The fight in Florida is not over.  The Institute for Justice plans to file an appeal seeking to have the entire practice act struck down; at a minimum, they will seek further clarification regarding exactly what work nonlicensees may now perform in commercial settings

IDPC applauds IJ’s wisdom and determination and will continue to support their future challenges to unjust and unconstitutional interior design laws.  IDPC will continue to monitor all of the Florida cartel’s legislative efforts, and bring false information and conflict of interest issues to public awareness, as we have successfully done in the past.

To support IDPC’s ongoing efforts, please encourage your colleagues to  join IDPC ( as we continue our mission to protect the rights and livelihoods of all in the design community.



  1. Congratulations on this hard fought victory. We know the fight is not over, but enjoy the moment. We have our fight in Tennessee, too – so victory in FL is important to cite precedence.

    Comment by Bohnne Jones — February 8, 2010 @ 4:05 pm |Reply

  2. A victory for designers everywhere.
    Thanks for your truly hard fought battle in standing up to the “machine”.
    No one has the right to oppress creativity, let the designing begin!

    Comment by Cathy — February 8, 2010 @ 5:14 pm |Reply

  3. A heart-felt thanks to all those that were involved in business and industry-rattling case. I appreciate and will continue to support IDPC in their efforts in Florida and elsewhere around the nation. As Designers we should be free to be able to work and express our artistic endeavours without the need of the a special-interest cartel.

    Regards, Joe

    Comment by Joe — February 8, 2010 @ 10:29 pm |Reply

  4. THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU!!!! The timing is perfect in the light of the pending legislation threat hanging over Tennessee. I plan to make Tennesee legislators aware of what has happened in Florida. Hopefully we can avoid the having the practice act pass thanks to the precedent set by the Florida VICTORY! LET FREEDOM RING!!!!

    Comment by Anna Aycock — February 9, 2010 @ 5:57 pm |Reply

  5. Good work and keep moving forward.

    Comment by AbbeyK — February 11, 2010 @ 3:50 am |Reply

  6. Wait a minute. Who’s protecting the consumer or designers who go through the trouble and investment of getting licensed, staying educated on latest building codes as well as technologies?…if anyone can slap up a sign saying “Interior Designer”, doesn’t that cheapen our profession? Designers are professionals, with real responsibilities for compliance with codes, servicing clients with well-planned, well-designed, ecologically sound solutions. There should be a distinction between those who have a really good eye and are picking out wallpaper and pillows with those who invest years to understand building construction, site planning, lighting, IAQ, etc.

    Comment by Shirley — February 11, 2010 @ 6:21 am |Reply

    • Since this law would allow decorators call themselves interior designers because they can choose finishes, paint, furniture and drapperies,etc. let’s also call ourselves architects and engineers because we draw floor plans, and because we understand of lighting,HVAC systems, etc. We could also call ourselves lawyers since we understand of compliances and liability. Outrageous, isn’t it?

      Comment by Jorge Berrios — February 11, 2010 @ 2:43 pm |Reply

      • This is very sad for the consumer. I am praying that one of you “Interior Designers” doesn’t spec a wallcovering that doesn’t meet fire code and end up killing hundreds. My prayers will be over that state of Florida tonight. I think tomorrow I’ll go and amputate my dogs leg, its getting old and looking a little unstable and I think I could do a really good job. Sarah’s Vet Practice is officially open for business!

        Comment by Sarah — February 11, 2010 @ 3:22 pm |Reply

        • LOL, even though this is a serious matter, you made me laugh with “Sarah’s Vet Practice is officially open for business!” But it is true, this is the case here.

          Comment by Jorge Berrios — February 11, 2010 @ 3:36 pm |Reply

        • Sarah,

          Have you been praying over Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah , Vermont, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming?

          If so, your prayers have been working since those 47 states do not regulate the practice of interior designers and there’s not a shred of evidence that even a single one of those working interior designers has placed the public in any form of jeopardy whatsoever.

          And now you’ve assured the people of Florida that they can all sleep soundly, too.

          Oh, and please do keep us posted on your dog’s surgery. We’re all praying for a swift and painless recovery, I’m sure.

          Comment by IDPC — February 11, 2010 @ 5:40 pm |Reply

        • Sara, I can’t quite follow your logic and I wonder if you may be over reaching a bit.
          I would think that if the choice of a wall covering could endanger people’s lives that there would be a state inspector to make sure that the product meets the codes before being approved and installed…oh, yeah, they do…..I’m sorry, what was your point?

          Comment by Mary S — February 11, 2010 @ 11:38 pm |Reply

          • Mary S,

            That makes sense…let’s not hold a trained professional to be responsible for their work, let’s put the blame on an overworked city employee. Hope they don’t overlook anything…oh well who cares as long as person who specified it can blame someone else. Pefect! Problem solved.

            Comment by Julie — February 12, 2010 @ 9:20 pm

          • If that wall covering has to be taken down and replaced because it was specified incorrectly who pays for it? You? The client? The inspector? The 3 legged dog?
            Why wasn’t it spec’d correctly in the first place. It’s not that difficult these products are labeled with little pictures. If you’re going to use the moniker of ‘interior designer’ at least have the courtesy to prefix it with ‘faux’.
            This change in the law absolutely cheapens the profession of interior design. Educated professionals now have to compete with every dolly decorator who can have business cards printed up.

            Comment by joe b. — April 14, 2010 @ 1:27 am

  7. What a huge effort and fantastic results! Thanks and congratulations to everyone who is working so hard to ensure designers in whatever niche can continue to provide well-designed spaces! The best to all of you. Lynda

    Comment by Lynda — February 11, 2010 @ 1:12 pm |Reply

  8. 8.I recently graduated from Miami International University with my Bachelors in Interior Design. The link to the ruling and the IDPC was sent to me by a colleague and I am simply dumbstruck by the asinine argument proposed by Hinkle.

    Previously unaware of IDPC’s efforts, I shall now become a member to help undo this injustice. Is this decision going to be appealed?

    My own knowledge of ibuprofen and acetaminophen found in over-the-counter medication as a pain-reliever does not qualify me as a medical practitioner simply because I am able to self-prescribe for a particular ailment without any knowledge of the rest of my body. Why was this not counter-argued by the defendant? Hickle’s ruling is both transparent and fickle and I am horrified that the state attorney was incapable of an appropriate defense. Is there proper and adequate representation?

    My apologies for the rant but after spending $100,000 to secure a degree and now an undetermined two-year pursuit of a “license,” I truly am distressed!

    Comment by TROY GALY — February 11, 2010 @ 4:13 pm |Reply

  9. Interior Design is a three dimensional art form. You cannot license art. Some are great some not so. There is a client out there for most. Its all about control. This, we are getting to much of.Thank you-all for the effort.

    Comment by Don Hekhuis — February 11, 2010 @ 5:47 pm |Reply

    • Interior design is not just art though. It takes a knowledge of art, structures, codes, materials, history. If you think that you can be an interior designer just because your an artist then you’re wrong. Im an artist too. I have studied art for years, I paint and draw and have done sculptures , but the differnce is that people dont have to live in sculptures or or paintings, they have to live and work in the buildings you design. There are no codes for art either you can make it out of anyting you like, but the same isnt true for the buildings you design. If you want to design a dry wall box to hang in a museum just because it is asthetically pleasing then go right ahead, but if all you care about are aesthetics then you really are just a decorator. I just hope that clients are wise enough to ask if there designers are licensed.

      Comment by Amber Caton — February 11, 2010 @ 6:17 pm |Reply

  10. Exerpts from an Open Letter from a Florida Interior Designer in response to “Patti Morrow/IDPC:”Florida Interior Design Law Struck Down!” (see emphasis added:

    IDPC, you and your free-of-charge, politically motivated libertarian legal team won the little battle.

    Unfortunately there are many unqualified individuals who are unlawfully involved in the design of commercial spaces today. They are creating genuine hazards, and yet go undiscovered and unprosecuted. Your recent judicial success in unrestricting the title of “interior designer” in Florida will, I fear, result in more unqualified, incompetent individuals being hired by unwary or unscrupulous business owners to design their facilities. I personally think we should be prosecuting the owners (which is not done today) as well as the unlicensed practitioners.

    Since 1989 I have promoted myself as a “Florida Registered Interior Designer” and I will simply continue to do so. My rights and responsibilities as a professional interior designer under Chapter 481, Florida Statutes have not changed as a result of this court ruling. However, as a dedicated, longtime member of the interior design profession (or “Cartel”, as IDPC seems to prefer).

    When the supporters of IDPC and other self-professed designers can objectively demonstrate their knowledge and minimum competence by qualifying for and passing the NCIDQ exam (as I did in 1981 and as have over 25,000 professional interior designers nationally since 1974), I will then consider them professional interior designers and welcome them as my peers, regardless of what Judge Hinkle has ruled.

    Hitler’s tactic of “The Big Lie” comes to mind. I guess if IDPC shouts it long enough and loud enough, as evidenced by the entirely one-sided article above, you may actually convince some gullible individuals that you won the important stuff in Florida.

    But, hey, as one popular but quirky political figure was recently quoted as asking, “How’s that hopey, changey stuff workin’ for ya now?”

    Jan Merle, ASID, Florida Registered Interior Designer ID0000085. Boca Raton, FL

    Comment by Jan Merle — February 12, 2010 @ 9:39 am |Reply

    • Really, Jan? Name these so-called hazards that have harmed even one consumer performed by an “unqualified” interior designer? You’d be the first one to do so, and trust me, we’ve been asking for exactly this kind of empirical evidence for several years. Your note is just another in a long series of hysterical, unsubstantiated scare-tactics. There’s not a shred of evidence to support your implication that the unregulated practice of interior design places the public in any form of jeopardy.

      What our recent judicial success WILL result in is more designers being able to call and market themselves truthfully, and WILL result in more consumers finding and hiring them, and WILL result in less monopoly for the Florida cartel.

      LOL, no one gives a rat’s rear end how YOU have or will promote yourself. Even more absurd is that you think anyone cares whether or not you consider them interior designers or welcome them as peers. That was the best tear-eliciting laugh I’ve had in a while!!! Here’s a newsflash for you – the only thing the interior designers do care about is that Judge Hinkle’s ruling narrowed the scope of commercial practices that only registered designers were allowed to perform in the past. At least that was his “split-the-baby-in-half” intent. We want it all, though, so we are supporting the repeal which has already been filed by the Institute for Justice and will do everything possible to assist them.

      BTW, weren’t you actually grandfathered in 1989? It looks like you didn’t get an interior design degree until last year, so you wouldn’t have qualified under the current criteria. This is the typical hypocrisy we see time and time again — designers who do not meet the criteria in the proposed law, but are grandfathered in order to squelch their opposition, and once they are inducted into the elitist little club, they are all too willing to lock the door behind them so that no one else can enter. That is nothing less than consumer fraud!

      Your statement comparing anything to do with interior design regulation to Hilter really gives insight into your true character and motivation. Hitler’s destruction of millions of innocent people doesn’t have the slightest relationship with either side of the interior regulation debate, and only a truly depraved mind could make such an association. Good grief, man, you need help!

      And lastly, to answer your question, “How’s that hopey, changey stuff workin’ for ya now?” – actually, Jan, it’s going quite well – astounding really, as you can see from the following facts. Read ‘em and weep.

      • Since the very beginnings of the Freedom Movement around 2006, nearly 100 attempts to expand or enact new interior design regulations have been defeated or derailed;
      • Since 2006, not a single new title or practice act has passed;
      • In 2007 the Alabama practice act was declared unconstitutional, and in 2009 the remaining title law was enjoined from being enforced against unregulated designers;
      • All states that had enacted “pure” title laws restricting “Interior Designer” have seen their laws declared unconstitutional or have amended their statutes to repair the defect and avoid a legal challenge;
      • Virtually all new bills are exempting all residential scope of practice, and are not attempting to restrict the title “Interior Designer;”
      • ASID backpeddled their legislation policy in March 2009 as it became inevitable that they were going to continue to lose their restrictive monopoly battles;
      • Earlier in 2010, the title portion of the Florida law was declared unconstitutional, and Judge Hinkle narrowed the scope of work which was previously only allowed to be performed by registered designers;
      • The Institute for Justice has filed an appeal which if successful, will completely remove the remainder of the Florida practice act.

      Comment by IDPC — March 22, 2010 @ 4:01 pm |Reply

  11. If licensing is not required to do Interior Design does that mean the State of Florida will not be charging us for renewal and requirement of CEU’s?

    Comment by Theresa — February 12, 2010 @ 4:53 pm |Reply

  12. There seems to be a lot of confusion about this issue. An Interior Decorator has license to provide items and artistic design that has nothing to do with structural, electrical, or fire codes. Interior Designers are distinctively different in that we are trained to provide residential and commercial clients with not only decorations, but also systems that effect the safety of those clients and the general public. Any one can have an eye for color or flair for design. That is not Interior Design, that is decorating. Designing covers floor plans, building codes, systems that provide safe water and energy to residents and commercial clients. There are varying degrees of education and types of practice, but suffice it to say that I would not want someone who never studied the effects of an energy system working on my building or residence. What if they do not know how a energy saving water system can adversely effect the elderly or those that are hospitalized. There are reasons we become licensed! There are more than simple building codes to take into consideration. There are weather conditions, natural interactions and Universal Design issues at hand. The training one goes through to earn a degree in Interior Design follow similar courses as Architecture. I understand that there are those who have working knowledge of these things because they have been self trained and they should be given an equivalent license, but those who can not determine the between safe sustainable design and aesthetic design should not be allowed to practice “Interior Design” as they are not designing, they are decorating!

    Comment by Sheri — February 12, 2010 @ 10:21 pm |Reply

  13. Another brain washed ASID/NCIDQ zombie who wasted money on an “Interior Design” degree.

    So what do you call an “Interior Designer” who works for a “Interior Decorator”.

    This is all about “Interior Designers” with low self esteem who work for Architects.

    Since your degree is useless, now you want the Government to give you a “merit badge” license.

    And now we have States with these idiotic titles such as “certified interior designer”, “registered interior designer” or my favorite “Wisconsin Registered Interior Designer”. The only thing these stupid titles are going to get the “designers” who decide to pay the government every year to “register” is a lawsuit from one of their unhappy clients who thought they were hiring a competent “decorator”.

    When are the “designers” who run ASID and IIDA going to recognize that NO ONE CARES! In fact, calling people who go to school for “Interior Design” Interior Designers is dangerous. If anything we should have a law that requires aspiring “Interior Designers” to work for “Interior Decorators” before they are allowed to market themselves to the consumer as as an “Interior Designer”.

    Comment by staff — February 13, 2010 @ 3:08 am |Reply

    • Mr.or Ms. Staff, I think that maybe all of us “brain washed interior designers” are upset with this resolution because we earned our title, not like decorators who are welcoming and so happy with the latest news because you have been given a title that you have not earned, studied or prepared for. Nothing can be far more from the truth than saying than NO ONE CARES if you have a title or not, if you are licensed or not. Go to any serious and competent Interior Design or Architecture Firm and apply for a job, and you’ll realize how responsible and serious people care and a lot about this issue. I understand that if you are just decorating, you are right, people may not care especially if you are good at it. At the end, you will see how titled, licensed interior designers win this battle.

      Comment by Jorge Berrios — February 13, 2010 @ 4:55 pm |Reply

  14. OK. If decorators can call themselves “Interior Designers” without the schooling and proper preparation; that means all of us “licensed Interior Designers” can act as interior architects….. Should not this be the case? I think we should really fight for it. Judge Robert Hinkle owes us that merit….

    Comment by Mayra — February 13, 2010 @ 3:46 pm |Reply

  15. I applaud the ruling that Judge Robert Hinkle has made. It will help people like me be able to do what I have strived so hard for the past three years, to become an Interior Designer by getting the proper education to do so.I am a Registered Nurse and was shocked by what I would have to do to become NCIDQ licensed. I take care of people everyday, and their lives are in my hands. Once I received my degree, I was able to sit for my boards. Why is this so difficult for a designer? I was taught very well and I am very aware of issues of saftey and comfort for my clients. I know the difference between residential and commercial design and how to properly design these spaces. So please give us newbeeies a change to show what we can do. And by the way I will strive to get my NCIDQ license as well but on my terms.

    Comment by Renee — February 13, 2010 @ 4:42 pm |Reply

  16. Ireceived my degree way back in 1966. I practiced my profession…did not get “grandfathered in” before the test to become licensed because I was busy having babies. Then when I went back to work I was appalled at the lack of knowledge and talent out there in those who got grandfathered in. That was insulting to me. The cost of the Step Program and the Tests to get licensed is aweful for those coming out of school and are starving on the salaries or commissions paid to start your career. I feel that ASID has become somewhat self serving and not affordable for many to join the oganization. I have also found that most clients do not care whether or not you are a member of ASID. Your clientele comes from word of mouth referrals and good solid work. I have worked with many talented individuals who do not have degrees and have good sense when it comes to getting a professional involved when there are structural issues and construction involved with a project. I have done the same even though I have a degree and took architecural courses. With HGTV we must just push on and trust our own talents as individuals and our good sense to educate ourselves. Sorry but I am 62 years old and only our own clients will learn how valuable we are this day and age.

    Thanks for the hard work anyway. Marieke Kreps

    Comment by Marieke Kreps — February 13, 2010 @ 5:12 pm |Reply

  17. In this case, I feel that Interior Designers should be protected in their profession. Decor consultants should be free to make spaces, and consult with color and texture as an artist would. But in the practice of interior design, it’s too important to specify safe products, and safety can be linked even to things that might not be apparent, i.e. (the right task lighting for a space, etc). Yes, it’s art, but it’s every bit as much a science.
    I am a student, and just heard a lecture series on all the ways that interior designers worldwide have been sued for their uneducated decisions. One in particular was regarding the combustion rate of a particular cellulose material used in drapery that caused an emergency exit route to be engulfed in flames too fast, leaving people trapped in a burning building.
    The point is, designers everywhere should be able to create their interior masterpieces, but there should be a definite distinction between who is a interior cosmetic consultant and who strongly understands the details of the built environment. the client deserves the clarity.

    Comment by Adrian — February 15, 2010 @ 12:41 pm |Reply

    • Were you given any documented prooof of all the so-called lawsuits against “uneducated decisions?” Probably just spoon-fed the usual scare tactics. Here are the REAL, quantifible statistics for the United States:

      According to the BBB and other sources, since 1907, a grand total of 52 lawsuits have been filed against interior in the ENTIRE COUNTRY and nearly all involved contract disputes, not safety issues. (Designing Cartels:

      Students are being used as pawns, indoctrinated with unsubstantiated propaganda in order to support their instructors’ own political agenda, in violation of the basic principles of academic freedom. They need to stop drinking the Kool-Aid and start researching the subject on their own.

      Comment by IDPC — February 15, 2010 @ 1:26 pm |Reply

  18. I understand that interior “designers” want to be elevated from Interior “decorators.” I understand that interior designers want to be a true profession. I feel the same. However, I feel that FL has taken legislation too far.

    For example, the term “architect” is owned by the profession. Even if one has graduated from a qualified architecture program, they cannot call themselves “architects” until they pass an exam. I think this ownership of the word “architect”, as well as any form of it, is too much. And they really do have a lot of public safety riding on them, particularly in the commercial sector. What about all the designers who design residential SFH’s who can’t even call themselves “architectural designers”? It seems unfair that a descriptive word cannot be used to describe a person’s trade, in my opinion. In many states you can design SFH’s w/o a license. In every state you must be a licensed architect to practice commercial architecture. As it should be.

    So, translate this to the interior design community, and I think that the industry trying to own the phrase “interior designer” is as unfair as the architecture industry owning the word “architect” and every form of the word. Just adding the word “certified” or “licensed” or the likes to “interior designer” is enough. It works. It does everything that the proponents of the legislation are looking for.

    Interestingly, in these discussions, I never seem to see any mention of the differences in safety concerns with respect to commercial v’s residential. It is really in the commercial setting that the safety codes are of utmost importance, as in architecture. Here is where legislation should be most concerned. Don’t worry so much about the residential side. (And I am not trying to diminish the importance of training in residential codes and design in the least bit here) Focus here and not in trying to control the words “interior” + “designer”. Maybe “Licensed Commercial Interior Designer” would be solution. BTW, how much of the exam is on residential in comparison to commercial? And what is the reasoning that.

    I am looking forward to earning a degree in interior design and specializing in residential and hospitality design. I look forward to the day I pass the exam….I look forward to day I have appellations after my name. I will feel more validated. I will feel professional. However, passing legislation that is so far reaching and, on top of that, unjust to those who have been in the field for a long time, is just not the answer. It just needs to be toned down, less exclusive, and more to the point of the real concerns. The legislation that has been struck down is just not the best answer to the real problems.

    I hope my thoughts are not too scattered or vague to get my points across 🙂 I just want the legislation to be aimed at what is necessary for the public safety without professional vanity interfering.

    Comment by Mary S — February 15, 2010 @ 8:29 pm |Reply

  19. Mary S. said “I look forward to day I have appellations after my name. I will feel more validated. I will feel professional.”

    Yours is probably the most cogent post in support of the IDPC that I have read. Unfortunately Mary, professionalism is not a feeling and you can not validate professional status by merely feeling it- regardless of the appelations you place after your name. Now if you realize that you, like all of us who want to hold ourselves to a higher standard, will seek a method by which you can IN FACT validate your status and the effort invested. Yes government regulation is not it. But neither is the wholesale dismissal of the education, experience and examination process. There are alternatives as you mentioned. We just have to work to make that the default model for professional status.
    It is more than a feeling.

    Comment by Mike Dudek — February 18, 2010 @ 9:11 pm |Reply

    • Mike, thank you for your response.
      Unfortunately Mike, I wonder if my comments have struck a nerve in you, hence your patronizing attitude in response. You are attacking what I personally will feel. What is the point of that? I never stated that having professional status was just a mere feeling.
      What I was trying to convey was that it is MY OPINION that this legislation/movement is too over the top…to the point of it being more about ego’s than public concern. (BTW, I feel architecture has gone that way).

      Comment by Mary S. — February 23, 2010 @ 6:00 pm |Reply

  20. Unfortunately Mary I am quoting YOU!

    “I will feel professional.”

    Maybe I am taking it out of context, whatever that may be. And no you did not strike a nerve. So are you saying that just because you pass the NCIDQ that you will “feel professional?”

    Comment by Michael Dudek — February 23, 2010 @ 9:55 pm |Reply

  21. Yes, you are quoting me. Unfortunately Mike, you are also misquoting me a couple of sentences later. You wrote in response to my “I will feel professional” with “professionalism is not a feeling and you can not validate professional status by merely feeling it.” You are correct. However Mike, you are implying that I think being a professional is merely a feeling. I do not think that it is merely a feeling and I did not write that. I said that “I will feel professional” because I will feel that way. What is your problem with what I will feel. Maybe you need to re-read what I wrote and get off your soap box and do away with you condescending tone.

    Comment by Mary S. — February 24, 2010 @ 12:30 am |Reply

  22. Okay let’s start over. Here in quotes is exactly what you just posted.

    I said that ‘I will feel professional’ because I will feel that way.”

    My problem with the way you feel is that you cannot feel professional. Prove me wrong.

    Like I said you started out great but then you lost any credibility by telling us how professional you will feel. That just does not make sense.

    Comment by Michael Dudek — February 24, 2010 @ 3:13 am |Reply

  23. Seriously, I think you are a bit thick.

    Comment by Mary S. — February 25, 2010 @ 5:21 pm |Reply

  24. You would not believe how long ive been searching for something like this. Went through 10 pages of Google results and couldnt find anything. First page of bing. There was this…. Gotta start using that more often

    Comment by Winifred Konzal — March 14, 2010 @ 11:17 am |Reply

  25. As a point of clarification to those who cite knowledge of “structural, electrical, or fire codes” as a point of support for licensing…Realize that currently a “Interior Designer” which has passed the NCIDQ, has a License by the State of Florida, and a member in good standing of ASID is still NOT able to sign or seal documents in most,if not all, the counties in the State of Florida. The only thing having all those accolades does is to allow you to market yourself for commercial projects…nothing else. All those titles are just a way of limiting the job opportunities to a “select” group, and for the government and associations of collecting fees. Smarten up and join the IDPC cause.

    Comment by Joe — March 23, 2010 @ 9:17 am |Reply

  26. Really Jan, the NCIDQ in 1981? Guess you forgot to mention that it was only two sections. Not the test it is today.Take it again, pass the first time, them I will listen to your ROAR

    Comment by patty — March 23, 2010 @ 10:04 am |Reply

  27. Dear Patty
    The laws for Condominiums have a very clear definition about what is what you purchase when you become owner and what not.
    To reduce it to the point: an owners property is limited by the interior walls. Otherwise said from the wallpaper or the color on you are in your property and free to imagine your place.
    I don’t think that anybody will reinvent this definition for what are ‘lawful residential interior-design services without a license’ and in so far I would not allow anybody to rule who I can use to do this decoration.
    Best regards

    Comment by Hans Juergen R. Klemm — March 24, 2010 @ 2:19 pm |Reply

  28. Thanks and congratulations to everyone who is working so hard to ensure designers in whatever niche can continue to provide well-designed spaces! The best to all of you

    Comment by nice homes — July 18, 2010 @ 3:23 am |Reply

  29. […] room and where to hang a picture, and that “Shag” carpeting is “In” again. Luckily a Florida judged ruled the practice to law to be unconstitutional. Laws like this don’t protect the consumer, but they do protect existing Interior Decorators from […]

    Pingback by Why I Don’t Respect the Law « Official Newsletter of the Libertarian Party of Florida — March 23, 2011 @ 9:26 pm |Reply

  30. I can name several law suites for your information dear lady and have just come to realize this is happening in FL. Most are “decorators” who enter into the commercial area not knowing a damn thing about factors such as “load bearings in veritcal height file cabinets”, finish selections in stairwells that are exit egress zones and the worst is that furniture placements effect path of travel! I am sure many of you have not a clue what I am saying!

    Comment by rj — April 21, 2011 @ 11:57 pm |Reply

    • Oh really? Do tell! Please share the specific details, case numbers, names, court locations, and final judgement of these so-called lawsuits. My guess is I’ll never get any specific info — because it doesn’t exist. If it did, the Florida cartel would be using it instead of perpetuating the same old scare tactics. FYI, 12 government agencies have already looked into the “health, safety, welfare” issue, and without exception, all concluded that interior design regulations add absolutely nothing to protect the public beyond measures already in place, but instead serve only to offer the consumer fewer choices and artificially inflate prices. You can read them here.

      The only thing licensing protects is. . . the licensee from fair competition.

      Comment by IDPC — April 22, 2011 @ 7:51 am |Reply

      • fewer choices? The fewer choices now if deregulation passes is that consumers can hire an architect, or a.. oh wait, that’s it. ONLY an architect! If a job is strictly Interior Design, they can ONLY hire an architect, not an Interior Designer, not an inferior desecrator (as architects call you). THAT is fewer choices. It isn’t going to help interior decorators, it’s only going to hurt educated Interior Designers and the consumer by providing less competition. You must not work for an architecture firm, because the chance of you getting to do commercial work under an architect is slim to none.. architects will want to see where you went to school, if you passed the NCIDQ, are/were you registered. Now they will be MORE picky in hiring because there is no longer a title act keeping unqualified decorators to apply for an interior design job.

        Comment by c — April 22, 2011 @ 9:05 am |Reply

        • Your assertion that if deregulated, only architects will be able to practice commercial interior design is incorrect and has been thoroughly debunked including but not limited to the articles here:

          IDPC White Paper, Interior Designers vs. Architects
          AIA Statement on Florida Deregulation
          ASID’s Big Fat Lies

          Deregulation will open more job opportunities, give consumers more choices, and grow Florida’s struggling economy.

          And since you obviously haven’t a clue, the kind of elitist, disparaging drivel in your post is exactly why we have been winning this fight throughout the country – legislators want the truth and facts (which we provide) and frown upon snarky, unsubstantiated rhetoric (typical cartel’s modus operandi).

          Comment by IDPC — April 23, 2011 @ 7:22 pm |Reply

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

Blog at

%d bloggers like this: