Honest questions about CMI

[Dom D'Agostino]

Originally Posted by jbowman

What makes you believe that they are the BOD? Because their name shows up on a contact list. None of them as far as I know are members of any BOD. I'm always willing to learn. Where are you getting your information from?

Right here, John:

http://www.certifiedmasterinspector.org/cmi/contact.htm

That's the CMI web site, so I presume it is accurate.

[Dom D'Agostino]

Originally Posted by rbennett

Anyone that wants to know about CMI should ask the questions on the CMI web site

Not InterNACHI.org

rlb

CMI

richard@rlbinspections.com

Try to follow the conversation, Richard. I asked no questions about CMI.
I simply made a statement in reply to a post by Joe H.

[Joseph Hagarty, CMI]

Originally Posted by Dom D'Agostino

Wow, what a apples to oranges comparison. Not the same at all.
Same address? No.
Same BOD? No.


Sorry to offend, clearly no one wants to talk rationally unless insults are being hurled around.

Stand back and look at the list as a non-industry consumer would. Hard to not see the connection.

Sorry that you took offense. Do your research and you will find that they (ASHI & NHIE) also shared a mailing address at one time.

Have a nice Weekend

[John Bowman]

Originally Posted by Dom D'Agostino

Right here, John:

http://www.certifiedmasterinspector.org/cmi/contact.htm

That's the CMI web site, so I presume it is accurate.

I don't see where it states that they are the BOD. I only see a listing of contacts with titles. Show us the actual corporate by-laws that formed the 501(c)(6) non-profit. I assure you that none of those names appear as BOD.

[Randy D. Stufflebeem]

Originally Posted by rcooke

I love to see guys like you who keep visiting NACHI and ask questions it is so obvious how jealous you all are of us who are happy .
You Know there is no other place for Home Inspectors like NACHI .
There is no other Association that does as much for home inspectors .
Keep coming and visiting and reading and you too will keep increasing your knowledge also .


NACHI a happy place to visit....... Cookie

Cookie,
What happen to the Christmas countdown
Randy

[John Bowman]

Oooops. I meant 501 (c)(3). Sorry.

[John Bowman]

Dom,

Your confusion may lay in that you believe that the term "certification board" has the same meaning as BOD. Maybe I'm confused in what you mean by "BOD". You do mean "Board of Directors", do you not?

[William J. Decker]

Originally Posted by lcapaul

Not slamming or bashing, just questions that members and non-members who compete with those who use the CMI designation should be wondering about and asking.

Yes you are. Be hinest about it and maybe others will take you more seriously. If you have a gripe, state it clearly and, maybe, you will get a clear answer. I don't care if you disagree with me, just don't play like you are all morally superior and all.

Clear, plain and honest. It's the only way to be.


If you are a Home Inspector with say 2 to 4 years under your belt, a few hundred inspections maybe, or even an Inspector with only a year and 50 or so inspections. Does anyone believe it is fair or honest for other inspectors who have the same or less number of inspections and education as you, and that you compete with for business, to display the CMI Logo that according to the CMI web site says that they have completed 1,000 inspections (or a combination of inspections and undefined education) which would be false as it pertains to the inspector in question.

Your first sentence started as a question, but just plain fizzled out, so I have no idea what you were tryng to ask.

As to those inspectors who have attained the CMI certification, They have met a certain criteria, and are therefore entitled to the certification, under the clearly stated rules.

It seems to me that you do not ask questions, but pose your own, biased, answers in the query, and do it in such a way as to seem all honest and sincere, when you are actually just trying to mess thing up.

The inspection and education requirements are valid and were greatly discussed for a long time, and were made more stringent. The discussion occured right here on this board. This was done plainly, in the open and in the public areas of this board. Don't you just love it when someone doesn't do due dilligence, and then demands that the whole process be re-opened, just because they were too lazy or uninterested at the time.

CMIs are certified, by way of the requirements. Some are and some aren't CMI. Let the public decide. But, by no means, to you have the right to supercede the hard worl of others just because you aren't satisfied.

If you meet the requirements, apply. Then you can also get more business.

Simple, really.

As InterNachi members you are required to meet constantly changing requirements, which in my opinion is good, but why aren't those who are using the CMI as a tool to compete against you required to do the same?

Because CMI is a seperate certification, not part of NACHI. Don't you read?

If the CMI designation is so successful, then as business men why aren't you pointing out the fact that the CMI designation is "misleading" at best, or fraud in my opinion, to your clients and the Realtors you deal with?

The CMI designation and certification is clearly stated and the requirements are publiclly posted. Just like other designations from other certification groups. Your use of the term "misleading" is misleading. It is certainly not a fraud. The requirements are clearly posted and available for all to meet. I have met them (long ago) but have decided not to apply. This is because some of the older members may not feel (feel, not think. Emotion coming into play before the brain kicks in.) that because I am somewhat new, that I shouldn't be given this certification. And I have respected their wishes. (BTW: I have two post graduate degrees from nationally recognized Universitys, have taugh at another University (as well as done published research), have written state apporoved CE courses and have taught and mentored many HIs in this area. I have also earned the respect of many non-NACHI inspectors in this area and do a good job for my clients.

What have you done?

There are many CMI's who meet today's standards, why aren't they asking the board why those who don't aren't required too? Are they afraid that someday the standards might increase, and in fact actually turn into something meaningful, which again in my opinion would be a good thing?

I, as others probably are, am trying to understand what you just wrote.

A question for Roy C. I just spent Thanksgiving week up in beautiful B.C. Roy, I spend quite bit of time up there throughout the year. This time I noticed on Canadian TV government ads about Canadian Truth in Advertising Regulations. My question is, do you believe that the present wording of the CMI website regarding qualifications would meet the Standards of the Canadian Regulation, or would they be considered at least misleading?

The clear answer. Yes. Care to make a substantial case otherwise? Or do you just want to spread inuendo?

These are fair questions aren't they? Most of you know my opinion of the present day CMI, so I promise not to reply, these are just questions I believe should be considered by any Home Inspector in competition with others.

We are (mostly) all in competition with each other. We are also professionals helping each other. Is it, for you, about being professional or about getting work.

Physicians have various levels of certification. They compete with each other in the market place. Do you think that a 20 year experience, multiple specialty doctor is being unfair to a newly licensed GP if they advertise their experience?

I don't think that you have through this one through.

BTW: Do you REALLY promise not to reply. That would be refreshing.

Call me if you want to discuss this further.

[Dom D'Agostino]

Originally Posted by jbowman

I don't see where it states that they are the BOD. I only see a listing of contacts with titles. Show us the actual corporate by-laws that formed the 501(c)(6) non-profit. I assure you that none of those names appear as BOD.

John, your joking, right?

The CMI President, Executive Director, Ethics Director, etc aren't really the CMI President, Excutive Director, Ethics Director, etc??

Show us the actual corporate by-laws that formed the 501(c)(6) non-profit.

Sure, I have that paperwork here somewhere...

I assure you that none of those names appear as BOD

Then maybe they shouldn't be listed as such. (??)

[John McKenna]

Thanks you for such simple and obvious answers Will and Nick.

[John Bowman]

Dom,

Sorry that my words seem to be so garbled to you. Let me try to explain one more time:

CMI Executive Director, President, Ethics, etc. are not BOD of the 501(c)(3). They are however individuals of the Certified Master Inspector Certification Board. They hold those titles only in name and may be so named or removed at any time by the BOD. They are a voluntary group with no Board of Director provost.

[Henry Valenzano, CMI]

Originally Posted by lcapaul

Not slamming or bashing, just questions that members and non-members who compete with those who use the CMI designation should be wondering about and asking.


If you are a Home Inspector with say 2 to 4 years under your belt, a few hundred inspections maybe, or even an Inspector with only a year and 50 or so inspections. Does anyone believe it is fair or honest for other inspectors who have the same or less number of inspections and education as you, and that you compete with for business, to display the CMI Logo that according to the CMI web site says that they have completed 1,000 inspections (or a combination of inspections and undefined education) which would be false as it pertains to the inspector in question.

As InterNachi members you are required to meet constantly changing requirements, which in my opinion is good, but why aren't those who are using the CMI as a tool to compete against you required to do the same?

If the CMI designation is so successful, then as business men why aren't you pointing out the fact that the CMI designation is "misleading" at best, or fraud in my opinion, to your clients and the Realtors you deal with?

There are many CMI's who meet today's standards, why aren't they asking the board why those who don't aren't required too? Are they afraid that someday the standards might increase, and in fact actually turn into something meaningful, which again in my opinion would be a good thing?

A question for Roy C. I just spent Thanksgiving week up in beautiful B.C. Roy, I spend quite bit of time up there throughout the year. This time I noticed on Canadian TV government ads about Canadian Truth in Advertising Regulations. My question is, do you believe that the present wording of the CMI website regarding qualifications would meet the Standards of the Canadian Regulation, or would they be considered at least misleading?

These are fair questions aren't they? Most of you know my opinion of the present day CMI, so I promise not to reply, these are just questions I believe should be considered by any Home Inspector in competition with others.

If you have questions about CMIs why ask on a NACHI site go the source. Thats like asking about NACHI on an ASHI site.

[Joseph Hagarty, CMI]

Originally Posted by jhagarty

Sorry that you took offense. Do your research and you will find that they (ASHI & NHIE) also shared a mailing address at one time.

Have a nice Weekend

"This is a bit of information that I think everyone who believes that the NHIE is an independent entity should read.

</SPAN>http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield...ate=f4pusq.2.1 wrote:Word Mark NATIONAL HOME INSPECTOR EXAMINATION
Goods and Services IC 016. US 002 005 022 023 029 037 038 050. G & S: Title of written examination taken by professional home inspectors to determine their qualifications for association membership and/or state licensing. FIRST USE: 20000300. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 20000300
Mark Drawing Code (1) TYPED DRAWING
Serial Number 76025291
Filing Date April 13, 2000
Supplemental Register Date May 15, 2002
Registration Number 2619101
Registration Date September 10, 2002
Owner (REGISTRANT) American Society of Home Inspectors, Inc. CORPORATION NEW YORK 932 Lee Street - 1st Floor Des Plains ILLINOIS 60016
Attorney of Record Harry S. Rosenthal
Disclaimer NO CLAIM IS MADE TO THE EXCLUSIVE RIGHT TO USE "EXAMINATION" APART FROM THE MARK AS SHOWN
Type of Mark TRADEMARK
Register SUPPLEMENTAL
Live/Dead Indicator LIVE

http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield...ate=f4pusq.4.1 wrote:Word Mark EBPHI
Goods and Services IC 042. US 100 101. G & S: Preparing, administering, and scoring of standardized tests, namely, the administration of the national examination for professional home inspectors. FIRST USE: 20000301. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 20000301
Mark Drawing Code (1) TYPED DRAWING
Serial Number 76082249
Filing Date July 3, 2000
Published for Opposition January 1, 2002
Registration Number 2551987
Registration Date March 26, 2002
Owner (REGISTRANT) American Society of Home Inspectors, Inc. CORPORATION NEW YORK 932 Lee Street SUITE 101 DES PLAINS ILLINOIS 60016
Attorney of Record Harry S. Rosenthal
Type of Mark SERVICE MARK
Register PRINCIPAL
Live/Dead Indicator LIVE

http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield...ate=f4pusq.6.2 wrote:Word Mark EXAMINATION BOARD OF PROFESSIONAL HOME INSPECTIONS
Goods and Services IC 016. US 002 005 022 023 029 037 038 050. G & S: Provides test administration and written examinations for professional home Inspectors. FIRST USE: 20000301. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 20000301
Mark Drawing Code (1) TYPED DRAWING
Serial Number 76025292
Filing Date April 13, 2000
Supplemental Register Date March 21, 2002
Registration Number 2608326
Registration Date August 13, 2002
Owner (REGISTRANT) American Society of Home Inspectors, Inc. CORPORATION NEW YORK 932 Lee Street 1st Floor Des Plains ILLINOIS 60016
Attorney of Record HARRY S ROSENTHAL
Type of Mark TRADEMARK
Register SUPPLEMENTAL
Live/Dead Indicator LIVE

http://www.homeinspectionexam.org/ wrote:The Examination Board of Professional Home Inspectors (EBPHI) is an independent examination organization whose objective is to promote excellence and exemplary practice within the home inspection profession and to serve the public through its quality assurance efforts.

http://www.homeinspectionexam.org/po...ok/1EBPHI.html wrote:Examination Board of Professional Home Inspectors®, Inc.

The Examination Board of Professional Home Inspectors (EBPHI) is an independent, not-for-profit entity, founded in 1999 for the specific purpose of developing, maintaining and administering the National Home Inspector Examination (NHIE).

Administration of the NHIE is intended to insure that home inspection professionals meet basic knowledge and practice requirements.
Successful completion of the examination answers the needs of the public, government and home inspectors.

Certain states license these professionals and may require passing this examination as a licensing requirement.

The American Society of Home Inspectors, the largest organization representing the profession, requires passage of NHIE as a qualification for full Member status.

The National Home Inspector Examination has been developed and is maintained in accordance with accepted psychometric standards, and administered by the independent Examination Board of Professional Home Inspectors.

http://www.ashi.org wrote:Examination Board of Professional Home Inspectors, Inc.
932 Lee Street, Suite 202
Des Plaines, IL 60016

http://www.homeinspectionexam.org/contact.html wrote:American Society of Home Inspectors, Inc.
932 Lee Street, Suite 101
Des Plaines, IL 60016

http://www.homeinspectionexam.org/about_ebphi.html wrote:The Examination Board of Professional Home Inspectors promotes a minimum competency standard for the home inspection profession and serves the public through its quality assurance efforts. The autonomous board believes it is necessary to demonstrate that the individual worker is qualified to perform the required duties of home inspection without threat of harm to the public. Professional examinations have been developed to assess the minimum competency of entry-level workers in a variety of professions."

[John Bowman]

Joe H.,

Imagine that. They have the same address and the same lawyer.

[Richard L. Bennett]

Will

It is not what the people think of you who are not CMIs but those of us who are CMIs

Come aboard

rlb