Scumbag NAHI hits new low at ASTM meeting yesterday.

[Brian E. Kelly]

Originally Posted by gbeaumont

Brian, ASTM have standards covering many areas of component evaluation and standards of evaulation related to Commercial buildings & IAQ issues to name but two. They are not exactly novices when it comes to standards of inspection.

For Eample:

- E 1368-05 Standard Practice for Visual Inspection of Asbestos Abatement Projects
- E 1527-05 Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase I ESA Process
- E 1528-06 Standard Practice for Limited Environmental Due Diligence: Transaction Screen Process
- E 1903-97 Standard Guide for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase II ESA Process
- E 2018-01 Standard Guide for Property Condition Assessments: Baseline Property Condition Assessment Process
- E 2308-05 Standard Guide for Limited Asbestos Screens of Buildings
- E 2356-04 Standard Practice for Comprehensive Building Asbestos Surveys
- E 2418-06 Standard Guide for Readily Observable Mold and Conditions Conducive to Mold in Commercial Buildings: Baseline Survey Process

Regards

Gerry

Does anyone use these standards?
None or these are "Construction Inspection" standards Gerry.

It looks a lot like that toothless Euro/ISO 9000 crap to me that was sold to industry a while back. Made auditors a lot of money but did not seem to improve any manufacturing/construction practices or efficiencies.

[gbeaumont]

Originally Posted by bkelly2

Does anyone use these standards?
None or these are "Construction Inspection" standards Gerry.

It looks a lot like that toothless Euro/ISO 9000 crap to me that was sold to industry a while back. Made auditors a lot of money but did not seem to improve any manufacturing/construction practices or efficiencies.

Brian, what definition of construction inspection are you using? I would say that most of what I posted applies 2018-01 most certainly does. Plus just about every installed product in a home has an ASTM std that defines it's correct installation, those standards are also referenced in IRC, IBC and most other codes.

Regards

Gerry

[Blaine Wiley]

Well, in any case, it looks like we're in for another fight.

We have been successful in the past, and we will be that way again.

[Frank M. Carrio, CMI]

Originally Posted by gromicko

Under ASTM rules, since we were unable to quash it by vote at the first meeting (which would have killed it there and prevented NAR, trial lawyers, and the home builders association from getting involved), a next meeting to go forward will be scheduled.
Aren't you glad that you went?
I moved that it should held next to the NACHI convention at the same time as the NACHI convntion and that a new vote be taken next to hundreds of my members... but ASTM promised it will be at a neutral location next time.
Without you there watching our backs this would have come as a nasty surprise, and the "next meeting" would be held at NAHI Headquarters.
Looks like we're in for a long battle to keep scumbag NAHI from giving our industry away to the agents and builders.

Keep up the good work and keep us informed.

[Brian E. Kelly]

Originally Posted by gbeaumont

Brian, what definition of construction inspection are you using? I would say that most of what I posted applies 2018-01 most certainly does. Plus just about every installed product in a home has an ASTM std that defines it's correct installation, those standards are also referenced in IRC, IBC and most other codes.

Regards

Gerry

Excellent point Gerry.

Let me put it another way. What specification, inspection protocol/procedure has ASTM produced that could be considered to be equal in scope to the to the inspection of resedentail housing. Most of their standards are very specific to one product/material/ and or system. They are not known for streamlined easy to implement procedures. Nor are they known for their user friendly general public interface.

After giving thought to what you said about ASTM materials standards for the components that make up a house, it seems very likely that whatever ASTM comes up with will not be very user friendly; what with all the ASTM cross refrences to all of their materials standards.

I could be wrong, wouldn't be the first time.
</IMG>

[gbeaumont]

Originally Posted by bkelly2

Excellent point Gerry.

Let me put it another way. What specification, inspection protocol/procedure has ASTM produced that could be considered to be equal in scope to the to the inspection of resedentail housing. Most of their standards are very specific to one product/material/ and or system. They are not known for streamlined easy to implement procedures. Nor are they known for their user friendly general public interface.

After giving thought to what you said about ASTM materials standards for the components that make up a house, it seems very likely that whatever ASTM comes up with will not be very user friendly; what with all the ASTM cross refrences to all of their materials standards.

I could be wrong, wouldn't be the first time.
</IMG>

Brian, I really have no clue as to what ASTM may or may not come up with, I feel that they will have to (in large part) follow the current industry standards, I for one don't believe that the wheel needs completely re-inventing.

However I do believe that our current industry SOPs could do with some revision and that a common standard for all inspectors would benefit our industry. I know I am likely to get attacked for stating this but I honestly believe that an ASTM standard offers more protection to the inspector than any current standard can possibly offer.

Maybe one of our insurance prroviders would care to comment on the defencability of standards.

Regards

Gerry

[Brian E. Kelly]

Sounds fair to me Gerry.

Just for the record I have no views of my own and just spout off the
first thing that the voices in my head tell me.
Please seek legal counsel before using anything that I may have posted, for your benefit.
And/or get your own voices.

[Nick Gromicko]

Gerry,

The insurance industry has already commented. AIG, the largest inspection insurer in the industry and arguably one of the largest corporations in the world offers discounts for inspectors who use NACHI's SOP. Anyway, my post is not to argue about the quality of an SOP written by ASTM with heavy input from REALTORs, builders and trial lawyers (which is now what we will suffer) vs. the existing ones we all use. My post is to show how scumbag NAHI perverted the voting process by taking steps to hold it next to their convention instead of at a location near one of the major stakeholders (NACHI or ASHI) or at least a neutral location. Then not telling us about it. Then busing in votes from the room next door.

I respect everyone's vote and after the meeting had dinner with a NAHI member who voted differently than me.

It was the way scumbag NAHI stacked the deck that was unAmerican.

[gbeaumont]

Originally Posted by gromicko

Gerry,

The insurance industry has already commented. AIG, the largest inspection insurer in the industry and arguably one of the largest corporations in the world offers discounts for inspectors who use NACHI's SOP. Anyway, my post is not to argue about the quality of an SOP written by ASTM with heavy input from REALTORs, builders and trial lawyers (which is now what we will suffer) vs. the existing ones we all use. My post is to show how scumbag NAHI perverted the voting process by taking steps to hold it next to their convention instead of at a location near one of the major stakeholders (NACHI or ASHI) or at least a neutral location. Then not telling us about it. Then busing in votes from the room next door.

I respect everyone's vote and after the meeting had dinner with a NAHI member who voted differently than me.

It was the way scumbag NAHI stacked the deck that was unAmerican.

Interesting Nick,

Yes our insurance providers see a benefit in SOP's, no debate, would they see a bigger advantage in a wider SOP used by 25,000 inspectors rather than an association SOP largely used by a much lower number of inspectors?

As to realtors, lawyers and builders guiding ASTM, that is rediculous ASTM is a democratic member driven organization, I do not know of any realtors or lawyers who are members. (though I conceed there must be some)

As to NAHI's role in this, I have to agree with you, and I also find fault with ASTM for being led by one faction within our business, that is against their own normal practice.

However, does that devalue the enterprise???

Regards

Gerry

[Keith Swift, PhD.]

In case you think that nothing good came out of this, our fearless leader rarely returns to camp without bringing something back for the membership, and this trip was no exception, as you will see in the days to come. It was a rare treat for me to see him in action. Hate to sound like a sycophant (servile), but when nature wants something done, she creates a genius, and if he's not a genius he's a rare individual indeed.

[James H. Bushart]

Originally Posted by gbeaumont

However, does that devalue the enterprise???

Gerry, since you mentioned "value" and these folks have announced their intention to charge to use this SOP...what do you feel a fair price would be?

Keep in mind that these folks will be lobbying states to adopt their SOP, and when the state requires you to use it, you must pay an annual fee to use it. So, Gerry, how much do you think we should pay to use this one in place of our own?

[gbeaumont]

Originally Posted by jbushart

Gerry, since you mentioned "value" and these folks have announced their intention to charge to use this SOP...what do you feel a fair price would be?

Keep in mind that these folks will be lobbying states to adopt their SOP, and when the state requires you to use it, you must pay an annual fee to use it. So, Gerry, how much do you think we should pay to use this one in place of our own?

James, you are badly misinformed, there is no annual fee based on stds usage. an individual standard may cost $30-200 per down load, but do we realy think that inspectors will accept that. I think not, if ASTM want to come to the table they need a better offer than that.

Regards

Gerry

[James H. Bushart]

Originally Posted by gbeaumont

James, you are badly misinformed, there is no annual fee based on stds usage.

Nick...do you have information to the contrary?

[gbeaumont]

Originally Posted by jbushart

Nick...do you have information to the contrary?

James, you could visit ASTM for youself at www.astm.org and check the pricing and availability of standards, members get a better price than non members (about 25% off) and if you buy multiple standards or intend to, you can pre buy those at an even better rate.

Regards

Gerry

[Keith Swift, PhD.]

I attended an all-day ASTM meeting in the Riviera Hotel in Las Vegas yesterday, Monday February 19th, 2007. The meeting could be characterized as exploratory, in that the host and ASTM representative informed us that he intended to conclude the proceedings with a vote-of-hands to see if building inspectors were interested in having ASTM author an “international” residential standard of practice. The host was articulate and presented some practical and also some idealistic reasons why inspectors might want to have an “international” set of standards instead of their own group standards. The proceedings were “democratic,” and anyone who wanted to speak was given the opportunity to do so. This does not mean that the proceedings were fair, because they were not. They were prejudiced by the fact that they were scheduled during the NAHI convention, and that the inspectors of many other trade associations only learned about it a couple of weeks before, and some only days before. To his credit, the ASTM host/attorney acknowledged this and apologized.
Before continuing, I would like to explain why I attended the meeting, and thereby establish my ethos, or my right to have a voice in this, and why I might be alleged to be prejudiced. I am NACHI’s Vice-President and a veteran building inspector, and I’m interested in anything that might affect my livelihood and that of my fellow inspectors, and particularly in protecting inspectors against those who would seek to control them, in whatever guise they appear. Many people may not be aware that I am also the president of Porter Valley Software, and that NAHI banned me and my business partner Lorne Steiner from attending their convention, allegedly when I became NACHI’s vice-president. I relate this, because I was approached by inspectors from CREIA, ASHI, AII and, yes, NAHI, who were surprised that I was not there as a vendor, or who wanted to thank me for articles that I’ve written on their behalf. I say this only to allay any suggestion that I might be biased against NAHI. I said everything that I have to say about NAHI, publicly, and that information is available for anyone who might be interested in learning more. Now, let’s get back to talking about the meeting and ASTM’s interest in writing an “international” standard.
I have read and reread ASTM’s Property Condition Assessments (PCA), which is the de facto standard for commercial inspections, and I have great respect for it. However, as I’ve said in numerous articles, I happen to have equally great respect for other industry standards, many of which were written by the best minds in the business, and which have evolved over many years and will continue to do so, and that’s the way it should be. In fact, that’s their strength. These standards just happen to be distinctive; and that’s also the way it should be. Inspectors are not homogenous, and we don’t want to be. Uniformity might appear to be beneficial, but too often it’s not. For instance, regulatory laws have been written that were intended to be beneficial, but many turn out to be anything but beneficial, as is abundantly documented in The Death of Common Sense: How Law is Suffocating America by New York attorney Philip K. Howard (Warner Books Edition, 1994). An ASTM international standard will constitute a “law” that would mandate the cooperation of a nation of realtors and other professionals who possess more money and far greater lobbying power and influence than most associations could ever hope to muster. If ASTM defines and writes the standard for our industry, realtors and other professional will not only be telling us what to do but how to do it, and there’s an outside chance that this could happen.
Although it was clear to me that delegates from such organizations as CREIA, ASHI, and AII, were opposed to the idea, NAHI members came prepared to vote for it. So I was not surprised when just before the scheduled vote a tide of NAHI members drifted into the room and were able to generate an affirmative motion to “move forward.” Many of the votes were clearly political, which is contemptuous but understandable. This means that there will be another meeting, a meeting in which inspectors everywhere will have a chance to vote their conscience. I’m utterly against the ASTM proposal, and have elected to march to NACHI’s drumbeat, but would proudly march to that of CREIA, ASHI, FABI, AII, in fact that of almost any other organization but NAHI, and I’m certainly not going to have Realtors or any other professionals tell me how I should do my job.
This was written in haste, and is insubstantial in many respects, but I wanted to warn inspectors about what I believe to be a threat to our autonomy as individuals.