Free mailing labels and postage for anyone wanting to write Kansas legislators.

[Scott Patterson]

Originally Posted by jbushart

In this sense, Scott, it does present itself as a credential or "qualifier", just as Nick tries to do with the NACHI test, in spite of what your website might disclaim.

Who decided or decides (outside of ASHI or your corporation) what "all home inspectors should know"?

Hi Jim,

What is on the exam is based on what is called a Role Delineation Study or RDS. This is a common procedure that is done with all professional exams.

A Core group of 35 home inspectors who have been in the profession for a minimum of 5 years and are still active home inspectors were brought to Chicago for a 3 day meeting. Many are not affiliated with any organization. Having a organization affiliation is not a requirement to participate.

At this meeting the role of the home inspector is discussed and a determined. Then this is sent out to over 6,000 home inspectors in all 50 states, Puerto Rico and Canada to collect their opinion on the what was covered at the meeting. The results are then reviewed and implemented as to the percentage of the folks that participated and agreed with what the committee had come up with. Role delineation studies are repeated every three to five years to insure that the resulting test blueprint— the content areas and knowledge, skills and tasks examined—are congruent with current professional practice.

This is how EBPHI is able to determine the role of a home inspector.

[Paul Sabados]

Regarding the issue of licensing, 50% are for it and 50% are not. To claim to speak for the entire membership is presumptuous. I meet many a fine InterNACHI member who are not against licensing and they are good people. In the arena of public opinion, their argument has many a valid point and they should be respected.

Getting back to the original point of this thread and away from the association bashing. John, is your 50/50 quote your opinion or do you have facts to support that claim. Secondly, if thats the case please point me to the 50% of Kansas Inspectors in Nachi that support this law. You're not going to find them, you'd be very hard pressed to find 10%

Nick you're being that Puffer fish again. Freebies of the orgs means nothing vs. bad laws plain and simple.

[John McKenna]

Originally Posted by psabados

Getting back to the original point of this thread and away from the association bashing. John, is your 50/50 quote your opinion or do you have facts to support that claim. Secondly, if thats the case please point me to the 50% of Kansas Inspectors in Nachi that support this law. You're not going to find them, you'd be very hard pressed to find 10%

Nick you're being that Puffer fish again. Freebies of the orgs means nothing vs. bad laws plain and simple.

Nick has stated the 50% figure many times and from my communications
that seems to be a fair estimate... IMHO.

To tell Nick that his mandate is to submit to the demands of a tiny
few on the forum is a little narrow minded, when he has many
many other inspectors who may not share those same narrow views.
InterNACHI's success is based on a broader agenda and other needs
that are just as important.

[dharris]

And one other IMPORTANT NOTE! I'm on InterNACHI's message board defending InterNACHI. Dan Harris, and Jim Bushart and Scott Patterson (all ASHI members) came to OUR HOUSE. I didn't go to their's.

Ahh poor nickey is gonna play the victim game.
Do you really belive if you and your supporters didn't,name call, bash, lie/ post 1/2 truths about other HI orgs to thousands of homes, IE: the public that read this crap, that many ashi members would not even bother to come to your house?

[Nick Gromicko]

In post #70 of this thread, ASHI's Scott Patterson says

ASHI national does not get involved in the local politics.

I trust that Jim Bushart is as vocal about Scott's revelation of ASHI's position on his own ASHI message board as he is about InterNACHI's position on our message board... lest he be a hypocrite.

[Paul Sabados]

Nick has stated the 50% figure many times and from my communications
that seems to be a fair estimate... IMHO.

Well nice that you've decided to be Nick's mouthpiece on this issue.

To tell Nick that his mandate is to submit to the demands of a tiny
few on the forum is a little narrow minded, when he has many
many other inspectors who may not share those same narrow views.
InterNACHI's success is based on a broader agenda and other needs
that are just as important.

Really, narrow minded, this is not a National Poll or agenda, this is strictly a regional issue and like I said it before, find me 10% of the Kansas Nachi inspectors that are supporting this current issue. So yes, the narrow minded inspectors of Kansas have been asking for Nachi help. All we are getting is double speak, chest thumping and a blow up fish. The inspectors of Mo. have seen what has happened, they know what the real score is and are trying to head off a similar attempt in that State. So you can get off of your national soap box, sell your training program and give away memberships as a freebie. This is an issue of our local business, livelihoods and future, so yes the few, because that's what we arein relation to National, have an agenda.

[dharris]

Originally Posted by jmckenna1

I know several people who have been studying to be home inspectors and
took the iNACHI test several times before they passed. These were people
who came from a construction background. It is a meaningful test IMHO.

Yea and several pass it [ or maybe someone else did it for them] to be instantly marketed to the public as a "certified HI" by nickey, then come on this BB and disclose they need ridealongs to LEARN the business, post if they have to meet the basic/ min state requirements for licensing they are screwed/ out of business.

[James H. Bushart]

Originally Posted by jmckenna1

Nick has stated the 50% figure many times and from my communications
that seems to be a fair estimate... IMHO.

To tell Nick that his mandate is to submit to the demands of a tiny
few on the forum is a little narrow minded, when he has many
many other inspectors who may not share those same narrow views.
InterNACHI's success is based on a broader agenda and other needs
that are just as important.

As I have said on many threads in many forums, John....if we want your opinion, we will get it directly from Nick. Thanks, anyway.

[Nick Gromicko]

Dan, you live in a licensed state that has no continuing education requirements whatsoever, and you belong to an association that has no entrance requirements whatsoever.

Do you really want to take on John McKenna who had to do hundreds of hours training to get his license and then do www.nachi.org/membership.htm on top of that for InterNACHI?

Dan, I think you should go somewhere else and bark with the little inspector newbie puppies. No?

[Joseph Burkeson, CMI]

Originally Posted by jmckenna1

Regarding the issue of licensing, 50% are for it and 50% are not. To claim to speak for the entire membership is presumptuous. I meet many a fine InterNACHI member who are not against licensing and they are good people. In the arena of public opinion, their argument has many a valid point and they should be respected.

(My Bold)

John,

This 50% figure is in no way a reflection of reality. Maybe you could find 25-33% of inspectors who belong to associations in favor of licensing but when you add all of the unaffiliated home inspectors who are 100% against licensing, the number would probably be no greater than 20% overall who favor licensing.

Furthermore, once that 20% was truly educated regarding the failure of home inspector licensing most of those inspectors (except of course those inspectors who are earning money through home inspection licensing) would move to the anti-licensing ranks.

Home inspector licensing can not and will not ever provide a cure to the problems within our profession, it can't it is simply not designed as a remedy. Asking home inspector licensing to aid our profession is equivalent to attempting to bake bread with a bicycle or shingle a roof with horseshoes.

[James H. Bushart]

Originally Posted by gromicko

In post #70 of this thread, ASHI's Scott Patterson says

I trust that Jim Bushart is as vocal about Scott's revelation of ASHI's position on his own ASHI message board as he is about InterNACHI's position on our message board... lest he be a hypocrite.

Scott Patterson does not speak for ASHI....and the ongoing series in the ASHI Reporter (often cited by me on this message board) contradicts his statement.

ASHI is involved in state legislative matters and has ongoing support to its chapters who are MORE involved in state legislative matters. Where do you think their model for legislation came from? Ever read their annual report...that they publish in all newspapers in all unlicensed states...discussing their rating system on enacted HI laws?

That is involvement.

I prefer it to backdoor, underhanded dealings by ED's of national associations looking to make a buck by embracing a law that his membership has opposed...and is still actively fighting.

[Nick Gromicko]

Jim, one can't oppose a law. One has to obey a law. As for legislation, there are InterNACHI members who support it and InterNACHI members who oppose it.

Which is why InterNACHI doesn't get involved unless it is particularly unfair to InterNACHI members.

[James H. Bushart]

Originally Posted by gromicko

Jim, one can't oppose a law. One has to obey a law. As for legislation, there are InterNACHI members who support it and InterNACHI members who oppose it.

Which is why InterNACHI doesn't get involved unless it is particularly unfair to InterNACHI members.

Nick.....if BS were music....you would be an orchestra.

Tell Rosa Parks that one cannot oppose a law.

Tell August Busch, as he drove his Clydesdales pulling a beer wagon from St. Louis to the White House to deliver a keg of Budweiser to Franklin Roosevelt when the Prohibition Act was repealed that he cannot oppose, but just obey a law.

Tell the women who vote in New York that you cannot oppose, but only obey a law. The black voter in Mississippi.....

The list is endless.....

You did nothing honorable, Nick.

You snuck behind the backs of your membership and attempted to profit by something that harmed them. Even the snake that you were dealing with, Barnes, was disgusted by you...and showed you the door.

You have been rejected by those we have rejected, ourselves.

And this law that we oppose...that you say cannot be opposed "but obeyed" has been sent back to the legislature. It's not a law anymore since it cannot be legally enforced....so says the Attorney General.

So we continue to fight while you continue to spin.......but your credibility has never been lower with the public and the membership than it is, today.

Spin away, Nick. No one is paying attention to you anymore.

[Nick Gromicko]

One problem with your theory.... it is difficult to "profit" from devloping, getting approval for, and administering FREE education.

You jumped the shark with your lengthy post of non-specifics again.

[Nick Gromicko]

Furthermore, the exising Kansas LAW is no more particularly InterNACHI member unfreindly than the legislation was.... therefore InterNACHI doesn't support or oppose it.