New NACHI licensing in New Hampshire... all NACHI.

[Nick Gromicko]

Good question Dan... I'll answer it, though I think it over obvious to all. At least it is over obvious to state legislators, attorneys general, NACHI, ASHI, Civil Justice, home inspector licensing boards, inspection franchises and consumers everywhere.

I have no problem with HVAC contractors or dentists. I hire them both. When I hire them to look at my compressor or my teeth I know UPFRONT that they make a living doing repair work. They aren't being deceptive and as a consumer, I don't feel deceived. They call themselves what they are and I know what they are.

However this is something quite different and unconscionable: An association that permits its members to deceive consumers and pretend that they are home inspectors offering impartial inspections... when in fact their members aren't generating impartial inspections (ones that suffer no conflict of interest)? Their members are secret contractors using my industry to generate work and falsely calling themselves inspectors instead of contractors. The contractor doesn't disclose this secret and doesn't disclose this conflict-of-interest until it is too late (after the consumer hired him/her to do the inspection). A proper disclosure should occur BEFORE the consumer chooses what inspector to hire.. not after.

Some associations give its members (to the detriment of consumers) a competitive edge over my NACHI members as they can charge less (and in some cases nothing) knowing that they will get a certain amount of the contracting work their inspections generate (just like contractors offer free estimates). My members can't compete with free. Luckily, the real estate industry doesn't rely on biased free estimates from contractors... instead the real estate industry correctly relies on impartial inspections by independent inspectors.

It is widely assumed that "home inspectors" are impartial and that their reports do not suffer from a conflict of interest. Home inspectors are much like Judges... they look at all the evidence and issue an opinion which is deemed to be impartial by all parties. A Judge's opinion and an inspector's report may be correct, it may be incorrect, but it certainly doesn't suffer from any secret conflict of interest. Dan, I bet I know what you would call a Judge who you discovered lacked impartiality and was secretly profiting by selling your opponent legal advice to help him/her prevail against you in his court room... you'd call him a Scumbag.

All associations should require that all their members be forthright with consumers in all their marketing literature and websites and stop calling themselves "home inspectors" and instead call themselves "contractors" just like dentists don't call themselves "dental inspectors."

I hope this clarifies my position for all.

[dharris]

Until then, Scumbag NAHI is perpetrating a fraud on consumers and a class action law suit should be filed.

I hope this clarifies my position for all.

Huhhh... A class action suit for fraud on consumers..

To clarify I am not in favor of inspectors performing work on homes they inspect.
Tell me how that is perpertrating fraud on consumers, compared to your policy that it's none of the consumers business if the inspector has any HI experience, training or knowledge prior to you marketing them as certified inspectors to the unknowing public..

I'm going to suggest to my elected superiors that maybe ASHI and NAHI join forces and file a class action suit against NACHI for having that policy which can cause far more financial harm to a consumer than an inspector repairing a defect identified in the course of an inspection to a HI org SOP and disclosed COE..


</IMG></IMG></IMG></IMG></IMG>

[Nick Gromicko]

Dan,

You indirectly support my contention about by not addressing their COE and instead switching to NACHI. Thank you.

Anyway, to answer you... NACHI's COE prohibits our members from being anything less than 100% forthright about "experience, training, and knowledge" Read 1.3 and 1.5 of http://www.nachi.org/code_of_ethics.htm

[dharris]

Originally Posted by gromicko

Dan,

You indirectly support my contention about Scumbag NAHI by not addressing their COE and instead switching to NACHI. Thank you.

Anyway, to answer you... NACHI's COE prohibits our members from being anything less than 100% forthright about "experience, training, and knowledge" Read 1.3 and 1.5 of http://www.nachi.org/code_of_ethics.htm

Scumbag NAHI on the other hand does permit its members to be less than forthright about the impartiality of their inspections. Read http://www.nachi.org/the_lady_doth_p...h_methinks.htm

Thanks for pointing out this important distinction between the two association's Code of Ethics.

Nick. Help me understand what your saying...
From what I get from this is that you enforce your COE??? And NAHI doesn't.

If banning a member [ a member that works for someone else, and to the best of my knowelge DOES NOT belong to another HI org.]
for not marketing your org ,I have to say your enforcement is lacking any value.
That gives you the authority to call other HIs scumbags on an open BB????.

[Nick Gromicko]

Dan,

I'll be glad to help you understand...

No, I'm not saying that NACHI enforces its COE and Scumbag NAHI doesn't.

What I'm saying is that NACHI's COE requires its members to be truthful and forthright with consumers other's COE permits its members to trick consumers into thinking they are home inspectors performing impartial inspection reports when in fact they are secretly contractors using my industry to generate repair work.

See the difference? It's HUGE.


As for the second part of your post about banning a member for not marketing NACHI or something... I have no idea what you are talking about with regard to that comment. We don't even require members to reveal that they are members and we are one of the few trade associations in the world that permits invisible membership as proof.

[Nick Gromicko]

P.S. I don't believe that I've ever called anyone a Scumbag in my life. It is not a term I would use to describe someone. Too harsh and not my style.

[Paul Sabados]

Here's the posted Bill Sb212

Is this the outcome you're looking for? Question the acceptable test, looks very open ended.

II. The board shall adopt one eligibility examination required for licensure that is an independent nationally recognized proctored examination designed to test competence in home inspection practice, as determined by recognized role definition methodology and developed and administered in a manner consistent with the American Educational Research Association’s “Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing;” the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s “Uniform Guidelines for Employee Selection Procedures;” the Civil Rights Act of 1991; the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990; and similar applicable standards

http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legi...07/SB0212.html

Good luck guys

[Frank M. Carrio, CMI]

Originally Posted by psabados

Here's the posted Bill Sb212

Is this the outcome you're looking for? Question the acceptable test, looks very open ended.



http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legi...07/SB0212.html

Good luck guys

What Paul has posted is a Bill that was submitted by ASHI.
You will see that in this bill "All Roads lead to ASHI"

This is not and I repeat NOT the "NACHI Bill."



As of today the Legislators are 2-3 weeks behind in their "Paper Work" and we do not have "on Line access" to our bill.

Once we do, we will provide a link.

[Peter C. Russell]

Originally Posted by fcarrio

What Paul has posted is a Bill that was submitted by ASHI.
You will see that in this bill "All Roads lead to ASHI"

This is not and I repeat NOT the "NACHI Bill."



As of today the Legislators are 2-3 weeks behind in their "Paper Work" and we do not have "on Line access" to our bill.

Once we do, we will provide a link.

Thanks for staying on top of things Frank, people can be misled very easily.