Canadian government recognizes CMI. Thank you Roy Cooke!

[Raymond E. Wand]

Hi Doug,

I am suggesting that CMI is another title that no one can prove to be beneficial. My clients do not ask me what my designations I have now. However they do know that I have a good reputation and thorough, thats because I cultivated my image, no title can do that in my opinion. But then again I deal by referrals and reputation, I do not solicit the agents.

[dpotts]

Originally Posted by Raymond E. Wand

Hi Doug,

I am suggesting that CMI is another title that no one can prove to be beneficial. My clients do not ask me what my designations I have now. However they do know that I have a good reputation and thorough, thats because I cultivated my image, no title can do that in my opinion. But then again I deal by referrals and reputation, I do not solicit the agents.

Now that I agree with completely! My experience has been that RHI is as unknown as any other designation. Maybe we should be more creative and come up with our own designations! But I'll stay away from Brian's, (Master Hemorrhoid Inspector), after all, he came up with up it fisrt and I wouldn't want to be seen as following "behind".

Doug

[Vern Mitchinson]

Finally got to the end of all this stuff.
All the good old ashi cum caphi boys nay say the requirements of CMI certification because they are not proctored.
To me swearing an oath on the holy book that everything I am presenting is true and correct is more serious then sitting in a room with someone watching over me.
After all our whole judicial system is based on the same oath to tell the truth and nothing but the truth.
For bill, ray, claude and others to question that is simply unacceptable.

[Raymond E. Wand]

Vern

Correction. I am not an ASHI/CAHPI boy. My apologies if I gave that impression however the more I look at CMI and NACHI I am beginning to believe that National Certification has much more merit than MCI for the myriad of reasons already noted.

Cheers,

[Claude Lawrenson]

Questioning should be acceptable; in fact it should be encouraged! I thought that was the NACHI way.

Although we may disagree in principle over the issue of examinations, and proctoring - it seems that many educational institutions including other professions have utilized that as their means for assessment for many decades. Perhaps I am blinded by my own educational values being part of the educational institution system. It has survived many years, and likely will continue to set many of the standards for both para-professionals and professionals for years to come. Case in point - what did it take to become a CET? Was the Ethics and Professional Practice exam an open book, unproctored; are the Building Code exams in Alberta or any other province also unproctored? They all have some forms or rules to be subscribed to. http://www.aset.ab.ca/faq.htm (link added). http://www.csc-ca.org/pdf/CSC_ACBOA.pdf (link added)

Likewise the value of any designation is only a good as the quality of the work/service delivered, and often benchmarked to the lowest common denominator - when viewed by others outside of the associations, particularly when things go wrong, or poor results are provided and questioned to clients.

Again this is only my personal opinion - I likewise encourage others to keep an open mind in the discussions.

[dpotts]

Originally Posted by clawrenson

Questioning should be acceptable; in fact it should be encouraged! I thought that was the NACHI way.

Although we may disagree in principle over the issue of examinations, and proctoring - it seems that many educational institutions including other professions have utilized that as their means for assessment for many decades. Perhaps I am blinded by my own educational values being part of the educational institution system. It has survived many years, and likely will continue to set many of the standards for both para-professionals and professionals for years to come. Case in point - what did it take to become a CET? Was the Ethics and Professional Practice exam an open book, unproctored; are the Building Code exams in Alberta or any other province also unproctored? They all have some forms or rules to be subscribed to.

Likewise the value of any designation is only a good as the quality of the work/service delivered, and often benchmarked to the lowest common denominator - when viewed by others outside of the associations, when things go wrong.

Again this is only my personal opinion - I likewise encourage others to keep an open mind in the discussions.

Once again I agree, but this industry is still young and public perception of HI designations is minimally recognized. This is not to say that the organizations promoting standards are doing anything wrong, on the contrary, they are trying to constantly improve awareness. I belong to OAHI as well and I appreciate their attempts at determining minimum education levels, but mandating only available "code courses" falls far short of the actual maintenance, renovation, and construction experience that is really more relevant to inspecting. One needs to know what they're looking at before determining if it's right or wrong. And this depends on when it was built/installed, not what todays code says. Even codes change, I'm currently finishing college courses, 4 based on '97 code and 1 based on 2006 code.
All exams are proctored. All exams count for less than 42% of the semester mark. Does this mean they're better??
It was only a few short years ago that those who currently mandate the standard, learned by the seat of their pants how to do the job. They came from various construction related backgrounds with precious few having general overall knowledge gained from maintenance and repair of existing structures. I don't believe you can teach someone through any of these corses to recognize problems if they don't have a great deal of background in new and old construction science, complete with having to diagnose problems when new technology is introduced to old construction.

That's my open mind

[James H. Bushart]

"Credentials" mean nothing to the buying public. They are used by members within a profession to differentiate themselves from the others. They are for personal glamour and ego tripping.

The buying public could not care less.

Thus, after one purchases a couple of consonants and vowels, their next endeavor is to convince others to be as impressed as they are. This very rarely happens.

[Raymond E. Wand]

"Credentials" mean nothing to the buying public. They are used by members within a profession to differentiate themselves from the others. They are for personal glamour and ego tripping.

Actually some regulated professions require members to state their membership, not for advertising or glamour or ego, but to ensure the public the member is regulated and is on the up and up.

[George A. H. Luck]

Now I am not claiming that my C.M.I. logo, featured in full 23" living colour on the front of my truck, on my web site, on my business cards and in all of my advertising is responsible but . . . . . .

I just got back home after completing my third inspection of the day (eleventh of the week) while all you guys seem to have had the time to post messages here all day. Hmmmmmm . . . . go figure.

[Claude Lawrenson]

Doug P - I commend those that see the value of taking building code courses, such as yourself. (Code courses - Like them or hate them) Most standards that are used in the construction of buildings are derived from the various building codes as well as those related to manufacturing and material standards. We stress this in the college system - building technology disciplne students now take a minimum of 3 full 40+ hour building code courses in Ontario.

I agree that the value will vary significantly, but I would feel comfortable with a home inspector that understands the importance of code and standards and how the performance of what is observed in the field is evaluated and assessed is much better than a subjective decision to render an opinion just on the inspectors personal opinion.

To design a house in Ontario requires one that is code certified and registered by law in the Province. To build a house does not require that the builder be code certified, but in most cases a member of Tarion. Now where does the home inspector fit in? Lowering the standard will leave inspector vulnerable - that's simply my opinion. Now how does that fit into the NACHI model of credentials mean nothing?

[James H. Bushart]

Originally Posted by clawrenson

Now how does that fit into the NACHI model of credentials mean nothing?

Studying the code is not a bad thing and can certainly enhance the quality of one's report. I am hoping to acquire such for myself later this month.

That is meaningful to the inspector and his client.

Several who have acquired these certifications have argued that they become a basic minimum standard and that those lacking them should not be home inspectors, in an attempt to thin out the competition.

Still, it means little to a consumer who is not purchasing a code inspection to hire an inspector with half the alphabet after his name, signifying his code "credentials".

[dpotts]

Claude, I continue to agree with you. What I'm trying to get across is that the courses are necessary and beneficial, but due to their current limitations cannot make up for years of maintenance, renovation and construction experience. This practical experience, IMHO, is needed in conjunction with understanding current building practices. 90% of homes inspected in Ontario were built before the 97 code. The code was not introduced in Ontario untill 1975 (about the time Home Inspection began). So yes all these courses are relevant, but again they currently cannot supply someone with no experience at all the wisdom of practical experience. We don't have a mentoring or residence program in effect that truly trains the non experienced.

[Claude Lawrenson]

Here is one example - I know of others - http://calendardb.humber.ca/LIS/WebC...?name=HMIN_505

The first building code was 1941 - http://www.nationalcodes.ca/nbc/questions1_e.shtml#1985

[dpotts]

Originally Posted by clawrenson

Here is one example - I know of others - http://calendardb.humber.ca/LIS/WebC...?name=HMIN_505

Thanks Claude, that's my point. 50 hours of training cannot compare to over 40,000 hours of real experience.
Once again, the original founders of OAHI inspectors had no College training because none existed. Their ability was based on experience in maintenance, renovation and construction.

All professions start somewhere, none start with a set doctrine, it has to come from accumulated knowledge which only those who've come from the trenches can share.

This includes current people who've had much experience in the real world of residential maintenance, renovation and construction. I'll even bet that the original 50 RHI's have never taken the currently required courses. No diss to them, they understood what I'm saying now. Courses were introduced and standards set to protect (rightly so) what became a viable business. I commend you for helping to set standards and hope one day the paramiters can include real knowledge in conjunction with 42% proctored exams.

[Nick Gromicko]

Ray writes

I am suggesting that CMI is another title that no one can prove to be beneficial.

Oh really? This from one of your fellow Canadian inspectors:

I was truley amazed the number of inspectors at this AGM that would qualify to apply for the CMI and have not taken advantge of it. I know there are tonnes of threads on this board regarding the CMI, like it or not it works big time. I for one have done nothing but reap the rewards from this professional designation. Although like most designations in this industry the CMI is voluntary.... for now . For those of you that don't post on the board much, like myself please feel free to Email me at cris@abnet.ca regarding the benefits.

posted here: http://www.nachi.org/forum/f48/alberta-agm-certified-master-inspector-designation-24780/

Wrong again Ray.