Does CAPHI need NACHI members

[Robert Francis]

Does CAPHI need NACHI members in order for CHIBO to work?

[rwand1]

I hope the five thousand inspectors out there can read this and take the time to vote.

Raymond Wand
Alton, ON

[Robert Francis]

Just think of the money on courses, exams, admin charges, travel time, and etc and etc. to 5,000 people. Can you say cash cow. The sad part is if the past prevails, not many will have every made it to the certification level, now lets see where have I heard of that happening before......................

[rwand1]

Do you know where your tax dollars are going?

Raymond Wand
Alton, ON

[rwand1]

Candadian Home Inspectors & Building Officials National Initiative - Technical Series 00-131

http://www.cmhc-schl.gc.ca/publicati...h00-131-e.html

I guess this is where the 5,000 came from?

Raymond Wand
Alton, ON

[Vern Mitchinson]

I spent over 28 years as an inspector lesion officer involved with the private land development industry and we developed a very accurate system to track the number of single family to multifamily lots serviced each year It had to be accurate because that was how we were paid for our services. CMHC came every year to review our records and publish a report of the housing starts etc. I never did figure out why their numbers never matched ours. Even accounting for the time lapse from servicing the lot to when the building was completed.

[rwand1]

Do you trust everything CMHC says? I don't, just as I don't trust the Liberals for their truthfulness.

Bye, bye Liberals!

Raymond Wand
Alton, ON

[Vern Mitchinson]

How do you know when a politician is lying?

His lips are moving.

[rwand1]

Fiberals! I like how Paul Martin has promised to ban handguns. What a moron they are already banned! Duh!

Raymond Wand
Alton, ON

[rwand1]

I had another concern. If 5,000 inspectors apparently exist across Canada, and you have a document released by CMHC that indicates 7,000 which real and accurate number was used in obtaining financing with Federal Tax dollars? I trust no one over inflated the real numbers or misquoted the numbers.....

Given the mistatements in the London Free Press one has to wonder what else has been embellished. What is even more of a concern is the fact Mr. Mullen is not concerned that he has been caught mistating the facts and doesn't care what is released to the press. Strange how Mr. Mullen as spokesperson fails to comprehend right from wrong.

Now lets look at the 2 million dollar figure being quoted. That figure is questionable. I think they have included volunteer time in the amount. I didn't think volunteers were paid and you were a volunteer because you wanted to give back of your own free time. Where's the BEEF? We know where the Bull is! ooooops, did I say that? I guess I did.

Raymond Wand
Alton, ON

[rwand1]

Ontario Press Council
http://www.ontpress.com/about/index.asp

A newspaper publishing an unsolicited opinion article should go beyond simply determining that it is not libellous; it should he prepared to accept responsibility jointly with the author for factual errors.

Amazing how your tax dollars are being used to publish erroneous info.

Raymond Wand
Alton, ON

[George A. H. Luck]

Very interesting page from the Press Council. If followed as intended this would effectively put most of the papers in the country out of business. Particularly the Toronto Star.

"Does C.A.P.H.I. need N.A.C.H.I. members"? - yes

" Should they come after us cap in hand"? Yes! As N.A.C.H.I. represents the major portion of inspectors nationally and that portion is growing rapidly, then any successful representative programme must have N.A.C.H.I. on the inside. The proponents of the national have, seemingly, done everything in their power to prevent N.A.C.H.I. members ( with the exception of a few 'after the fact" meetings and a few postings on this and other bbs's) from having their opinion expressed and counted. That is not 'inclusive' by any definition.

[rwand1]

http://www.cmhc-schl.gc.ca/en/burema...hose_ce35b.cfm

I think this is a new publication it is listed as Jan. 2006.

Raymond Wand
Alton, ON

[wjung]

Ray,
the way I read this document, it appears to me to be pre finalization of the NI, because they state in the document something to the effect of the NI to be completed by 2005. So I would suggest that it preceeds the finalization of the NI and is not a 2006/new document. It may just have been redated.

Wolf

[Roy D. Cooke, Sr]

Originally Posted by rwand1

http://www.cmhc-schl.gc.ca/en/burema...hose_ce35b.cfm
I think this is a new publication it is listed as Jan. 2006.
Raymond Wand
Alton, ON

WOW! This to me looks like it was put out by CAHPI.
I like the section where it say's that they do not "recommend or endorse" any association.
This sounds like double talk to me and far from being fair to Inspectors in any other association.

"CMHC does not recommend or endorse any individual home inspector or association. CMHC does encourage and support the private home inspection industry to establish national uniform standards of competency. For more information on the inspection industry's national initiative please refer to the CMHC Research Highlight Canadian Home Inspectors and Building Officials National Initiatve Phase Two: Development of National Certification and Accreditation Models on CMHC’s website"..

This is about as Biased a PUBLICATION as I have seen.

RoyCooke SR....R.H.I.....CAHPI-ON