Kingston Meeting September 10th

[Roy D. Cooke, Sr]

Originally Posted by clawrenson

Thanks Ray - Survey result - about half of those surveyed believe its difficult to find a qualified home inspector; almost 3/4 do not believe that consumers are adequately protected - et al.

Bottom line - there is nothing - regardless of association - to prevent unqualified individuals from operating as home inspectors.

At a minimum - mandatory certification of home inspectors would benefit with the full range of interested parties to clarify concerns and identify a means to resolve them.

Gee Claude we agree. ("Bottom line - there is nothing - regardless of association - to prevent unqualified individuals from operating as home inspectors. .")
OAHI/CAHPI is a prime example
They have qualified home inspectors ( figures ~)
RHIs ...................................242.......... who are trained
Fully trained to do inspections...242 Total
They have associates.............104 ...........who have some training
They have applicants ................6...... ......little or no training.
Students ............... ..............432. ........... Who want to be trained
Not fully......... trained.............542. Total .Who are out doing inspections and learning how to be an inspector from the public.
Now obviously you see nothing wrong with this system as you say nothing about it .
You are quite vocal about the way NACHI does it .
NACHI makes those who wish to be a NACHI member and do home inspections, to pass an exam first.
You Condone CAHPI and OAHI who do not co-operate with NACHI and ridicule NACHI and its members .
NACHI where you come to try and sell your NCA and allows all to visit and post .
I guess we see things differently NACHI , helps all , CAHPI/OAHI who might help some of their members but definitely does not share to the other Home Inspectors.
Sure looks very unbalanced to me .

......... Cookie

[Claude Lawrenson]

This leads me back to the obvious question - does NACHI certify home inspectors?

[rwand1]

Not any more than CAHPI or CAHPI-OAHI does.

[Roy D. Cooke, Sr]

Originally Posted by clawrenson

This leads me back to the obvious question - does NACHI certify home inspectors?

Does NACHI ignore other associations like OAHI/CAHPI does.
Poor Claude he continues to always turn around many posts and trys to Blacken NACHI ,
Keep trying Claude you have to pull NACHI down a long way to get to where The NCA is good luck some day you just might try and fix things instead of ignoring the problems.

.... Cookie

[Roy D. Cooke, Sr]

This is on another NACHI post but I feel it needs to be read by those who think The CAHPI--NCA is a good idea.... Cookie



: http://www.nachi.org/forum/showpost.php?p=247870&postcount=43




Dan Bowers vbmenu_register("postmenu_247870", true);
Holmes Inspection Company
NACHI Member

User Name: dbowers
Location: Shawnee Mission, KS
Posts: 804

Re: Licensing - Love it/Hate it
"The only States with credibilty when it comes to laws, are those with regulations. They are the ones keeping optomitrists etc. from being HI's".

You think there's credibility in being licensed - and none if not.

You're kidding right.

For example - As a "non-licensed home inspector" in a "non-licensed state", I've done expert witness over 23 times in the past 6 years alone against "licensed engineers". Not to be rude, but to date its 23/0 in my favor.

If I look at the home inspector licensing laws in place around the country and hung my entire credibility hat on meeting their requirements, I wouldn't have a whole lot except in maybe 2 of them.

Sorry - licensing doesn't really protect the consumer OR us (especially us), AND the licensing of inspectors is so pathetically simplistic (except in 1 or 2 states) that it doesn't keep hardly anyone out of the profession.

Witness that by the INCREASE in HI numbers in most licensed states AFTER licensing went into play.

All it mostly does is give others a lever in controlling what we do.

Almost every other profession outguns us in man-power, political influence, money, etc. Once we're licensed it makes it a lot easier to jerk our chains.

[George A. H. Luck]

Claude, thank you for directing me to page 68 of the OHIO STUDY. I found these interesting statements;
Ohio homeowners rated the home inspector they dealt with 7.7 on a scale of 1 to 10
on the accuracy of the inspection report, while real estate agents from licensing
survey states rated home inspectors 8.3 for report accuracy.

AND

Ohio homeowners rated the home inspector they dealt with 7.7 on a scale of 1 to 10
on their overall satisfaction, while real estate agents from licensing survey states
rated client satisfaction 8.5.

Both of these statements seem to give home inspectors a failure rate of about 3%. This of course flies in the face of what is reported earlier on that same page;

Real estate agents in licensing and non-licensing survey states both:
o said approximately 15% of home inspection reports they’ve seen are
inadequate
approximately 13% of homeowners have later discovered problems with
their home despite having had a home inspection

Obviously we have a difference of OPINION not FACT. So where did that 10% discrepancy come from?
First we must ask what sort of "problems" were later discovered by home owners? Were they minor or major? Did the develop after the home inspection? Were they hidden faults that were not evident to the inspector. Are these findings the result of inflated expectations on the part of the home owner? None of these questions were adequately addressed before the survey was taken and should have been. It is a lot like asking two people if they thought last summer was hot. Opinion is not fact.
On the part of the real estate agents we should ask "What does the term ‘inadequate’ mean?" Does it mean that the inspection revealed conditions that the agent would rather have remained hidden? Does it mean that the presentation of a check list report was not up to the agents personal requirements? Does it mean that the spelling was bad? Again the parameters of the response were not identified before the survey was taken.

Of particular interest is the statement;

When comparing survey data from states with licensing to states without licensing, virtually no
significant difference exists.

OR

Given that the statistics do not support the claim that a full licensing program will minimize or
eliminate inadequate inspections, the natural response is not to implement any regulations.
This is shortsighted and does not take into consideration other facets of the real estate industry
described here. Nonetheless, even if regulation is pursued, the data still support the notion that
regulation should be limited.

And

Quantifiable data did not appear to exist as to whether or not licensing actually ensures more
qualified home inspectors.

One might also ask why real estate agents were asked to judge an inspectors qualifications, his performance and the accuracy of the findings of the report given that they all reflect on the agent’s income. As well the sponsors of the report, being a major player in the real estate industry open the report to questions of bias that may have influenced the report to be critical of the inspection industry in general.
Do we need our own report / survey / white paper done by a disinterested third party whom we can trust?
Yes!
C.A.H.P.I. / C.M.H.C. have not provided or been provided with one yet and basing a multi-million dollar bureaucracy on out of date, inaccurate survey / study numbers is not the way to go about the job.

[George A. H. Luck]

My friend Marcel, P.M'ed me to say that there appeared to be a small error in my last posting. He pointed out that 3 of 10 was 30% not 3%. ( He had the good graces not to post here and make me look like a complete fool, something I am quite capable of doing without aid) At any rate I replied to him as below;

Hi Marcel!
I had composed that reply on my word processor while waiting for a client to show up. I copy / pasted it to the message board and I now see that an entire section was left out! (probably my fault)
I had a friend who is on the staff of the local university , look at the Ohio study last year and he found so many discrepancies and questionable data that he decided to do an analysis for the "fun of it" ( guy needs a real hobby)

He sent me a paper on the study in which he had assigned a bunch of differing variables to try to compensate for Realtor bias, low sample rates, undefined parameters etc. etc. etc. and he came up with a failure rate of about 3 - 4%.

I don't think that I will re-submit the entire message as, frankly, the subject is a bit boring.

I will post an explanation of what happened though as my math really isn't that bad!!!
George

[Claude Lawrenson]

Thank you George and Marcel for clearing up the math - even I get mathematically challenged - every once in awhile! That's OK - but - I agree and would have little concern if the 3% was the reality.

Now with that aside - you pose another good question - who else other than the client would have a lot of knowledge about the home inspector, the process and the inspection report. Certainly there may be a factor for some degree of bias. But the figures offer just that - facts based on the questions asked and responses received.

My Personal Opinion - I do not have a problem with licensing, however, I would have issue with common conditions that seem to come into play with licensing - dumbing down the requirements in order to attain higher numbers of inspectors to make such a task financially viable to afford the bureacracy to run it, or the potential influence outside of home inspectors - realtors, builders and such. Now if we could only agree that we are in this together for a common goal - regardless of all the politics.

BTW - Marcel - here's an opportunity - how many times (or rough percentage within the last 3 months) have members of the CANUCK forum badmouthed NACHI - compared to what is the reverse towards OAHI or CAHPI? I would even challenge that comparison to the last year. It's unfortunate that some feel the need to continue that senseless debate.

[Roy D. Cooke, Sr]

Originally Posted by clawrenson

Thank you George and Marcel for clearing up the math - even I get mathematically challenged - every once in awhile! That's OK - but - I agree and would have little concern if the 3% was the reality.

Now with that aside - you pose another good question - who else other than the client would have a lot of knowledge about the home inspector, the process and the inspection report. Certainly there may be a factor for some degree of bias. But the figures offer just that - facts based on the questions asked and responses received.

My Personal Opinion - I do not have a problem with licensing, however, I would have issue with common conditions that seem to come into play with licensing - dumbing down the requirements in order to attain higher numbers of inspectors to make such a task financially viable to afford the bureacracy to run it, or the potential influence outside of home inspectors - realtors, builders and such. Now if we could only agree that we are in this together for a common goal - regardless of all the politics.

BTW - Marcel - here's an opportunity - how many times (or rough percentage within the last 3 months) have members of the CANUCK forum badmouthed NACHI - compared to what is the reverse towards OAHI or CAHPI? I would even challenge that comparison to the last year. It's unfortunate that some feel the need to continue that senseless debate.

Gee Claude that is an interesting thought
Lets see how many tomes in the last 6 months has the owner of the CANUcK forum or rough percentage has Bill Mullen bad mouthed NACHi or its members .
I am sure we will see how much more mature the Canuck Members are compared to the Owner of the Canuck forum.

(" My Personal Opinion - I do not have a problem with licensing, ")
Gee I agree with your personal opinion,
(" however, I would have issue with common conditions that seem to come into play with ") I do have issue with a self appointed group ( CAHPI) trying to take over control of the home inspection industry in Canada
.............. Cookie

[Roy D. Cooke, Sr]

Claude CAHPI has a problem I did just a rough count and Bill Mullens posts

and they show his neutral or positive posts come in the high forties .

Bill Mullens negative posts to NACHI or the NACHI members come in the low fifties .

This was the leader- spokes person of the NCA .

For some one who should be diplomatic he is a failure.

If you expect to try and convince more of the NACHI members to look at the NCA it could be a big advantage to tell Mr Mullen to stop trying to help you sell the NCA.

He has proven many times in the last few months his words are too negative.

.......... Cookie

[Claude Lawrenson]

So lets play along Roy - what happens when that self appointed group is replaced by elections? Does that equate to a legitimate group now in power? Will it possibly impact you or NACHI members? Wouldn't it be nice to see more balanced representation on that board?

So how could that balance be expected - by those brave enough to step forward on behalf of an association or group that is a national certificate holder? Or by telling other inspectors to run away - that the NCA is doomed?

Yes NACHI members and even Nick voted against applying in the poll - that OK. However, what value would it serve if NACHI did get "equivalency" agreement? Now how would that impact NACHI and its Canadian members?

Certainly these are all nice to "haves" - but no offense - does appointments and non-election not ring a similar tone?

Heck even when some elections are held - do we always like what we get?

I have a number of solutions that could benefit NACHI Canada members - but why keep banging my head against the wall. After all - some indicate the truth is only available on NACHI. But some refuse to see the simple answer to the dilemma - even if it is staring them in the face.

[Roy D. Cooke, Sr]

Originally Posted by clawrenson

So lets play along Roy - what happens when that self appointed group is replaced by elections? Does that equate to a legitimate group now in power? Will it possibly impact you or NACHI members? Wouldn't it be nice to see more balanced representation on that board?
Lets see you answer some of our questions .
You have done nothing but evade .
Why should we play your game with your rules...

So how could that balance be expected - by those brave enough to step forward on behalf of an association or group that is a national certificate holder? Or by telling other inspectors to run away - that the NCA is doomed?
.If you wish to play fair stop trying to sell this and start properly open to all for their opinion and thoughts.
Yes NACHI members and even Nick voted against applying in the poll - that OK. However, what value would it serve if NACHI did get "equivalency" agreement? Now how would that impact NACHI and its Canadian members?
.I do not know who has asked for equivalency.
Certainly these are all nice to "haves" - but no offense - does appointments and non-election not ring a similar tone?
.It is you and your self appointed group who are trying to convince via the NACHI BB how great this is and how we all should go along with your bunch...

Heck even when some elections are held - do we always like what we get?

I have a number of solutions that could benefit NACHI Canada members
.Why do you keep holding the carrot out .
Facts have been asked for and never given. .
This to me is just more baloney you are selling to try and get the free thinkers to help your group.
- but why keep banging my head against the wall. After all - some indicate the truth is only available on NACHI.
.Sorry NACHI and the NACHI members do not have a dilemma.
It is CAHPI WHO has jumped in and told us how it should be,
well you are up a creek with out a paddle .
But some refuse to see the simple answer to the dilemma - even if it is staring them in the face.

Exactly what I and others have been trying to tell .
The simple answer is there is nothing you have that we want or need.
We have been shown from the get go Equal treatment is never going to happen, Has not happened or been shown to want to happen.
The proof is The free booth at the Conference , Calling NACHI members goons for giving me 2006 Canadian Award now you are trying to get our support for the NCA flop.
Bill Has shown distate to NACHI and its members since January 2005 and why should we now trust him and you .
You have complained about our posts defending NACHI on the NACHI site .
Not once have you said any thing about Dave B ,Gil S or Bill M or others who have attacked NACHI.
Sorry Claude I feel you have tunnel vision and see your group only
You have continually tried intimidation to get us to stop giving our thoughts.

............. Cookie

[George A. H. Luck]

Now if we could only agree that we are in this together for a common goal - regardless of all the politics.

I can agree with you here Claude. We both have the same destination in mind. We just both would rather travel different paths to get there. My path does not include huge bureaucracies, elitism or networks of "good old boys".

"how many times (or rough percentage within the last 3 months) have members of the CANUCK forum badmouthed NACHI - compared to what is the reverse towards OAHI or CAHPI?"

Perhaps a more interesting question would be - "How many times has the president of O.A.H.I./C.A.H.P.I. bad mouthed N.A.C.H.I. on that same board as opposed to how many times Nick has done the same to OAHI / CAHPI on this message board?"

[Marcel Gratton]

Originally Posted by clawrenson

BTW - Marcel - here's an opportunity - how many times (or rough percentage within the last 3 months) have members of the CANUCK forum badmouthed NACHI - compared to what is the reverse towards OAHI or CAHPI? I would even challenge that comparison to the last year. It's unfortunate that some feel the need to continue that senseless debate.

I simply don't have time for research but being that you asked Claude, as recent as today and yesterday...

[Marcel Gratton]

Originally Posted by gluck

Perhaps a more interesting question would be - "How many times has the president of O.A.H.I./C.A.H.P.I. bad mouthed N.A.C.H.I. on that same board as opposed to how many times Nick has done the same to OAHI / CAHPI on this message board?"

George and all,

I have never once hear Nick same anything bad about CAHPI and I respect him for that.

Unfortunately,the same cannot be said about other leaders...