Look for RHI designation to ensure you're not getting uncertified `cowboy'

[Roy D. Cooke, Sr]

http://www.nachi.org/documents/ASHI_...38ed417ec98789

Tried the rest NACHI is by far the best.......... Cookie

[rwand1]

I have sent Mr. Maxwell an email asking him if he intends to update the incorrect information in his article published Sep 15, 2007.

http://www.thestar.com/article/256044

[George A. H. Luck]

Sadly, you will probably get the same polite kiss off that I got.

[sdavies]

Good Vs Bad inspectors what is the decideing factor? From the post in this thread we are talking about a designation. I will admit, I am a newer inspector less than 300 Inspections. but does that make me one to or not use? Who decides?

Does that make me one of the ones that make all the mistakes?

Have I got my RHI/CMI/NCH? , No because whats next there will be somthing else in the future that I will have to get!

Until the industry comes under 1 set of requirments, 1 law, 1 SOP, there will always be people who think they are better and those that are not the best.

And the people who who think they are better will sit and judge and criticize others...Dont get me going We can't even all agree that we are underpaid and should charge more for our services with the amout of liability we take on during a inspection (such a simple and real issue).

RHI/CMI/NCH is just another way of creating a old boys club. Where the few who have the designation try and hold themsleves out from the rest as being better becuase of it. We should be working to harmonize the industry and bring every one togther for the betterment of the industry and the client.

With these designations we are creating a new division in the ranks of the have and have nots which will further confuse the clients and agents as they wont really know the difference between them and give them more pause to have none of it..

[Roy D. Cooke, Sr]

RHI/CMI/NCH is just another way of creating a old boys club. Where the few who have the designation try and hold themselves out from the rest as being better because of it. We should be working to harmonize the industry and bring every one together for the betterment of the industry and the client.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Having been an RHI, Looked close at the National Certification and am a CMI.
You are so very correct about the RHI and the NC same game same leaders who do not listen or answer questions .
The CMI is completely different.
It is separate from all association completely.
It is open to all Home inspectors affiliated or not affiliated to any of the associations.
The requirements are a combination total inspections and hours of continuing education total of 1,000 .
It too is going through some improvement but it is completely separate identity and has many positive pluses.
We want to help all inspectors and continue to help our selves,
and to continue to improve the industry.
It is a one time reasonable cost and I can see no clicks demoralizing other inspectors or associations.
To me it is the way of the future.
We regularly have a members chat on methods, information and help.
I am sure others can explain it better then this but stay with your continuing education and Inspections and you too can join if you wish.
Pleasure is in being an CMI pressure is not applied.
You can see peoples eyes light up and they think,
when you say Oh! yes, I am a Certified Master Home Inspector.
Nothing else has shown people you care more then this does,
it just shows we have gone the extra step.

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

(Added )
as an example CMI just donated 6 cards for Newer HIs to use at Home Depot

[rwand1]

Steven,

Good points. I will only add that as long as CAHPI and OAHI continue to release false info the public is being duped into a false sense of security.

I am for fairness and honesty and openess, and inclusion of all inspectors, my record speaks for itself. Unfortunately we have all to often seen to many instances where the likes of Mullen, Lawrenson, and Lloyd do and say as they please without any form of accountability, but they want us all to be responsible and beholden to them while they get to appoint and take opportunities through their favourtism that none of the rest are entitled to under their dictates.

[rwand1]

I have just sent this email to Mr. Maxwell. I hope he takes the time to research the real facts.

Next step is the Press Council of Ontario and the Editor of the Toronto Star.

Mr. Maxwell,

You had asked me earlier how one should go about seeking someone qualified. I responded with a list. The fact is, anyone not in OAHI can be qualified. Given that the Act Pr 158 indicates that anyone in the Registry is an RHI it is not correct to state that anyone with RHI is in fact fully qualified. Why bother asking for information if you are not willing to correct the obvious oversights in your article? As former Discipline Chair of OAHI I can assure you that what you have been told by Mr. Ganassini is factually incorrect. As to your emails from concerned stakeholders I am also aware of stakeholders who sent you emails questioning your topic and your assessments of the industry provided by Mr. M. Ganassini. As such I am quite willing to prove to you via the bylaws of OAHI and PR 158 that the information you have published is not accurate. Unfortunately your article does nothing to assure the public that there are competent inspectors who are actually qualified by other home inspector associations and by their education, as there are many colleges offering courses which are fully accredited and issue diplomas. Many inspectors have taken the time to attend college to further their professional duties. You completely overlooked this fact in your article.

Now I respectfully ask you again will you be providing a follow up article in regards to your original article which you claim you have extensively researched?

Should you wish to discuss the facts further please feel free to contact me at 519-942-9496 and I would happy to discuss the particulars with you.

Thank you for your time.

Yours truly,

Raymond Wand

[rwand1]

http://www.ontpress.com/complain/index.asp

[rwand1]

Thanks for your note, Raymond. I appreciate you taking the time to write.

What's the best way for consumers to find a reputable home inspector, if the RHI designation can't be trusted?


Take care,


Steve

On 16-Sep-07, at 8:18 AM, Raymond Wand wrote:

Dear Mr. Maxwell,

Re your article entitled "Home inspectors' qualifications vary", in the Saturday Toronto Star.

I am a senior member of OAHI since 1991, and I can tell you that article is in err. I have attached the Private Members Bill (Pr 15 which you can see for yourself gives OAHI its charter.

You should be aware that anyone in the Registry is entitled to use RHI. That is a fact. Therefore anyone who is a member who hasn't jumped through all the hoops is in fact a RHI! Needless to say OAHI is deceitfully and wantonly misrepresenting and acting contrary to PR 158. Its like many things OAHI does which are contrary to the Act. Mr. Maxwell you may wish to brush up on the Act before accepting as fact what OAHI has provided you. These gives consumers a false sense of security.

Further contrary to your article there are many private inspectors who are qualified to inspect because they are past members of OAHI. There are also two other home inspection associations which you have failed to mention. These are ASHI (American Society of Home Inspectors) and NACHI (National Association of Home Inspectors) each association has varying degrees of entry requirements. By no means is OAHI RHI the only qualifying credential. Further there are many Professional Engineers and Architects providing inspection services and are not members of any home inspection association.

Also please note that National Certification is another self regulating body made up of voluntary membership which is home inspectors overseeing home inspectors. Licencing is the only alternative to bring all home inspectors in Ontario under the scrutiny and oversight of government appointed governance council to ensure the home buying public is being served fairly.

I hope you take the time to correct the misinformation that you have provided the public in your article.

Thank you.

Raymond Wand RHI, CHI, ASHI, OAHI, CFIHI.
http://www.raymondwand.ca

[rwand1]

Mr. Maxwell,

You had asked me earlier how one should go about seeking someone qualified. I responded with a list. The fact is, anyone not in OAHI can be qualified. Given that the Act Pr 158 indicates that anyone in the Registry is an RHI it is not correct to state that anyone with RHI is in fact fully qualified. Why bother asking for information if you are not willing to correct the obvious oversights in your article? As former Discipline Chair of OAHI I can assure you that what you have been told by Mr. Ganassini is factually incorrect. As to your emails from concerned stakeholders I am also aware of stakeholders who sent you emails questioning your topic and your assessments of the industry provided by Mr. M. Ganassini. As such I am quite willing to prove to you via the bylaws of OAHI and PR 158 that the information you have published is not accurate. Unfortunately your article does nothing to assure the public that there are competent inspectors who are actually qualified by other home inspector associations and by their education, as there are many colleges offering courses which are fully accredited and issue diplomas. Many inspectors have taken the time to attend college to further their professional duties. You completely overlooked this fact in your article.

Now I respectfully ask you again will you be providing a follow up article in regards to your original article which you claim you have extensively researched?

Should you wish to discuss the facts further please feel free to contact me at 519-942-9496 and I would happy to discuss the particulars with you.

Thank you for your time.

Yours truly,

Raymond Wand

Steve Maxwell wrote: Good Morning Raymond,

I'd be happy to print a correction, but I don't see any error in what I wrote. In fact, I've received many emails from concerned stakeholders congratulating me on the accuracy of my work.


But like I said, I don't see any error. Specifically what's wrong?


Take care,


Steve


On Sep 26, 2007, at 7:28 AM, Raymond Wand wrote:

Mr. Maxwell:

Further to your article, are you planning on correcting the information in a future article?

http://www.thestar.com/article/256044

Thank you.

Raymond Wand

Raymond Wand wrote: Sorry, forgot to attach Pr 158

12. (1) Every member of the Association whose name appears in the register may use
the designations “Registered Home Inspector” and “R.H.I.“.

Raymond Wand
Raymond Wand wrote: Dear Mr. Maxwell,

Re your article entitled "Home inspectors' qualifications vary", in the Saturday Toronto Star.

I am a senior member of OAHI since 1991, and I can tell you that article is in err. I have attached the Private Members Bill (Pr 15 which you can see for yourself gives OAHI its charter.

You should be aware that anyone in the Registry is entitled to use RHI. That is a fact. Therefore anyone who is a member who hasn't jumped through all the hoops is in fact a RHI! Needless to say OAHI is deceitfully and wantonly misrepresenting and acting contrary to PR 158. Its like many things OAHI does which are contrary to the Act. Mr. Maxwell you may wish to brush up on the Act before accepting as fact what OAHI has provided you. These gives consumers a false sense of security.

Further contrary to your article there are many private inspectors who are qualified to inspect because they are past members of OAHI. There are also two other home inspection associations which you have failed to mention. These are ASHI (American Society of Home Inspectors) and NACHI (National Association of Home Inspectors) each association has varying degrees of entry requirements. By no means is OAHI RHI the only qualifying credential. Further there are many Professional Engineers and Architects providing inspection services and are not members of any home inspection association.

Also please note that National Certification is another self regulating body made up of voluntary membership which is home inspectors overseeing home inspectors. Licencing is the only alternative to bring all home inspectors in Ontario under the scrutiny and oversight of government appointed governance council to ensure the home buying public is being served fairly.

I hope you take the time to correct the misinformation that you have provided the public in your article.

Thank you.

Raymond Wand RHI, CHI, ASHI, OAHI, CFIHI.
http://www.raymondwand.ca

[rwand1]

Hello Raymond,

I can't do what you ask because it would mislead people.


Yes, while it may be true that some non-RHI inspectors have extensive training, the smoke-and-mirrors 'certification' programs lurking out there do not verify some minimum level of practical proficiency. The point of my article was not to state that RHI inspectors are the only ones capable of inspecting a home, only that RHI is the most widely used designation that homeowners can trust. Provided they really are RHI people, that is.


I hear that some inspectors use this term when they're not entitled to. That, of course, is deceitful and wrong. But apart from this blatant fraud, I'm convinced that authentic RHI inspectors are capable, reputable and verified as such by the association.


I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.


Take care,


Steve

[rwand1]

My final reply.

WITHOUT PREJUDICE

Thank you for your reply. Obviously you refuse to look at the info unless its from your trusted source. You asked me to supply the info on how to go about finding an inspector, now you tell me that is not suitable by your refusal to look at the facts you asked for. This calls into question your ability to separate fact from fiction and you sincerity. Contrary to your comment, "article was not to state that RHI inspectors are the only ones capable of inspecting a home, only that RHI is the most widely used designation that homeowners can trust" is not what the article relays. Pr 158 demonstrates just how misinformed you are had you taken time to delve into. I have further been informed that other emails calling into question your article have met in the same manner which is denial that you stand by your facts.

As to your comment, "I hear that some inspectors use this term when they're not entitled to. That, of course, is deceitful and wrong. But apart from this blatant fraud, I'm convinced that authentic RHI inspectors are capable, reputable and verified as such by the association. "

So you take hearsay over fact? You seem to have preformed opinions based on what you have only been told. This attitude calls into question your independence and ability to report factually. Are you factually sure of what your contact is telling you?

Thank you.

Yours truly,
Raymond Wand
ASHI, OAHI, NACHI, CFIHI

CC.
Steve Wickens
Robert Hepburn
Bureau of Accuracy/Public Editor
Editor The Toronto Star
Press Council of Ontario

[rwand1]

I guess Mr. Maxwell doesn't care to factually delve into truthful information and chose to ignore a document which proves him totally wrong.

[rwand1]

http://www.stevemaxwell.ca/Homebuilding%20Advice.html

I wonder what qualification(s) Mr. Maxwell has in order to reviewing blue prints and making suggestions?

http://www.stevemaxwell.ca/Homebuilding%20Advice.html

or

http://www.stevemaxwell.ca/Renovation%20Advice.html

or

Steves soliciatation for a fee.

http://www.stevemaxwell.ca/Home%20Repair%20Advice.html

Makes you wonder what his qualifications are other than a writer. I see no credentials such as membership or education even as a builder. I guess I can make blanket statement too!

[rwand1]

Ontario Press Council

http://www.ontpress.com/complain/index.asp