Misuse of Title

[Roy D. Cooke, Sr]

Ray it is the old OAHI story do nothing answer no questions.
I say shame on all the OAHI members who read all this information and do nothing .
You all are the reason why this association continues to stumble along.
If you say nothing and do nothing then you will continue to get exactly what you deserve. NOTHING.

Roy Cooke RHI...CMI...CHI..CAHPI-on

[Mario A. Kyriacou, CHI]

Originally Posted by rcooke

Ray it is the old OAHI story do nothing answer no questions.
I say shame on all the OAHI members who read all this information and do nothing .
You all are the reason why this association continues to stumble along.
If you say nothing and do nothing then you will continue to get exactly what you deserve. NOTHING.

Roy Cooke RHI...CMI...CHI..CAHPI-on

Roy

They have received $500.00+ for defect and recognition course,$25.00 info package from me and let me tell you they will receive no more$ from me.I'm not a member and will never join!

[rwand1]

Financial concerns and quasi, incomplete answers from OAHI. To date no one has seen budget/financial statements, that is unless you go to head office to see for yourself what is what, and depending if you can get an answer to where head office is!

[Roy D. Cooke, Sr]

Originally Posted by mkyriacou

Roy

They have received $500.00+ for defect and recognition course,$25.00 info package from me and let me tell you they will receive no more$ from me.I'm not a member and will never join!

Having taken that any many more courses from OAHI.
I do think they have lost most of their better teachers.

I think if a person really want to improve their inspection education .
They could take that $500:00 divide it by ten that gives you $50:00 and if you went out with a very experienced inspector and gave him $50:00 each time you will have gained much more knowledge in all respects of home inspection.
I did 100 Inspections with my son and 2 other HIs took me out so I could see how they did things.
I landed running and had more knowledge when I started then many who had been at it for years .
I charged more then any other Inspector in my area to start and still charge more then the rest.
Gets me usually a better class of home more profit for lesswork.
Class room instruction is OK but not even close to field training.


Roy Cooke ..RHI..CMI..CHI..CAHPI-ON.... a Happy Nachi Member

[Mario A. Kyriacou, CHI]

Originally Posted by rcooke

Having taken that any many more courses from OAHI.
I do think they have lost most of their better teachers.

I think if a person really want to improve their inspection education .
They could take that $500:00 divide it by ten that gives you $50:00 and if you went out with a very experienced inspector and gave him $50:00 each time you will have gained much more knowledge in all respects of home inspection.
I did 100 Inspections with my son and 2 other HIs took me out so I could see how they did things.
I landed running and had more knowledge when I started then many who had been at it for years .
I charged more then any other Inspector in my area to start and still charge more then the rest.
Gets me usually a better class of home more profit for lesswork.
Class room instruction is OK but not even close to field training.


Roy Cooke ..RHI..CMI..CHI..CAHPI-ON.... a Happy Nachi Member

Roy

You need the theory first and then the field training.Don't discount the theory.

[rwand1]

Self explanatory.

Sorry OAHI cannot stop anyone from inspecting. This is true of a dual member. That is to say if you are a member of Nachi and a member of OAHI. You can inspect while a member of Nachi so long as you do not advertise any affiliation with OAHI. For Mr. Azar to be suggesting otherwise is absolute nonsense. If you don't believe me check with your own lawyer. Take your lawyer a copy of PR 158 and the by-laws of OAHI. Know what your rights are because OAHI doesn't know. If you need a copy of PR 158 or the by-laws let me know I would be happy to provide these documents.

I have yet to see this so called agreement between OAHI and ASTT(BC). If this agreement exists then there should be no hinderance to providing it to members who find themselves in the gunsights of OAHI.

I have asked for such proof of this agreement only to be met with silence from OAHI.

As to not being allowed to take electrical panel covers off that is nonsense so long as you have adequate protection it is permissable. One is not doing work on the panel you are only inspecting.

[rwand1]

http://www.dww.com/articles/official_marks.htm

Introduction

An official mark is an authorized mark used by Royalty, universities, governments, and public authorities in Canada for wares and services. Official marks are not trade-marks, although they are governed by the Trade-marks Act (the "Act"). Protection for official marks is automatic. That is, the Registrar of Trade-marks has no discretion to refuse the request for publication of an official mark 1. The Registrar must only ensure that the proper authority sanctions the mark. Official marks need not meet the requirements for the registerability of a trade-mark under the Act 2. For example, a public authority may adopt a mark which is clearly descriptive. An official mark is not used to distinguish the wares and services of one person from those of another, but to identify those wares and services as meeting the regulations and standards of a public body. Therefore, a public body can adopt and use words or symbols which could not be used as trade-marks by private bodies.
This article will focus on official marks of public authorities.

Public Authorities

Official marks of public authorities are protected by section 9(1)(n)(iii) of the Act. The Act does not provide a definition for "public authority", so one must turn to the case law in order to determine its characteristics.
Registrar of Trade-marks v. Canadian Olympic Association ("COA") 3 is the leading case on determining whether a body is a public authority. In COA Urie J. held that in order for a body to be a public authority it must: (a) pursue objects of a public nature; and (b) be subject to a significant degree of government control.
Although previous case law 4 held that a body must also owe a duty to the public in order to be considered a public authority, the Federal Court of Appeal in COA held that the finding of enforceable obligations or duties owed to the public was not determinative of whether an entity is a public authority. Urie J. noted that a dichotomy exists in section 9(1)(n) in that it extends protection both to entities whose obligations are imposed by competent legislation and to those whose obligations are self- assumed. Section 9(1)(n) of the Act allows for a wide degree of variation in the public duty owed. The Court contrasted the strict obligations of the RCMP with the beneficial organizations such as the United Nations, which does not have strict public obligations but rather self-imposed obligations. In view of the different public obligations by different entities included in section 9(1)(n), the Court ruled that a duty owed to the public is not a necessary criterion for making a body a public authority.

Adoption and Use

Before an official mark can be published in the Trade-marks Journal it must be adopted and used by the public authority. Adoption cannot be proven by simple reliance on the date of publication in the Trade-marks Journal. Adoption is defined in section 3 of the Act. However, section 3 does not apply to official marks. Use is defined in section 4 of the Act. While section 4 may be helpful in determining what is use in respect of a trade-mark, it is not applicable to official marks, as public authorities have no need to use an official mark for the purpose of distinguishing its wares and services from those others.
Since sections 3 and 4 of the Act are not applicable to official marks one must turn to dictionary definitions of the terms. The dictionary meaning of "adoption" is "to choose; to take a relationship not previously occupied". "Use" is defined as "employment; to avail oneself of". It is arguable then that a fixed intention by a public authority to choose and employ a mark may constitute adoption and use under section 9 of the Act 5.

Protection of Official Marks

A public authority can prevent a third party from adopting, registering or using the official mark or a mark resembling it without the consent of the public authority regardless of the wares or services associated with that other mark. This absolute prohibition provides the official mark owner with a lower threshold in the test for infringement than that provided to trade-marks owners, as they need not show that there is a likelihood of confusion.


There are limitations to the protection granted to an official mark. Although the Act states that an infringing mark must "closely resemble" the official mark, case law suggests that the mark must be almost identical. Additionally, the prohibition offered by section 9 is prospective in operation and does not carry any retroactive prohibition regarding the normal adoption of trade-marks by commercial traders6. Therefore, a mark adopted before public notice is given can continue to be used after the publication of the official mark. However, an applicant who has adopted his or her trade-mark prior to the publication notice of an official mark would be precluded from obtaining a registration by the subsequent publication of a section 9 notice. The applicant would be entitled to use his or her trade-mark but not to obtain a registration.

Challenging Official Marks

Official marks are sometimes characterized as invulnerable because there is no process to oppose or expunge the public notification of an official mark. Although proof of public authority is a condition precedent to an official mark being published by the Registrar, the official mark holder is not required to re-evidence its status as a public authority at the request of a subsequent challenger 7.


Section 9 of the Act does not contain any provision for relief nor does it allow for the rescission of the Registrar’s decision to give public notice of the adoption and use of an official mark.


An appeal lies to the Federal Court from any decision of the Registrar under section 56 of the Act. However, the party challenging the decision of the Registrar must show standing 8. A third party to a decision of a federal tribunal does not have standing to appeal the decision of the Registrar 9. Under section 56 of the Act, only persons directly affected by the decisions of the Registrar (which often includes the applicant alone) may appeal his or her decisions.
Pursuant to section 57 of the Act the Federal Court has exclusive jurisdiction, on an application of any person interested, to order that any entry in the register be struck out on the ground that at the date of the application the entry, as it appears on the register, does not accurately express or define the existing rights of the person appearing to be the registered owner of the mark. However, one cannot use section 57 to challenge the publication of an official mark as an official mark is not an entry in the trade-marks register. The register contains only listing of trade-marks.
In the recent case of Magnotta et al. v. Vintners Quality Alliance of Canada 10 Reed J. held that the Registrar’s decision to give notice of the adoption and use of an official mark may be challenged pursuant to section 18.1 of the Federal Court Act.

Conclusion

There has been much criticism of the generous protection which the Act gives to official marks. There are suggestions that the Act may be amended to reduce some of the protection granted to official marks, to put public authorities, especially non-government bodies, on more equal footing with regular trade-marks owners.

Endnotes

1. Insurance Corp. of British Columbia v. Registrar of Trade-marks (1979), 44 C.P.R. (2d) 1 (FCTD)
2. Insurance Corp., supra
3. (1982), 67 C.P.R. (2d) 59 (FCA)
4. Littlewood v. George Wimpy & Co., [1953] 1 All E.R. 583 (Q.B.)
5. Latham, Brant, "Explosion of section 9(1)(n) Notices" Patent and Trademark Institute of Canada Review, (1985); Morrow, David A., "Official Marks" Trademarks Law of Canada
6. Allied Corp. v. Canadian Olympic Association (1989), 28 C.P.R. (3d) 161 (FCTD)
7. Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters v. F.W. Woolworth Co. (1991), 39 C.P.R. (3d) 272 (TMOB)
8. Canadian Olympic Association v. USA Hockey Inc. (1997), 74 C.P.R. (3d) 348 (FCTD)
9. Cangene Corp. v. Eli Lilly and Co. (1995), 63 C.P.R. (3d) 377 (FCTD)
10. [1991] F.C.J. No. 326

[Roy D. Cooke, Sr]

Originally Posted by mkyriacou

Roy

You need the theory first and then the field training.
Don't discount the theory.

All the theory in the world does not make a person a home inspector.

Working in the electrical trade for over 50 years gave me great start .
While doing inspections with my son I took Courses with NACHI, OAHI,CMHC, Wett,and others.
Read the complete C&D courses .
I still take more courses then most other inspectors .

I have about 50 hours CE this year and so does my wife.

The most important part was the field training with out a doubt.
Worth 80% or more .

Classes are great but they do not come any where near teaching what you can learn from a GREAT INSPECTOR ,who takes the tume to explain it.
For Me it worked well I started Charging more then any one else In my area and still Do .
Just booked two inspections for next week and turned down two more .
I charge what I am worth and get quality homes to inspect.

Roy Cooke ..RHI..CHI..CMI..CAHPI-ON

[Mario A. Kyriacou, CHI]

Originally Posted by rcooke

All the theory in the world does not make a person a home inspector.

Working in the electrical trade for over 50 years gave me great start .
While doing inspections with my son I took Courses with NACHI, OAHI,CMHC, Wett,and others.
Read the complete C&D courses .
I still take more courses then most other inspectors .

I have about 50 hours CE this year and so does my wife.

The most important part was the field training with out a doubt.
Worth 80% or more .

Classes are great but they do not come any where near teaching what you can learn from a GREAT INSPECTOR ,who takes the tume to explain it.
For Me it worked well I started Charging more then any one else In my area and still Do .
Just booked two inspections for next week and turned down two more .
I charge what I am worth and get quality homes to inspect.

Roy Cooke ..RHI..CHI..CMI..CAHPI-ON

Roy

I disagree,

In the field you stated that you have never seen a furnace in the attic [unconditioned space] This is where the theory helps HI like you,you can learn about this before you encounter it in the field and have no idea on how to report it,or inspect it!!

I also have 30 years in the construction industry,but was humbled when I attended school.And it was NOT C&D.

Whatever works for you Roy!!

Mario

[rwand1]

A furnance is a funance no matter where its located. They all work pretty much the same. Fuel source, ignition, heat exchanger, exhaust.... The theory is all the same, as is for electrical and plumbing. The problem is that school cannot teach you the screw ups you find in the field, only experience can do that in my opinion.

[Roy D. Cooke, Sr]

Originally Posted by mkyriacou

Roy

I disagree,

In the field you stated that you have never seen a furnace in the attic [unconditioned space] This is where the theory helps HI like you,you can learn about this before you encounter it in the field and have no idea on how to report it,or inspect it!!

I also have 30 years in the construction industry,but was humbled when I attended school.And it was NOT C&D.

Whatever works for you Roy!!

Mario

And how many hours of CE do you have this year?
Roy Cooke

[Mario A. Kyriacou, CHI]

Originally Posted by rcooke

And how many hours of CE do you have this year?
Roy Cooke

Roy


800 and counting!!!

[Mario A. Kyriacou, CHI]

Originally Posted by rwand1

A furnance is a funance no matter where its located. They all work pretty much the same. Fuel source, ignition, heat exchanger, exhaust.... The theory is all the same, as is for electrical and plumbing. The problem is that school cannot teach you the screw ups you find in the field, only experience can do that in my opinion.

Roy

Can you please explain to me "HOW WOULD YOU KNOW IT'S A SCREW UP"???
This is not an technical question just explain it to me.I will give you a hint, "theory"
You must know what is right [correct] before you can call something out as being wrong!!

I'm not discounting experience,why are you and Roy hell bent on discounting education?I'm scratching my head,I can't figure you guys out.
</IMG></IMG>

[Roy D. Cooke, Sr]

Originally Posted by mkyriacou

Roy

Can you please explain to me "HOW WOULD YOU KNOW IT'S A SCREW UP"???
This is not an technical question just explain it to me.I will give you a hint, "theory"
You must know what is right [correct] before you can call something out as being wrong!!

I'm not discounting experience,why are you and Roy hell bent on discounting education?I'm scratching my head,I can't figure you guys out.
</IMG></IMG>

First Off you keep answering Raymond wands letters and calling him Roy .
I am Roy and I would love you to show me where I or Raymond has discounted education.
Your Hint "Theory" what the he77 has theory got to do with home inspection .
I could care less what the pressure is at the burner of an oil furnace or the amount of unburned fuel in the smoke.
I do not need to know the fan speed or how fast electricity travels or the speed of sound at sea level.
I need to know if the furnace is functioning reasonably ( PERIOD).
Please do not try and double talk me I would think I have forgotten more theory then I could ever need .
I am more concerned in making sure to see and write and spell properly what I need to do for a good home Inspection.
Again I take you back to my post where as well as doing 100 inspections with my Son I did take many courses with PACHI,NACHI,CMHC, and I forgot to mention some on line courses.
I did not say that I had taken the C&D courses that you mentioned. ( I do think C&D are great for those who can not get hands on instruction) .
I again take you back to my post where I have about 50 hours of continuing education this year .
you say 800 WOW!?????. How do you ever do inspections .
Do you think it is fair for a person who has much class room instruction to then go and do home inspections with little or no experience in inspecting a home.
Second how can you even think I am against education when I have so many CE hours each year.
When you have been at this a few years you will understand no matter how long you have been doing inspections there is always something new .
I am smart enough to carry some phone numbers in my cell of other inspectors who have much experience so I can get instant consultation.
I guess I must have some knowledge as more other inspectors call me for advice then I do them.
You keep bringing up about my not having seen a furnace in an attic as thought this is a big thing thing.
I would love you to tell me why how an attic furnace can be so much difference then a crawl space furnace or an outside furnace.
How many outside gas furnaces have you inspected ?
Please do not try and belittle me or Ray I would put our experience and education hours up against you and five of your HI Buddies in total.

Roy Cooke ..RHI..CHI..CMI..CAHPI-ON..CAHPI-ONT. Royshomeinspection.com

[rwand1]

Mario

I am Raymond, not Roy.

Well lets see... how to spot a screw up....

The vent is disconnected because it wasn't glued (abs vents).

The furnace does not respond to thermostat. We are not technicians so I don't need to report on why its not responding to thermostat, only alert the client that it will not respond.(there could be many reasons why, but I am not there to diagnose)

The furnace filter is missing or dirty.

The blower belt is frayed or slipping.

The furnace blower is noisy, the power vent is noisy. The furnace is dirty.

There is rust under the burner compartment, or water poolig as in the case of mid or high efficency furnace.

The furnace due to age has high failure probability.

Yes theory is great but its no substitute for field experience and vice versa.