Thank you Bill Mullen.

[Nick Gromicko]

As many of you know I've been struggling (for years now) with creating the "Certified Master Inspector" professional designation at www.certifiedmasterinspector.org Much of the struggle had to do with figuring out a set of requirements that were attainable yet meaningful and that included credit for both education and experience. It sounds simple enough, but it wasn't. Anyway, I had much help from NACHI members on the message board who really thought through every angle of every proposal... outloud. Some folks helped out of public view by phone and email. Bill Mullen was one who contributed much behind the scenes. He put aside association politics and allowed me to bounce one idea after another off of him. The Master Inspector Certification Board and I are forever grateful to him for sharing his thinking with us, thinking that that helped us get it right.

Thanks Bill!

[rwand1]

Why would anyone become a CMI when they can be Nationally Certified in Canada through CAHPI? That is the benchmark in Canada. As the benchmark it will likely be used at some point for licencing threshold in Canada. What will CMI be the benchmark for?

Yes thank you Bill Mullen for your service and your insight! Licencing for one and all.

[wjung]

Nick,
are you suggesting the CMI will be accepted by CAHPI as on par with their National Certification here in Canada?
Wolf

[Nick Gromicko]

CMI is national certification in Canada whether CAHPI accepts it or not.

[rwand1]

The more important question is will anyone accept it, never mind CAHPI.

[Nick Gromicko]

Who is the "anyone" you care about accepting it? Accept it for what? It is what it is... a national certification for inspectors.

[rwand1]

Anyone=non aligned and current CHI's. What is it offering that is not already offered? A title?

[Nick Gromicko]

What is a non-aligned and current CHI?

[rwand1]

Non-aligned=non Nachi
Current CHI are those Nachi members who hold CHI.

[Nick Gromicko]

Oh, those are both subsets of inspectors. I think I'm still lost. What do you mean... "accept it"? Accept it for what?

[Larry Ewens]

Ray
You lost me. CHI is a designation we are not allowed to use in Canada, as you well know. You seem to be concerned with jumping on the National Certification bandwagon, as I am, but then you do not want to accept a CMI designation as an alternative. I believe that, with the new requirements for CMI status, it will be a far more credible benchmark of competence than the National will ever be. With the National being brought in it should dilute the RHI status significantly. By the way you are right, licensing is the way to go here in the great white north. I just don't see it as a viable program right now as there are not enough inspectors to make the bureaucracy sustainable with the amount of money the fees will bring in.
Larry

[rwand1]

Larry,

I think titles are meaningless. RHI, Certified.... another meaningless title that the public really knows nothing about.

The Canadian Associations of record have repeatedly shown they cannot leave their animosities behind. They don't have any intention of playing fairly. Which leads me to ask, why even bother with CMI, why doesnt NACHI just solicit and push for licencing in every province where it has members? CMI will be irrelevent with licencing. Why don't we get the ball moving with licencing instead of wasting time running around trying to reinvent the rules?

As to licencing and numbers, I don't think it matters the government will bare the cost and likely impose a processing fee or application fee. They have to start licencing at some point waiting for appropriate numbers to do it I don't think is a concern. If licencing in Ontario were to happen tomorrow you already have sufficient numbers of approximately 1000 inspectors.(OAHI/ASHI/NACHI) Ditto B.C. The same circumstances apply. However I now read the licencing scheme is on hold and nothing has moved forward fwiw in B.C.

I think the time has come to stop the turf wars and take the power from those who have abused it for their own agenda. Licencing will remove the power from those who are abusing it. The evidence of that speaks volumes.

Nachi could be at the forefront of pushing for licencing. I have been in this biz since 1991 and all I have ever seen is mismanagement.

[Nick Gromicko]

Licensing is bad inspectors, bad for consumers, bad for other inspection associations, and good for NACHI the association.

In the U.S. (where we operate as 50 seperate countries) we have had licensing in some states for many years, some a few years, some just recently adopted licensing and some swear they'll never license home inspectors... so we can see what licensing does for inspectors, consumers, other trade associations and NACHI very clearly.

Licensing harms individual inspectors because licensing sets a minimum standard that everyone can meet. Outside of Texas, my 13 year old son could be a home inspector in every state in the U.S. In the U.S. some licensing boards even use the NHIE, an exam that everyone can pass. This harms inspectors in two ways. First, everyone gets licensed easily, so veteran inspectors who have established markets for themselves over the years, wake up one morning and are as licensed as a guy who went into business yesterday... worse... the state lists them equally as "licensed" on their website. Second, it hurts inspectors because adopting licensing roughly triples the number of inspectors in that state (we've watched state after state adopt licensing and have the number of inspector nearly triple). How would you like to wake up tomorrow to 3 times the number of competitors you have today... all of them just as "licensed" as you?

Licensing harms consumers because it commoditizes our services as an industry (killing inovation, especially where standardized reporting forms are adopted like in TX), drives prices (and therefore service) down, forces REALTORs to point to the government's licensed list (to avoid negligent referral claims) instead of the very best inspectors (as is there fiduciary duty to do), demands boring, approved continuing education that everyone has to attend (instead of continuing education that is more challenging) and tricks consumers into thinking a licensed inspector is a qualified inspector... as qualified as any other "licensed" inspector.

Licensing harms other inspection associations that are merely credential-only associations (associations that have primarly focused on being a credential where none used to exist). These associations have websites you can visit. Visit them... and look for their benefits pages. There are none. Their only benefit is some sort of weak-at-best credential. When the government goes into the credential business (adopts licensing) they kick these association's ****. The government is really good at the credential-offering business, and these associations flounder. New inspectors want in order: A license (from the government) and everything else to succeed (from NACHI). That's it. Inspectors these days are not as emotionally loyal to trade associations (especially one'st that have been ripping them off with high dues and no benefits). ASHI, a no-entrance-requirement-whatsoever association in the U.S. for instance has lost members in every state that adopted licensing... despite the total number of inspectors increasing in every state that adopted licensing.... wow.

Licensing helps NACHI the association (not individual NACHI members) because NACHI provides everything the government won't provide. We don't compete with the government on their turf too much and they don't bother us on our turf. The government offers minimum standard licensing, NACHI offers everything else your business needs. NACHI is very strong in licensed states because once you get a license... you are only 1% done procuring all you need to be successful. NACHI offers the other 99% of the pie.

As for CMI, REALTORs are licensed in all 50 states and all Provinces of Canada and thousands of licensed REALTORs go out, seek, and earn various professional designations every day (I had several myself when I was a REALTOR). Professional designations are popular in nearly every industry that is licensed and in every state and Province that is licensed, and I don't see CMI being an exception to this rule. We don't have to ever worry about the government competing with us in the high-end credential offering business as we can be assured that governments only compete in the minimum standard credential offering business. (licensing). Like other industries where professional designations are popular in licensed areas... so will CMI be. The CMI site is what helps make it great... it is high traffic (more traffic than NAHI's entire site according to alexa.com), already popular with REALTORs and consumers (despite being young), uncluttered, explains quickly what a CMI is and why you should hire one, and makes it simple to find one... not much else. Face it... nothing trumps "Certified Master Inspector".... and certainly not "licensed"... a credential that the average consumer, thinking that everyone is licensed (operating legally), gives you no extra credit for being.

[tmels]

very well put Nick

[rwand1]

Licensing helps NACHI the association (not individual NACHI members) because NACHI provides everything the government won't provide. We don't compete with the government on their turf too much and they don't bother us on our turf. The government offers minimum standard licensing, NACHI offers everything else your business needs. NACHI is very strong in licensed states because once you get a license... you are only 1% done procuring all you need to be successful. NACHI offers the other 99% of the pie.

Sounds like the best of both worlds!

Licensing harms other inspection associations that are merely credential-only associations (associations that have primarly focused on being a credential where none used to exist). These associations have websites you can visit. Visit them... and look for their benefits pages. There are none. Their only benefit is some sort of weak-at-best credential. When the government goes into the credential business (adopts licensing) they kick these association's ****. The government is really good at the credential-offering business, and these associations flounder. New inspectors want in order: A license (from the government) and everything else to succeed (from NACHI). That's it. Inspectors these days are not as emotionally loyal to trade associations (especially one'st that have been ripping them off with high dues and no benefits). ASHI, a no-entrance-requirement-whatsoever association in the U.S. for instance has lost members in every state that adopted licensing... despite the total number of inspectors increasing in every state that adopted licensing.... wow.

Licencing I think would allow us to lobby to have the government cap our liability, that would be advantageous in my opinion both liability wise and hopefully reduced E&O premiums. I would also agree NACHI does offer more benefits marketing, info, meetings, conferences...

The only other problem that is not solved is the governance issue with private voluntary self regulating bodies overseeing themselves. I think it very important for proper management and ethics, and the only certification in this area is that licencing takes away self regulation status and oversite of a government body. Pretty hard to hide bodies and bend the rules when the government has appointed a mixed outside council.