Your livelihood due to membership association in jeoprady in Ontario

[rwand1]

What would you do if as a Nachi member you were being discriminated against biz wise because you do not belong to CAHPI-OAHI/National?

What if you were told because you are not a member of CAHPI-OAHI your marketing materials in realtor offices will not be permitted.

What if you were told your services would not be recommended to home buyers unless you were a member of CAHPI-OAHI?

What would you do if an CAHPI-OAHI put out a PR piece that was discriminatory against other home inspection associations and made claims that weren't necessarily true?

What if those claims made by CAHPI-OAHI created an unfair marketing advantage?

What would you do if your livelihood was ruined through statements and press articles from CAHPI-OAHI?

[George A. H. Luck]

Do you see this happening in Ontario either now or in the near future?

[Mark Ellison]

It's happening already. Now, keep in mind, I'm just an employee, but our office manager has let me know that I've lost inspections because I'm not an RHI. Hell, I'm discriminated against by my employer ... I'd make 6% more per inspection if/when I get to RHI. Do I want to become an RHI? Not really. Do I want to be a member of OAHI? Not with all I've learned of them from this forum and in speaking to others. Will I... probably, as it helps my bottom line. And that sucks to be blunt!

Mark Ellison
Brampton

[rwand1]

Mark and George.

Yes happening here and now in Ontario in one area, backed up by documentation.

George you have mail.

[rwand1]

Go here ....

http://www.nachi.org/forum/showthrea...083#post244083

[rwand1]

Tom Lloyd ask me to post this for you folks.

http://www.reco.on.ca/publicdocs/For...mer%202007.pdf

Seems he is on a real tirade about Nachi over on the other forum. Looks like Nachi is doomed in Ontario.

Oh well there is always the National maybe you can all catch the coat tails.

Abandoned ship. Women and cowards first.

[George A. H. Luck]

Mark, it is unclear, are you an inspector or a realtor?

[Claude Lawrenson]

It sounds like Mark is employed by a home inspection company.

Perhaps do what others do - exaggerate your credentials. Oops did I say that out loud!
Just kidding - but I have seen it done.

[Mark Ellison]

George,

I'm an Inspector with AmeriSpec. Been at it for just a year and a half in and around Toronto.

Mark

[Claude Lawrenson]

Mark my advice - bide your time and gain experience. Certainly it will not replace or compensate for a full fee that others collect. But there can be a certain degree of safety and knowledge acquired at the "bosses" expense!

Than again are you prepared to go it on your own. Unless you have a comfort level and sure thing - the safest thing is stay a while for the ride.

Best of luck.....

[Mark Ellison]

Thanks Claude,

and I agree with you whole heartedly. I'm lucky to work with a great boss and a great team. Between them, and all of us here on the Forum, I get an education almost everyday!

Thanks for your support.

Mark

[dcook1]

Originally Posted by clawrenson

Mark my advice - bide your time and gain experience. Certainly it will not replace or compensate for a full fee that others collect. But there can be a certain degree of safety and knowledge acquired at the "bosses" expense!

Than again are you prepared to go it on your own. Unless you have a comfort level and sure thing - the safest thing is stay a while for the ride.

Best of luck.....

Mark,
The only thing Claude said wrong here was "than". LOL
Actually what Claude is saying, If you want to go on your own, then there is some expenditure that will be required on your part. You are actually protected by being "employed". Work with it and get your certs. Only you will benefit in the end.
I spent almost $40,000 to get started and just jumped right in with both feet almost 3 years ago. It is paying off. However, I had almost 30 years in the construction industry to back me up. Claude has had a billion (actual number) years in the industry and as an instructor at Humber, he is very knowledgeable (do not tell him this )
Also, (here comes the crap flying) do not rely on NACHI to build your busines. Get out and build your own business. Get your courses.
Listento others, then do what you feel works best for you. Best of everything!

[Nick Gromicko]

I see nothing wrong with the article. It didn't say not to use NACHI members (had it, we'd have sued the other association... but it didn't). It didn't even mention NACHI. The sky isn't falling.

Look, every association has a duty to promote their association's members. NACHI is no different. I just did a very lengthy interview with the Washington Post and never once mentioned another association. It is running in the real estate section (online and offline). RECO will give us equal space to promote NACHI. Who wants to author it?

If you look at the RECO article you will discover that it is NOT. They clearly put in big letters "Article provided courtesy of the Ontario Association of Home Inspectors"

So who is volunteering to author the NACHI article for Canada? I certainly think you could tout our size, our educational offerings and our entrance requirements: www.nachi.org/blind.htm

[rwand1]

OAHI is the only certifying organization in Ontario, pursuant to Provincial legislation granted in 1994. It regulates the prerequisite educational and experience qualifications for, and use of, the designations of “Registered Home Inspector” and “RHI”. It is now the only truly legitimate certifier of private inspectors in Ontario. Yet, 75% of private inspection is non-affiliated.

Actually OAHI does not certify, it never has, as it a voluntary self regulating body, that requires a number of courses to be completed in order to be granted full membership. The colleges are truly certifying as they come under Provincial Acts.

strong membership growth to nearly 800 members;

We know that the numbers are in dispute and actually if you only count Assoc. and RHI there are less than 350!

vibrant organizations with strong leadership, formal governance
structures and active regional and topical committees;

Wrong, wrong, wrong. We are all well aware of mismanagement and irregularites with the membership, money matters, breaches of the bylaws all documented. Lack of BOD minutes. Improper collection of fines. Members being thrown out with out due process. Breaches of Pr 158.

continuously improving education and testing requirements
for members, delivered by its own qualifications and discipline process, and in partnership with several community colleges and regulatory bodies;

Own qualifications, taught by a select few for financial gain.

A Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC) study in 1996 identified inconsistencies in home inspections across Canada. At the same time, there was increased demand for home inspections, and the lack of qualified practitioners led to a number of consumer concerns. CMHC
demanded some level of competence and training. CAHPI

I don't think consumer conerns were the issue, that has never been the case because of the very low number of complaints. Ministry of Consumer and Corporate Affairs has been on record as stating self regulation is working, given the low number of complaints they felt licencing or some other form of legislation was warranted.

OAHI has long held the view that the private inspection sector should be regulated and self-managed, and that is the wish of the national level as
well.

Thats the problem self regulation has not worked since Pr 158 was granted in 1994 for all the numerous reasons we have all read about.

and the best quote offered by a self regulating voluntary body is ....

If it doesn’t happen, and even if it does, the real estate brokerage community should continue to exert influence over the quality, scope and affiliation of private home inspection in Ontario.

That is a pretty demanding statement, and we know already that some Realtors have heeded the call at locking out Nachi members. Nick if that is not exclusionary, restrictive, and restriction of a livelihood I don't know what is. RECO or OAHI have no right to be instructing RECO how to operate or who to hire given that OAHI has no legislation giving it absolute power, and requiring all home inspectors to belong to OAHI. They have also insulted other practioners (architects, engineers, contractors) who may very well be qualified and do inspect housing.

[Brian A. MacNeish]

Originally Posted by rwand1

I don't think consumer conerns were the issue, that has never been the case because of the very low number of complaints. Ministry of Consumer and Corporate Affairs has been on record as stating self regulation is working, given the low number of complaints they felt licencing or some other form of legislation was warranted.

Raymond:

Given the low level of competance I have seen quite frequently in the field, it is a mystery that there aren't more complaints or litigations. Reasons:

(1) We aren't required to report complaints to any association or other body so that some/any monitoring is being conducted.

(2) Who is being totally truthful when questioned (but not monitored) about monies paid out to settle complaints? These may never get to a lawyers office. How much of this goes on?

(3) When complaints get to litigation through a lawyer or private mediator, we still don't know of these cases.

(4) In the past few years, I have seen vendors give up $10,000 in price reduction due to items I have found but were missed by their inspector 3-5 years previous. Why wouldn't they go after the inspector that missed these items? It was a paper loss only.....the house value appreciated $30,000-$60,000 so what's a $10 grand price reduction......I don't have to come up with the 10 grand and, anyways, we made thousands just by owning the place with no or few upgrades such as paint. (At a recent HI meeting, one member who I am usually diametrically opposed to agreed on this.)

(5) Many, if not a majority, of HI's have waiver clauses in their contracts. This immediately limits the # of complaints.

A little off topic but needs to be discussed as I have talked to people who have found themselves in this situation!!:

In many cases, the unsuspecting client has not read the waiver clause(s) beforehand and signs it onsite in a pressure situation before the inspection. The pressure situation goes like this:

(a) either it's too long and they skim over it, not getting the true gist of what's in it (I never see any bold/highlighted print saying "you'll be signing your rights to compensation, if warranted, away" or,

(b) they read it, understand it but realize they'll piss off (1) both realtors, (2) the vendor(s) and (3) the HI for standing up for themselves and not signing!! It has to be a pretty strong person who, at the beginning of inspection, says, "No go!" and walks. They have a legal "Agreement of Purchase and Sale" for which this move might constitute a breach of contract. In a hot RE market, they may have as little as 4-5 days to satisfy the inspection condition. So, to not sign the waiver and find another inspector may lose the house and their deposit for them in the end (and possibly lead to a lawsuit).......No pressure, you say!!

NOTE:
I consider the waiver clause the most distasteful, unprofessional item of the HI field. Not many, if any, professional groups have clients sign a waiver. (Yes, I know that surgeons now have some patients sign a waiver clause when the statistical numbers favour failure of a procedure but the patient still wants to proceed) To an astute client, the waiver should serve as a red flag.......Has this professional no faith or confidence in themselves to do a good job so they try to protect themselves with THIS!!