I had an inspection today for a Roof Certification & found an EVIDENT leak.
The client was needless to say upset.
The client showed me their inspection report prior to buying it less than 30 days prior.
This was not on the report.
I noticed that is was a fellow Inter-NACHI member.
The property had a lot of evident problems, including EVIDENT foundation, wrong information throughout the report & additions were not documented on the report.
What should I do?
Call the inspector & give them a heads up or not get involved?

[Wayne B. Wilson]

Call him give him a heads up

make your inspection as requested, collect your fee and let it go... perhaps the guy had a bad day and if so he will find out on his own... giving him a 'heads up" is asking for trouble.

[Russell J. Hensel]

I would not call. You work for the person paying you. There are crap ton of NACHI inspectors who suck. Let em fail. Only way to weed out the weak and those giving the industry a bad name.

Sorry but you don't have the right to have a "bad day" when someone is spending $100,000 based on your inspection. It's a luxury we can't and buyers can't afford. A bad day is you missed a cracked window or bad GFCI not structural and roof problems.

[Jeffrey R. Jonas]

[QUOTE=rhensel;790295]I would not call. You work for the person paying you. There are crap ton of NACHI inspectors who suck. Let em fail. Only way to weed out the weak and those giving the industry a bad name.

Sorry but you don't have the right to have a "bad day" when someone is spending $100,000 based on your inspection. It's a luxury we can't and buyers can't afford. A bad day is you missed a cracked window or bad GFCI not structural and roof problems.[/QUOTE]

And you certainly don't want to be dragged into the fray, and be accused of being in collusion with the other inspector, if it were found out you were in contact with him. If your client requested that you contact him, that would be another matter, as you (hopefully) would be working in the best interests of your client.

[Christopher Currins]

[QUOTE=Unregistered;790233]make your inspection as requested, collect your fee and let it go... perhaps the guy had a bad day.[/QUOTE]

I hope you're not a home inspector, but you probably are.

[Charlie Chapman]

My apology if I am not suppossed to speak in here.
I am not an inspector nor have I had any dealings with one. What sort of lead me toward maybe being an inspector was hearing all the complaints about inspectors in the area I live in.
I would think if a inspector sees shoddy work by another inspector there would be some way to report it.
To me it would be no different than two employees in a compnay and one is letting equipment be damaged and the other one not saying anything.
It seems around here the same bad inspectors keep getting the jobs and the only person that suffers is the buyer
I can see not saying anything to the inspector but someone should be notified am I wrong in my thinking

[William T. Misegades]

[QUOTE=rhensel;790295]I would not call. You work for the person paying you. There are crap ton of NACHI inspectors who suck. Let em fail. Only way to weed out the weak and those giving the industry a bad name.

Sorry but you don't have the right to have a "bad day" when someone is spending $100,000 based on your inspection. It's a luxury we can't and buyers can't afford. A bad day is you missed a cracked window or bad GFCI not structural and roof problems.[/QUOTE]

I agree with Russell, we don't have the right to have a bad day with someone's lifetime investment.

If ANYTHING is to be done in my opinion, it is contacting InterNACHI and letting them deal with that inspector as far as his membership.
InterNACHI Code of Ethics says:
"The InterNACHI member shall not engage in any practices that could be damaging to the public or bring discredit to the home inspection industry."

"The InterNACHI member shall not engage in any act or practice that could be deemed damaging, seditious or destructive to InterNACHI, fellow InterNACHI members, InterNACHI employees, leadership or directors. Member(s) accused of acting or deemed in violation of such rules shall be reviewed by the Ethics committee for possible sanctions and/or expulsion from InterNACHI."

If that inspector promoted the fact he is part of InterNACHI by writing it on his report, he not only brought discredit to the home inspection industry but the association as well.

No matter what, that inspector will naturally be weeded out (it might take some time), but as the inspector who came after and found all the other deficiencies, you became that home owners top inspector who he will recommend you to everyone.

[James H. Bushart]

[QUOTE=wmisegades;822827]I agree with Russell, we don't have the right to have a bad day with someone's lifetime investment.

If ANYTHING is to be done in my opinion, it is contacting InterNACHI and letting them deal with that inspector as far as his membership.
InterNACHI Code of Ethics says:
"The InterNACHI member shall not engage in any practices that could be damaging to the public or bring discredit to the home inspection industry."

"The InterNACHI member shall not engage in any act or practice that could be deemed damaging, seditious or destructive to InterNACHI, fellow InterNACHI members, InterNACHI employees, leadership or directors. Member(s) accused of acting or deemed in violation of such rules shall be reviewed by the Ethics committee for possible sanctions and/or expulsion from InterNACHI."

If that inspector promoted the fact he is part of InterNACHI by writing it on his report, he not only brought discredit to the home inspection industry but the association as well.

No matter what, that inspector will naturally be weeded out (it might take some time), but as the inspector who came after and found all the other deficiencies, you became that home owners top inspector who he will recommend you to everyone.[/QUOTE]


It is not unethical to be a piss poor inspector.

InterNACHI provides the means for inspectors to advance in skill and knowledge ... but the market, not the association, will decide who will and who will not be in business.

[William T. Misegades]

[QUOTE=jbushart;822829]It is not unethical to be a piss poor inspector.

InterNACHI provides the means for inspectors to advance in skill and knowledge ... but the market, not the association, will decide who will and who will not be in business.[/QUOTE]

I completely with you, the market will weed out the bad inspectors, not InterNACHI.
However, if that inspector is damaging the reputation of the industry and/or InterNACHI, then the association can choose or not to have that piss poor inspector represent them.
That is why I wrote: "If ANYTHING is to be done in my opinion, it is contacting InterNACHI and letting them deal with that inspector as far as his membership."

I personally wouldn't do anything because I would have done the job, gotten paid for it, left a home owner happy with my services who previously got a crappy service from another HI. I know I'd get good referrals with proof from that client.
I might recommend the client contacting the Association.

[James H. Bushart]

[QUOTE=wmisegades;822839]I completely with you, the market will weed out the bad inspectors, not InterNACHI.
However, if that inspector is damaging the reputation of the industry and/or InterNACHI, then the association can choose or not to have that piss poor inspector represent them.
That is why I wrote: "If ANYTHING is to be done in my opinion, it is contacting InterNACHI and letting them deal with that inspector as far as his membership."

I personally wouldn't do anything because I would have done the job, gotten paid for it, left a home owner happy with my services who previously got a crappy service from another HI. I know I'd get good referrals with proof from that client.
I might recommend the client contacting the Association.[/QUOTE]



In the world of business ... no one represents me but me.

If you (or anyone else) tried to tell me how I should run my business, I would cordially invite you (or anyone else) to engage in sexual intercourse with yourself. As long as I am operating in accord with the code of ethics and other conditions of membership, anything else is nobody's business but mine and my client.

Inviting a client to contact NACHI about the quality of their home inspection will result in nothing at all, other than to make the person recommending it look impotent as well.

The world is full of people who have no business holding a flashlight in someone else's house ... and NACHI, as every other association, has their fair share. Many NACHI members have yet to perform their first home inspection and many more are hoping, someday, to do more. NACHI certifies that a member has met the requirements for membership ... not that they perform good home inspections. The same is true with all associations. Read the strong disclaimer that ASHI publishes on the site where they promote their members to the public. NACHI does the same thing.

Consumers have a duty to carefully select a good home inspector. What club he might belong to has very little to do with the quality of his work. Having a license in his state simply means he met the minimum and does not mean he is competent, in spite of the confused perception of some.

The first criteria that a consumer should look for is whether or not the inspector is a full time professional home inspector. If he lacks the confidence or the ability to rely upon his own skills for his financial needs ... they, too, should withhold confidence in him as well for their own financial investments.

This thread was started by an inspector who has a problem with a competitor and lacks the intestinal fortitude to publish his comments under his own name or to confront the inspector that he hopes to disparage. Instead, he posts an anonymous "question" about how to handle an inspector who --- only according to him, at this point --- is not performing as he should. How do we know that Mr. Anonymous is not a slouch and that the first inspector actually performed well?

This thread illustrates my point. Your business is your business. Stay within the ethical boundaries and make it or break it on your own merit. Enough said.

[Russell J. Hensel]

This is where I totally disagree with Mr. Bushart, as I usually do. Although I see his point I just don't agree with it.

When an organization, such as this (INACHI) REQUIRES.....you to post your affiliation on your marketing material the same size or LARGER than another organization, then its wrong. You are MANDATING that you show your affiliation. Why should it not be on a volunteer basis?

You are MANDATING your company to be lumped in with idiots. When there are substandard inspectors in my area, I don't want people to see ANYTHING alike on our marketing materials and websites. In no way, shape or form I want to appear or thought to be associated with them in any way.

And as Mr. Bushart, incorectly states, INACHI does NOT enure that its members meets the certification criteria. There was an email sent about 2 months ago about missing continuing education and people went haywire!

I disagree with Mr. Bushart stating that the person looking for a Home Inspector must FIRST look for a Full Time home inspector. I will put Marcel R. Cyr against ANYONE. He is not a full time inspector as well as a few others have stellar curriculum vitae. I don't think Nick is a full time inspector, I would have him inspect my house.

So in my conflicting position is that people of an organization can 100% cast a shadow on other members just by association. So who cares what other NACHI members do? I do! Not only does it reflect pooly on the organization, but the profession as a whole.

So when it doesn't matter what "others" do....thats total BS.......If you want to get the money you think you deserve then you have to act like a professional and produce professional products. To raise our public perception we have to be better and perform better. To just say it is what it is, and the market will eat them up is just WRONG WRONG WRONG.....especially when people are dealing with $100,000s even more and 30 years of debt based on your service.