Originally Posted By: ecrofutt This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Read their website carefully, especially the Ride Along Mentoring Program for which they charge RAMP fees. Last time I calculated it, ( a couple of years ago) they’d get you through the first 100 mentored supervised Pennsylvania inspections for only $24,500.
Judge for yourself whose interests they're serving.
Originally Posted By: rzimmerman1 This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
jsmith11 wrote:
The PHIC claims that NACHI isn't state ACT 114 compliant?
Is this a coalition for real???
All comments welcomed.
Thanks,
Ryan 
Acording to the judgement posted on the PHIC site NACHI was found non compliant with PA law.
Nick's responce is that NACHI was never served or notified. Bottom line is that Nick knew about it and now knows that a judge said NACHI was not compliant befor or at the time of signing. So NACHI was found guilty
In my oppinion - If NACHI was complisnt and Nick had thought he could win there was no reason I know of not to show up. Bu failing to respond NACHI was found guilty.
I also wonder, but have little info about Nick being charged with providing improper Radon testing in PA. I've heard there is a judgement against Nick, but have not received enough info to confirm or deny.
valued quote from James Bushart
"An association of members will stick together and be there for each other, whether they are directly affected or not."
Originally Posted By: apightling This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Mr. Z. did you ever write for the NY Times? 'just curious . . . no need to confirm or deny . . . .
Headline: It was written someplace (corrolary to "I have heard") that Mr. Z wrote for the NY Times. Mr. Z neither confirms nor denies he wrote for the NY Times.
Originally Posted By: rzimmerman1 This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
apightling wrote:
Mr. Z. did you ever write for the NY Times? 'just curious . . . no need to confirm or deny . . . .
Headline: It was written someplace (corrolary to "I have heard") that Mr. Z wrote for the NY Times. Mr. Z neither confirms nor denies he wrote for the NY Times.
-ap
 Mr. Z denies he has written for the NY times or any other newspaper.
I have no problem answering a valid question put to me. Contrary to some others.
valued quote from James Bushart
"An association of members will stick together and be there for each other, whether they are directly affected or not."
valued quote from James Bushart
"An association of members will stick together and be there for each other, whether they are directly affected or not."
Originally Posted By: apightling This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Rob,
What I wrote was an illustration of how 'did not confirm or deny' is a lame way of saying anything. It conveys the impression you are trying to create a commentary or issue where there is none or very little substance upon which to base a claim. It also discredits the rest of your statements and exhibits a low esteem of those reading your comments.
On the other hand . . . I suspect you could get elected as governor of PA by such tactics. : )
Originally Posted By: rzimmerman1 This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Art,
I have read posts stating that Nick put 100s at risk by improperly conducting Radon tests in PA. But, I can not personly say this is true. I could have said ‘Sources Say’ I even take TV news and Newspaper stories with a grain of salt. Everyone twists the truth. So when I say can not confirm or deny I anm saying I do not know but I think it has some merrit.
Given Nicks history and willingness to skirt the truth I lean toward believing. But without facts I must let others know for which it came.
If being truthful is lame then so be it. I do not make things up and do not go looking for dirt. And I am tired of Nick continuly posting false statements and hiding all these past issues, such as being found guilty by PA.
valued quote from James Bushart
"An association of members will stick together and be there for each other, whether they are directly affected or not."
Originally Posted By: apightling This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
“If being truthful is lame then so be it. I do not make things up and do not go looking for dirt. And I am tired of Nick continuly posting false statements and hiding all these past issues, such as being found guilty by PA.”
So, not only do you make statements without *verifiable* supporting information but you also go for the sympathy mongering approach to elevate the validity of your commentary. Apparently noble, but still lame.
If you are tired, take a nap. Then get solid information that is confirmable and not easily refuted. . . . or, simply say it's your opinion. That will carry the validity your previous statements have earned.
I don't know you from a hot rock. I haven't had an association with NACHI or Nick for any significant length of time. I am simply responding to your posting on its value to me as valid information. You are commenting in an environment where people make very authoritive posts so such tactics stand out like a sore thumb.
Originally Posted By: dnice This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
apightling wrote:
I am tired of Nick continuly posting false statements and hiding all these past issues, such as being found guilty by PA...
So, not only do you make statements without *verifiable* supporting information...
I don't know you from a hot rock. I haven't had an association with NACHI or Nick for any significant length of time...
A lot of people can benefit from accurate information. You must understand that neither Nick or NACHI has been "found guilty" of anything. "Guilty" is a term used in criminal court, and nothing criminal transpired. People and organizations find themselves at odds with government regulations all the time. You win some and you lose some when dealing with them.
Nick has a particular style that some don't like or appreciate, but any judgements on it are purely subjective. Some people act like I am some kind of shill or lackey, but nothing could be further from the truth. Positive things I have to say about Nick are base more on my own observations than on the fury of controversy that gets whipped up by some people, every time Nick posts something.
There are enough people that try to demonize Nick (and NACHI) on the outside and I just don't care to join in on those who do it on the inside. He's done a good thing here and he continues to work on things that every member can benefit from, but he seems to be the only one here that is constantly subject to extreme scrutiny.
I see people constantly misinterpreting things he says and making federal cases out of it. Even if they are right, I think people could channel their energies in a more positive direction, and keep in mind that things are not always as they appear.
Originally Posted By: jsmith11 This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
I had no idea that my post would get so colorful. What I would like to see is, NACHI some sort of action against organizations like PHIC. They have listed every association with the exception of ASHI and NAHI as being non-compliant or non-responsive.
So I'm figuring that PHIC exists much like the Mob. If we don't participate in their stroking game we and everyone else in the industry is at fault?
Thats the impression I'm getting right now.
Another item of concern is that in this area their are many crooked realtors and investors with old money. I think theres someone who orchestrated this so called 'coalition' to get positive publicity for ASHI and NAHI.
This reasoning comes from other articles and websites which have linked these two organizations. These two are in bed together and we'd better get some brains together to combat it before its too late.
We can't put this to rest anytime soon because they're not gonna let up anytime soon.
Thanks for sharing and keep your thoughts coming in, so maybe we can find a SOLUTION for us all...
Originally Posted By: apightling This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Thanks David . . . however, I don’t deserve the credit for the first sentence . … it was in quotes . . . 'wouldn’t want to be accused of plagiarizing Rob.
Originally Posted By: apightling This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
also, the rest of my post was in response to that quote and directed at Rob . . . I probably needed to make that clearer . . . sorry for the confusion . …
Originally Posted By: rzimmerman1 This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
dnice wrote:
A lot of people can benefit from accurate information. You must understand that neither Nick or NACHI has been "found guilty" of anything. "Guilty" is a term used in criminal court, and nothing criminal transpired. People and organizations find themselves at odds with government regulations all the time. You win some and you lose some when dealing with them.
Found guilty vs Judgement against. I'm not a lawyer so sorry if I mix terms. Here is the link to the Judgement in favor of PHIC
http://www.phic.info/judgement.htm
If I read this correctly NACHI was found to not meet PA laws befor or upto the date the judgement was entered. Yes or No
To be found to not meet the law sounds guilty to me?????
valued quote from James Bushart
"An association of members will stick together and be there for each other, whether they are directly affected or not."
valued quote from James Bushart
"An association of members will stick together and be there for each other, whether they are directly affected or not."
I even take TV news and Newspaper stories with a grain of salt. Everyone twists the truth. So when I say can not confirm or deny I anm saying I do not know but I think it has some merrit.
