Applied Science TRADEMARKING everything inspection related!

These message board pages are now for archival purposes only. Please visit https://www.nachi.org/forum/ for our most recent forum discussions.

Applied Science TRADEMARKING everything inspection related!

AuthorMessage
Claude Lawrenson

Ontario Home Inspections Inc.
NACHI Member: Yes
(as of 3/25/07)
NACHI Member
Posts: 684
User: clawrenson
Posted: Dec 26, 2005 8:54 PM       Post Subject:
Raymond - The reference to 5000 is based on an independent study done from a consultant for CMHC. It is based on the "potential" of all home and property inspectors in the country, regardless of affiliation or lack thereof.
Back to Top
Raymond Wand

Raymond Wand Home Inspection Service
NACHI Member: Yes
(as of 3/25/07)
NACHI Member
Posts: 447
User: rwand1
Posted: Dec 27, 2005 8:13 AM       Post Subject:
Claude

Thats a pretty bold statement and wishful thinking when we know that CAHPI has less than 1000 inspectors. Does anyone realistically expect 5000 inspectors to be Certified, let alone 500, given the fact that we don't have all the facts?

How can CAHPI possibly certify 5000 inspectors by 2007. That is imposssible, and anyone who thinks that quantity of inspectors will be certified by 2007 is dilusional (after all it is voluntary). There must be an awful lot of dilusional people around. icon_wink.gif

Seasons Greetings.

Raymond Wand
Alton, ON
Back to Top
Roy Cooke

Roys Home Inspection
NACHI Member: Yes
(as of 3/25/07)
NACHI Member
Posts: 1987
User: rcooke
Posted: Dec 27, 2005 8:25 AM       Post Subject:
clawrenson wrote:
Raymond - The reference to 5000 is based on an independent study done from a consultant for CMHC. It is based on the "potential" of all home and property inspectors in the country, regardless of affiliation or lack thereof.


I guess some can not see what has happened in the past OAHI is over ten years old .
They have managed to certify about 200 RHI's in that time .
OAHI has about 50% of the certified inspectors in CAHPI.
That looks to me like in 10 years their are 400 CAHPI certified inspectors in Canada.
You do not have to be a rocket scientest to see that this looks impossible.
At this time NACHI has just about the same number of certified Inspectors in Canada.

Roy Cooke sr..... R.H.I. .... C.H.I.
Back to Top
Claude Lawrenson

Ontario Home Inspections Inc.
NACHI Member: Yes
(as of 3/25/07)
NACHI Member
Posts: 684
User: clawrenson
Posted: Dec 27, 2005 8:43 AM       Post Subject:
This is not about OAHI or CAHPI. The inspection future is not about the past but the present and the future. The inspection business in Canada respectfully is about ALL home inspectors regardless of association or lack thereof.

The number of 5000 is based on guesstimating from an old 2000 CMHC reseach report and release. At that time approximately 2000 of that 5000 represented home inspecrors in associations. Would it be fair to say that the number of non-assocaition members runs about of equal value? So realistically given time the numbers are achievable.

http://www.cmhc-schl.gc.ca/publications/en/rh-pr/tech/tech00-131-e.html

To others sorry for the thread drift, but here that is not uncommon.
Back to Top
Roy Cooke

Roys Home Inspection
NACHI Member: Yes
(as of 3/25/07)
NACHI Member
Posts: 1987
User: rcooke
Posted: Dec 27, 2005 8:58 AM       Post Subject:
clawrenson wrote:
This is not about OAHI or CAHPI. The inspection future is not about the past but the present and the future. The inspection business in Canada respectfully is about ALL home inspectors regardless of association or lack thereof.

The number of 5000 is based on guesstimating from an old 2000 CMHC reseach report and release. At that time approximately 2000 of that 5000 represented home inspecrors in associations. Would it be fair to say that the number of non-assocaition members runs about of equal value? So realistically given time the numbers are achievable.

http://www.cmhc-schl.gc.ca/publications/en/rh-pr/tech/tech00-131-e.html

To others sorry for the thread drift, but here that is not uncommon.


Sorry I must have been reading the CHIBO 11 incorectly .
It looked to me like CAHPI was to be the association who where going to pull this all together and run the new Certification.

If I am correct and it is to be CAHPI I only wished to show they have not been able to get many members in the past to come on board .
They have not been to free with the information in the past .
I wonder will many expect that they it is now agood time to expect CAHPI to change.

A great place to start is to open up their BB to all and start and post much information on their BB.
It is so strange that the Chosen Director of Information for CAHPI
(Bill Mullen) has a privated BB that he gives slanted information to his chosen few .
To me it seems like a vey poor way to try and convince those who are not members of CAHPI to come on board.

Roy Cooke sr.
A HAPPY NACHI Member.
MANY Have Joined NACHI and liked it.
Where free information is given to all.
Back to Top
Raymond Wand

Raymond Wand Home Inspection Service
NACHI Member: Yes
(as of 3/25/07)
NACHI Member
Posts: 447
User: rwand1
Posted: Dec 27, 2005 8:58 AM       Post Subject:
Quote:
The number of 5000 is based on guesstimating from an old 2000 CMHC reseach report and release. At that time approximately 2000 of that 5000 represented home inspecrors in associations. Would it be fair to say that the number of non-assocaition members runs about of equal value? So realistically given time the numbers are achievable.


Guesstimating? That is a far reach to suggest that there were 2000 inspectors back in 2000. Sorry there is no way 5K inspectors could be certified in a year. We don't know how many inspectors are not aligned we only know how many are aligned.

I also believe those retained to conduct studies, research and provide input for CMHC/CAHPI are not even home inspectors. I spoke to one researcher and he said he was a past contractor/builder.

It seems the more things are questioned the more back tracking comes about.

Cheers,

Raymond Wand
Alton, ON
Back to Top
Claude Lawrenson

Ontario Home Inspections Inc.
NACHI Member: Yes
(as of 3/25/07)
NACHI Member
Posts: 684
User: clawrenson
Posted: Dec 27, 2005 12:07 PM       Post Subject:
So can the same logic be equated in comparing the real membership versus practicing members of any organization including NACHI or any others? I really feel those numbers are really somewhat ellusive. How many home inspectors are in Ontario - just representing one province? Care to hazard a guess?

Equally I have spoke to reps from other provinces at the conference that have indicated significant growth in their numbers. So even though some may feel otherwise - growth is inevitable.

Does it state as a matter of fact that 5000 will be put through the process in one year - I didn't read it that way. My point is who really cares? Even 1000 going through the certification plan is a damn good start, even if that is over the next few years. Who really knows for sure.

If you have the 2000 stats to indicate otherwise - it seems that the number was based on actual contacts by the consultant to solicit input in the study. All it takes is for one to use and gather the data from all phone ads for Canada for home and property inspectors. Even that will not not account for every home inspector. I know some inspectors that don't need to or choose not to advertise in the phonebook. Their work is primarily based on past referrals, or those on the other side doing this as a part-time business, or those married to realtors.

BTW: The studies referenced were not building contractors but actually "professionals" such as in architects and engineers.

Again you expressed your POV, and I accept that, however I just felt that I am also trying to express that not everyone sees it the same way - so there is bound to be differences of opinion.
Back to Top
Roy Cooke

Roys Home Inspection
NACHI Member: Yes
(as of 3/25/07)
NACHI Member
Posts: 1987
User: rcooke
Posted: Dec 27, 2005 12:35 PM       Post Subject:
I understand Bill Mullen has again posted on His Private Canuk Bulletin Board that Roy and Ray will soon get a letter from his Lawyer that will knock our socks off.
I wonder is this just more of his Typical Chest thumping or is he getting very nervous of seeing how NACHI is growing so well In Canada..
I eagerly look forward to this mail.
I believe this is the third time he has posted that he is getting his lawyer to send us a letter.
I wonder how it will look when it is shown that we have tried to post factual information and he has posted many not nice things on his board about us.
I think it is time for this information to be posted who is on the secret committee.
When are we the inspectors of Canada going to have a chance to voice our opinions.
Why is every thing that could effect the Home inspectors done behind closed doors.
I do stand behind all my statements ,It would be nice if Bill Mullen could say the same thing.

Roy Cooke sr. R.H.I....C.H.I.>>> CHAPI-ON.

A HAPPY NACHI MEMBER!!!!
Back to Top
Raymond Wand

Raymond Wand Home Inspection Service
NACHI Member: Yes
(as of 3/25/07)
NACHI Member
Posts: 447
User: rwand1
Posted: Dec 27, 2005 12:41 PM       Post Subject:
Hi Claude,

Quote:
So can the same logic be equated in comparing the real membership versus practicing members of any organization including NACHI or any others? I really feel those numbers are really somewhat ellusive. How many home inspectors are in Ontario - just representing one province? Care to hazard a guess?


I don't know either, but we keep hearing 5K, even I have been given to quote it. Perhaps an audit of the membership numbers? Both CAHPI and NACHI, OAHI, ASHI Members in Canada?

Quote:
Equally I have spoke to reps from other provinces at the conference that have indicated significant growth in their numbers. So even though some may feel otherwise - growth is inevitable.


I agree growth is inevitable. (sounds like Chauncy the Gardner statement) icon_wink.gif

Quote:
Does it state as a matter of fact that 5000 will be put through the process in one year - I didn't read it that way. My point is who really cares? Even 1000 going through the certification plan is a damn good start, even if that is over the next few years. Who really knows for sure.


I read it differently and I know others who did too. Everyone should care about the numbers being quoted. As I have said all along; adequate numbers seem to equate with functionality and cost and signifigance of Certification. Only active involvement by all will make this work.

Quote:
If you have the 2000 stats to indicate otherwise - it seems that the number was based on actual contacts by the consultant to solicit input in the study. All it takes is for one to use and gather the data from all phone ads for Canada for home and property inspectors. Even that will not not account for every home inspector. I know some inspectors that don't need to or choose not to advertise in the phonebook. Their work is primarily based on past referrals, or those on the other side doing this as a part-time business, or those married to realtors.


What about Engineers, Architects who provide consultative services that could be considered a home inspection? I agree with your rational above, by the way.

Quote:
BTW: The studies referenced were not building contractors but actually "professionals" such as in architects and engineers.


So then they (Engineers/Arch) would supercede home inspection standards? If there is a higher standard being suggested from a higher authority (they are licensed, we are not) this would suggest our SOP are being formulated by others or have been formulated by others?

Quote:
Again you expressed your POV, and I accept that, however I just felt that I am also trying to express that not everyone sees it the same way - so there is bound to be differences of opinion.


No arguement there. After all we have to express our opinions and concerns otherwise we would all remain deaf and dumb. icon_wink.gif

Seasons Greetings.

Raymond Wand
Alton, ON
Back to Top
Raymond Wand

Raymond Wand Home Inspection Service
NACHI Member: Yes
(as of 3/25/07)
NACHI Member
Posts: 447
User: rwand1
Posted: Dec 27, 2005 12:48 PM       Post Subject:
Roy said,

Quote:
I think it is time for this information to be posted who is on the secret committee.


What secret committee?

Too bad about Bill. Its unfortunate that he can make statements on the Canuck list without anyone questioning his statements. Seems the management of the Canuck list has put the fear of the Lord into those boys who dare speak up. Its more than a closed list, it certainly appears to be closed minded too.

icon_redface.gif icon_redface.gif icon_redface.gif icon_redface.gif

Raymond Wand
Alton, ON
Back to Top
Roy Cooke

Roys Home Inspection
NACHI Member: Yes
(as of 3/25/07)
NACHI Member
Posts: 1987
User: rcooke
Posted: Dec 27, 2005 12:51 PM       Post Subject:
rwand1 wrote:
Roy said,

Quote:
I think it is time for this information to be posted who is on the secret committee.


What secret committee?

icon_redface.gif icon_redface.gif icon_redface.gif icon_redface.gif

Raymond Wand
Alton, ON

Sorry it is a secret. .......I am not supposed to know about it.

Roy sr
Back to Top
Raymond Wand

Raymond Wand Home Inspection Service
NACHI Member: Yes
(as of 3/25/07)
NACHI Member
Posts: 447
User: rwand1
Posted: Dec 27, 2005 1:02 PM       Post Subject:
Quote:
Sorry it is a secret. .......I am not supposed to know about it.


Do you have a decoder ring too?

icon_lol.gif icon_lol.gif icon_lol.gif

Raymond Wand
Alton, ON
Back to Top
Roy Cooke

Roys Home Inspection
NACHI Member: Yes
(as of 3/25/07)
NACHI Member
Posts: 1987
User: rcooke
Posted: Dec 29, 2005 10:51 AM       Post Subject:
I see a class action suit has been filled against CMHC.
It seems that when information was requested through the Canadian
Freedome of Information much was blacked out .

I wonder how it might come out if Home Inspectors applied for information
via the same route.

The CMHC CHIBO 11 sure looks like they too do not want any information going out to those who could be loosing their right to make a living the way they have been for many years.

The more I look the more I see that the Home Inspection Industry in Canada could be corrupted.

I wonder why they all are so secretive and not following their rules and giving information to the members.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.canadiansforproperlybuilthomes.com/html/letters/condoclassaction.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Condo Class Action Launched

By Martin van den HemelBlack Press, Tri City News
Dec 09 2005

A newly-elected Surrey councillor and her husband are the representative plaintiffs in a class action lawsuit filed Tuesday against the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation on behalf of all B.C. leaky condo owners.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Earlier this year, Black Press newspapers revealed the results of a freedom-of-information request to the CMHC. Hundreds of pages of documents marked restricted and confidential showed that senior bureaucrats and top federal politicians were aware of serious problems relating to energy conservation measures in house construction techniques as far back as 1981.

Roy Cooke sr..... R.H.I......C.H.I..............................3518
A HAPPY NACHI MEMBER
Back to Top
Claude Lawrenson

Ontario Home Inspections Inc.
NACHI Member: Yes
(as of 3/25/07)
NACHI Member
Posts: 684
User: clawrenson
Posted: Dec 29, 2005 4:51 PM       Post Subject:
Quote:
"The CMHC CHIBO 11 sure looks like they too do not want any information going out to those who could be loosing their right to make a living the way they have been for many years.

The more I look the more I see that the Home Inspection Industry in Canada could be corrupted.

I wonder why they all are so secretive and not following their rules and giving information to the members. "


These statements are not only erroneous and way off base, they could be considered extremely slanderous. These are very serious allegations that I hope for Roy's sake he can support, because I know how CMHC dislikes being wrongly accused of things. Where do you get this information (or lack of it). Lets see the facts to support this.

CMHC wants to see as much factual information as possible going out about this project. What CMHC does not like is having to correct people who contact them with questions based on personal opinion from contrived information or misinterpretation of the facts. I have yet to see a clear concise response posted after all of the letter writing that indicates that CAHPI and the CHIBO committee acted in bad faith.

Both CAHPI and CMHC have tried to get as much information out as possible, because we want everyone to know how great a project it is. They are rightfully proud of their contribution to it. CAHPI National along with its affiliates are extremely proud of this initaitive and the overall contributions this will create to raise professional standards for home inspectors in Canada.

I challenge you give me one example of any "reasonable" question about the National Initiative that has not been answered. I suspect that all have been answered, but it seems not to the liking of a small handful.

Roy with all due respect, I simply and politely suggest that you and Ray ease up a little. If there was any glimmer of mending fences, it sure seems that the constant bashing against CAHPI, OAHI and CHIBO will find you and possibly Ray equally challenged with a countersuit. You guys have certainly "pissed" off many, and I know it just a matter of time before you will be put on the defensive.

Since NACHI has suppressed the opportunity for "others" to speak for themself, on the once open forum, I feel a certain obligation to present the other side of the story. There are many that cannot post here that have expressed concerns about many slanderous accusations being freely touted on this forum. Slanderous statements are being permitted and have not gone unnoticed. I even know of lists being compiled that will be used against you, the same way you have posted information to use and badmouth others. So be careful what you wish for!

Even airing the issues, real, resolved or not has nothing but further build a huge wall between CAHPI National along with OAHI, and many other provincial associations about the best intentions of NACHI. Any good will is quickly dissolving. Most of that seems to be based on the posts for a large part by the two of you.

Like it or not there are more huge announcements upcoming. Even Nick himself seems to like the National Initiative, after all he announced it so - right here on this forum. https://www.nachi.org/bbsystem/viewtopic.php?t=18097 So I think that speaks volumes that there may be some common ground - but the constant bashing or implications that some are being untreated fairly and your implications suggesting otherwise is premature, and purely speculative at best!
Back to Top
Roy Cooke

Roys Home Inspection
NACHI Member: Yes
(as of 3/25/07)
NACHI Member
Posts: 1987
User: rcooke
Posted: Dec 29, 2005 6:02 PM       Post Subject:
Thanks Claude for your letter . I also received copies of a letter from Bill that is close to being exactly the same as yours .
Both you and Bill challenge us Roy and Ray when we make a statement .
You at least do give some information .
Bill on his Closed BB tells all when he makes a post that we are wrong and have the information wrong.
You also say we are wrong . Well is we do put out incorrect information .
WHY do you and Bill not correct us instead of still giving very little .
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill asks for just one ( I have many ) question that he has not answered .
Well I put out that CAHPI Members would be charged $150:00 and non members would be Charged $1,000:00 .
As per usual we where told that is wrong .
Then Tell us what the charge will be?
Please not your typical Politician answer words with nothing coming out.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I feel your and Bills letter are trying to intimidate me with your ( Could be considered Slanderous).
Bill should talk he has put out on his BB more than once that I would be receiving a letter from his lawyer ( Still waiting.)
He says I should not be contacting CMHC with(out right lies) and (their myopic brains) . Not nice talk Bill!
I thought this was free country and when information is not comming out I feel I have the right to ask for it and clarification of what little is given out .
It was Bill who put out his own Press release with all the incorrect information in it . ( Talk about outright lies ) WOW!
http://lfpress.ca/newsstand/Business/BusinessMonday/2005/12/19/1359292-sun.html

Bills Letter below.
Glad to see Bill Mullen and Dave Bottoms continue ( Like many others )come to NACHI to get information.

Roy Cooke sr . C.H.I..... R.H.I.

Subject: [Canuck HI] NACHI Forum
>
> Can one of you Roy Cooke Sr. followers please forward some information to him for me? (That should be easy because you do it almost every day without authorization) He posted these statements on the NACHI Forum this morning concerning the National Initiative.
>
> "The CMHC CHIBO 11 sure looks like they too do not want any information going out to those who could be loosing their right to make a living the way they have been for many years.
>
> The more I look the more I see that the Home Inspection Industry in Canada could be corrupted.
>
> I wonder why they all are so secretive and not following their rules and giving information to the members. "
>
> Those are not only erroneous and way off base, they could be considered extremely slanderous. These are very serious allegations that I hope for Roy's sake he can support, because I know how CMHC dislikes being wrongly accused of things. I have no idea where he gets his information (or lack of it) He and his buddy Wand make things up as they go, and after they have said it three times, their myopic brains consider it to be true.
>
> CMHC wants to see as much factual information as possible going out about this project. What they don't like is having to correct people who contact them with questions based on outright lies contrived information that have been given to them by R & R through their campaign of innuendo and misinformation.
>
> Both CAHPI and CMHC have tried to get as much information out as possible, because we want everyone to know how great a project it is. They are proud of their contribution to it, and the CAHPI leadership is tickled pink with how well it has developed.
>
> I challenge Roy to give me one example of any question about the National Initiative that has not been answered. I suspect that all have been answered, but likely not with the answers he and Raymond and their loyal lapdogs wanted to hear.
>
> I guess these two haven't heard yet that their guru Nick is a believer in the National Certification Plan and has said so publicly. I have never said much nice about Nick, but I am pleased that he has seen past the BS that Ray & Roy have been spreading and he sees this as something good for his members.
>
> Bill Mullen
> Sarnia
>
>
>
Back to Top
Robert Francis

Shamrock Home Inspections, Inc.
NACHI Member: Yes
(as of 3/25/07)
NACHI Member
Posts: 196
User: rfrancis
Posted: Dec 29, 2005 8:23 PM       Post Subject:
Ray and Roy thanks for all the information, that is unbiased, without your input, I feel it alot of what we now know, we would not have and that once again it would have been rammed thru and that only a select few would have known what was really happening.

The old saying "the truth hurts" sure seems to apply in this case does it not? I for one am glad of your views on these matters and I am finding it very odd that a couple of individuals can derail something that was in the works for years!!!!! Very odd indeed. Or is it!

I recently viewed other assocations web sites, I could not find anything on this new CHIBO anywhere except those assocations that belong to CAPHI. Granted I may have overlooked it, but I find it strange.

I also find it very strange every time its questioned it seems alot of people get very upset. WHY? If this is suppose to effect ones right to earn a living then, the questions or statements should be answered and not beaten around the bush and disregarded.

Just my POV
Back to Top
Claude Lawrenson

Ontario Home Inspections Inc.
NACHI Member: Yes
(as of 3/25/07)
NACHI Member
Posts: 684
User: clawrenson
Posted: Dec 29, 2005 10:06 PM       Post Subject:
First I am not aware that I have slandered you. So are you suggesting Roy that I have slandered you, or merely tried to clarify information? Where excatly have I slandered you - I am human enough to recant if I really done so. But I fail to see why you name me.

Secondly I do not speak for Bill, or for his statements. I do however - if you note add more information to your discussion, once again based on certain parties that have been purposely dropped from the NACHI members section. Again that is a right of NACHI, but it seems rather ironic to expect people will not watch and listen to the latest round of bashing against those associations that you once belonged. Even more the credentials and use of your membership marks seem there must be value in clinging to them. As I said before I just offer another side of the story - or another piece to the puzzle.

So perhaps to provide more slanderous statements - (NOT). Do you have proof that the final word will be $1000 for non CAHPI inspectors? How is that fee based? Have you asked why is there a difference, if any? Perhaps all of this is mere speculation and purposely feeds the NACHI agenda to take over CAHPI or kill CAHPI. After all it seems that Nick made some pretty brash and bold statements against CAHPI, ASHI, NAHI, and the list keeps growing with such discourse. And yes, it is my understanding those posts have also been saved for another stormy day in NACHI land. (Oops sorry to get side tracked). But those facts speak for certain devious intentions, with the word of a potentially pending lawsuit. Or is it merely Nick's way of venting to prove a point about freedom of speech?

This is real news to me; if you have some reliable inside sources on fees that have not even been set. In my opinion, it is all speculative based on my knowledge and input up to the CHIBO-2 announcement in November. The whole issue of costs is tied directly into many other activities that's underway. All I know is there are no free passes and anyone interrested in going through the process will be required to pay. Perhaps you have, as I stated before "speculative guesstimates" of information - based on off the official record comments by certain people. Seems rather ironic to second guess a fee that has not even been set, but perhaps a few more meetings and cost studies may provide the actual costs. So I am just as curious as you are to the real facts about the fee structure.

Did Bill's Press Release indicate costs? I did not see any. So where did this information surface from? Certainly not CMHC, or from the CHIBO Committtee, or from CAHPI National. Perhaps you read that this is "legal' and may be appropriate through prior precedence. Read page 5 (upper left hand column) of this newsletter. Those numbers you quote seem to echo those figures. http://www.fnnboa.ca/FNNBOA_Newsletter-_Spring_20051.pdf

Again can it be presumptuous to assume that all the work is completed and that all the answers are yours to have? My understanding is there is quite a bit more work to get to that point.

Once again I suggest its likely best to quit chattering about speculative off handed comments, until those tasks are complete and than I would recommend putting your money, value and efforts for expressing your information based on the real facts.

When all is said and done, and aside from the idle gossip whether here or there on those forums, base your decisions on facts - because I still fail to see how "Home Inspection Industry in Canada could be corrupted" or that CAHPI or CMHC is to blame. Perhaps Nick can enlighten us with those answers or his words of wisdom.

Enough for now, I will be tending to more important and urgent family matters - like my mother-in-law that's gravely sick and not expected to see the New Year!
Back to Top
Raymond Wand

Raymond Wand Home Inspection Service
NACHI Member: Yes
(as of 3/25/07)
NACHI Member
Posts: 447
User: rwand1
Posted: Dec 29, 2005 11:22 PM       Post Subject:
Very interesting indeed.

I am for any form of action which will pit those who feel they are right and those that feel they have been wronged.

This whole CHIBO project has been sold piece meal, it has not provided at this point in time any feedback from anyone, most importantly OAHI members of which I am one. Many Oahi inspectors I have personally spoken with only know that which they have been told in Inspection News an OAHI publication or read here. Again no one, I repeat no one has stated what this certification will mean or bring to the profession. We know it is only a model at this point. We know that CAHPI reports to its provincial counterparts which we know at least in Ontario has not been conducted in the best manner. If anyone thinks that for a moment this is a done deal that can be derailed by me or anyone you are sadly mistaken, it seems to be the contrary.

It has not been ratified by anyone particularly those other provincial bodies which make up CAHPI. That remains to be done. It is clear that this whole project hinges on people partaking of this program. Where is the overwhelming support and endorsement? I don't see any only what we are told by those who have the most to lose.

What is clear is that statements have been made on a closed list which is subject to its own form of censorship imposed by its owner. Just as some have apparently been banned from the Nachi site so to have some been banned from the Canuck list. So that is a two way street.

If people have issues with questions being raised by those astute enough to read what has been published and what has been promised too bad. If people feel I or anyone including Mr. Cooke do not have a right to seek answers from our elected representatives too bad. That is a right as a taxpayer. If those in CAHPI wish to make threats, so be it, but please remember you will most certainly open a pandoras box, and I would suggest maybe it needs to be opened. I am willing to stand behind my concerns and I am willing to continue to question regardless who dislikes it. I am tired of reading less than truthful information presented in a paper which calls into question that which we know is not true. Apparently you cannot question the so called truth.

I am tired to of reading Mr. Mullens myopic, self centred comments. I am fed up with what has been tolerated by management in OAHI and CAHPI which pales in comparision to anything you have levelled against me or Mr. Cooke. I think OAHI and CAHPI have been negligent. I think I can prove that very easily by the attitude expressed by some directors in letters, the lack of response to legitimate requests, the failure to follow clear concise by-laws and the dictates of those in power who clearly demonstrate they cannot follow the by-laws as written. It seems some in OAHI are greedy with money and drunk with power. It seems Mr. Mullen can do as he pleases without consequences but no one else can.

I am tired of reading in the London Free Press erroneous comments which no one including the author at this point in time seems concerned about correcting. Some of those comments are misleading. Instead we see more excuses and justifications to try and explain away the descrepencies.

As to the suggestion that Nick has changed his mind, that remains to be seen.

No hard feelings my thoughts and opinions. Sorry to hear of your family illness Claude.

Raymond Wand
Alton, ON
Back to Top
Vern Mitchinson

Home Choice Inspections Ltd.
NACHI Member: Yes
(as of 3/25/07)
NACHI Member
Posts: 48
User: vmitchinson
Posted: Dec 30, 2005 4:22 PM       Post Subject:
The following is a direct copy from the http://www.fnnboa.ca/FNNBOA_Newsletter-_Spring_20051.pdf site.


Application Fee ? Individuals
are to submit a fee of $150
for certification as well as
$150 to become a member of
FNNBOA. If anyone does not
want to become a member of
FNNBOA, but wants to be
certified, the application fee
will be $1,000. This fee is
based on cost recovery to
establish the Certification and
pay for the Council to review
the application.

FNNBOA or First Nations National Building Officers Association

The way I read this is if you want to be certified by FNNBOA then this is the fee.
Does this fee schedule apply to CAPHI certification then Ray & Roy are correct.
If The FNNBOA is certifying inspectors then CAPHI does not have exclusive rights.
Then other associations would also have the right to establish standards and certify
anybody that meets those standards. It seems to me that CMHC as a government agency can establish standards that the various inspection associations could or should follow. In a democratic society we all have the free choice to follow, lead, speak out about or ignore without the threat of law suits.
As a member of NACHI I would hope that NACHI adopt those standards and exceed them wherever possible.
Back to Top
Go to page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next