Turmoil At The Top?

A Canadian Federation of Independent Home Inspectors contact inside O.A.H.I. has sent in the proposed inspection contract being pushed upon the lucky members. by some of the ‘powers’ within that organization. As many of you will remember, an attempt to do this same thing a few years ago caused quite a stir and not a little dissension in the ranks. Could a new call for all O.A.H.I. inspectors to declare their lack of insurance be far off . . . again?

O.A.H.I. continues to spin it’s wheels.

Read the latest contract proposal below-


**Please review the second version of the Visual Pre-Purchase Home Inspection Agreement on the Knowledge Cafe titled ‘Provincial Contract ver. 2’ and add any comments that you wish by September 10th 2006 at which point a committee of members and directors will review the agreement and comments and construct a final copy for use.

Please note that the Draft is for discussion purposes only and no reliance should be placed on the document.**–>**

This Visual Pre-Purchase Home Inspection Agreement [the “Agreement”] is made this of , 200_ between: (month) (year) day (date)<SPAN style=“COLOR: midnightblue; FONT-FAMILY: Verdana”>
<!–[endif]–>

LET’S TRY AGAIN-

**Please review the second version of the Visual Pre-Purchase Home Inspection Agreement on the Knowledge Cafe titled ‘Provincial Contract ver. 2’ and add any comments that you wish by September 10th 2006 at which point a committee of members and directors will review the agreement and comments and construct a final copy for use.

Please note that the Draft is for discussion purposes only and no reliance should be placed on the document.**–>**

:?: …

**Please review the second version of the Visual Pre-Purchase Home Inspection Agreement on the Knowledge Cafe titled ‘Provincial Contract ver. 2’ and add any comments that you wish by September 10th 2006 at which point a committee of members and directors will review the agreement and comments and construct a final copy for use.

Please note that the Draft is for discussion purposes only and no reliance should be placed on the document.**–>**

This Visual Pre-Purchase Home Inspection Agreement [the “Agreement”] is made this of , 200_ between: (month) (year) day (date)<SPAN style=“COLOR: midnightblue; FONT-FAMILY: Verdana”>
<!–[endif]–>

**Please review the second version of the Visual Pre-Purchase Home Inspection Agreement on the Knowledge Cafe titled ‘Provincial Contract ver. 2’ and add any comments that you wish by September 10th 2006 at which point a committee of members and directors will review the agreement and comments and construct a final copy for use. **


Please note that the Draft is for discussion purposes only and no reliance should be placed on the document.–>
(The Execution of Agreement by Inspector) (The Execution of Agreement by Client)
Inspector Name I HAVE READ EACH CLAUSE OF THIS AGREEMENT — I UNDERSTAND THAT IT LIMITS THE INSPECTOR’S LIABILITY

Sorry About That. Darned Hurricane Rains Keep Knocking Out My Electricity!

Silly and too dam busy .
I can see giving this to a client and they saying WOW! I think we had better post pone the Inspection while I take this to my Lawyer.
I hope they take it to the OAHI lawyer to give them some advice .
OAHI BOD seem to get some strange ideas on how to make it harder to be a home inspector.
With thoughts like this it sure does make NACHI look good to me and others .
Roy Cooke … RHI… CAHPI-ON … Royshomeinspection.com

My take on this - sides with trying to have it’s members adopt a “standardized” inspection agreement that will or could possibly dovetail with a E&O program.

I am not sure if it should be “termed” turmoil or simply - like reporting formats - that too was reviewed and not accepted. To me its a matter of choice - unless it is a condition dictated by the insuring underwriters.

It boils down to personal choice, or in the case of report systems the impact on proprietary reports in the marketplace. Unless there is a team of lawyers and eventually judges that will uphold such a “contract” - I would best have a lawyer “independently” review it, and see what is ones own best interest.

Unless I am mistaken there is no choice OAHI insists that you give the client a form stating that they know that the home inspector has no insurance and the Inspector must get it signed before the inspection .
As NICK keeps says NACHI is the only one to have the Home inspector pass a test before they do inspections . The NACHI policy on insurance is only that the inspector follow the rules of the state or province .
NACHI does not insist the client sign forms re insurance before the inspection .
Roy Cooke RHI CAHPI-ON Royshomeinspection.com

Roy:

Is E&O Insurance currently a Provincial requirement for Home Inspectors?

NO. NOT YET,BUT I CAN SEE IT BEING A REQUIREMENT DOWN THE ROAD.

No this has never been required by any Provincial Government that I know of.
Past experience with Home inspectors and Insurance companies has not been very good .
If a home owner has made a frivolous claim with no merit and the inspector does not want the Insurance company to settle .
They usually settle as the cheapest remedy .
Most HIs have $5,000:00 deductible and if it is a $7,500:00 claim the insurance settles raises the HIs cost by many dollars for three years and the Company makes more money and the HI losses .
This has led to much distrust from existing Home Inspectors so many do not carry E&O insurance.
Then we get the newer inspector who feels that to advertise insurance increases his chance of getting more Inspections .
They do not understand advertising insurance gives John Q public thoughts to go after the home inspector for silly things .
Roy Cooke … RHI… CAHPI-ON… Royshomeinspection.com

OAHI tried this a number of years ago, and the standardized contract did not fly then. And most likely it won’t fly this time. Franchisors will not use it. Multi inspector firms will not use it. Carson Dunlop will not use it. ISS will not use it. Sole proprieters will not use it. I would not use it.

The word VISUAL is mentioned too many times and is overly wordy!

Brief but attentive?

Why would the SOP be included or referred to?

The insurance committee is on hiatus. I guess OAHI should appear to be doing something constructive.

Does this contract mean that OAHI members are experiencing higher then normal claims?

Does this mean many members cannot obtain insurance, thus the contract?

Arbitration? What if you don’t want arbitration?

No limit of liabilty?

OAHI sent me a notice about this insurance contract and told me to go to the OAHI Discussion forum the CAFE to comment on this contract, but seeing as I am suspended from the CAFE I have been denied denial of service, even though I am a member in good standing. So see my comments above.

Thanks George for posting this. And thanks to CFIHI for posting it.

Mario, et al:

We had all better be attentive to what is going on up here in Ontario. We should all be pushing and promoting licencing. We must as a group ensure that any licencing is done with inspectors input. Not just OAHI’s input. We must demand and call for liability caps on our liability, we cannot let other interests control legislation that affects us. We cannot rely on OAHI to do the right thing. Nor can you rely on CAHPI to do the right thing.

Well if they had a lawyer write this up its a JOKE! Was it even reviewed by a lawyer? Like many things in OAHI you have to wonder where the legal advice is coming from.

Btw " a team of lawyers" do not uphold contracts, only courts can do that. I think this contract won’t fly!

When I was with OAHI and they first came out with the requirement of disclosure of no insurance clause for our contracts, at first I thought it was a bit ridiculas. Then I saw the benifit behind it. Even though I am no longer with OAHI, I not only have that clause it my contract but it’s the very first clause!

I have yet to have someone balk at it.

Paul,

They still require the disclosure, and it can be in your contract or verbal disclosure.

I fail to see a benefit from disclosing one is not insured, but please enlighten me.