Memo
To: City Council
From: Nick Gromicko
Date: 10/11/2005
Re: Home Inspector Registration
Nick Gromicko, Founder of the National Association of Home Inspectors (“InterNACHI”),
respectfully requests that this memorandum be admitted into the record of the
hearing on the captioned matter.
InterNACHI objects to the proposed Amendment to Title 15 of the Loveland Municipal
Code for the following reasons:
1. There is no Code of Ethics included in the proposed Amendment. Thus,
a home inspector could pay kickbacks and finders’ fees to realtors or, more unethically,
find defects in the inspected home and then suggest himself as the perfect person
to repair them. If the purported rationale behind the Amendment is to protect
the consuming public, this is a glaring omission.
2. There is no requirement to carry Errors and Omissions Insurance. Thus,
an aggrieved client of a negligent home inspector would have no recourse against
a judgment proof inspector. If the purported rationale behind the Amendment is
to protect the consuming public, this is a glaring omission.
3. The proposed Amendment is nothing more than a word-for-word recitation
[with a different numbering scheme to fool the unwary] of the standards of practice
of the American Society of Home Inspectors, an out-of-state organization to which
Mr. Rudolph belongs, rather than the more stringent standards of practice of the
Colorado-based InterNACHI, which is not only the world’s largest association of home
inspectors, but Loveland’s, Colorado’s and America’s, as well. Because InterNACHI standards
of practice, continuing education and annual testing requirements are so high,
AIG, the world’s largest insurance company, insures InterNACHI members exclusively
at a substantial discount from the rates it regularly charges for errors and omissions
insurance. By lowering the home inspection standards to the ASHI model, the City
of Loveland will instantly eliminate almost all of the inspectors in the city
of Loveland and make it impossible for many to acquire errors and omission insurance
to protect the consuming public.
4. The continuing education requirement is inadequate. It should be at
least twenty-four (24) hours.
5. There is no annual testing requirement of the home inspector in the
proposed Amendment. In an industry that has undergone and continues to undergo
such rapid change as the home inspection industry, inspectors should be required
to demonstrate continued competency. If the purported rationale behind the Amendment
is to protect the consuming public, this is a glaring omission.
6. There is no requirement that the home inspector have any experience
whatsoever. If the purported rationale behind the Amendment is to protect the
consuming public, this is a glaring omission.
7. Section 3.2.5 is clearly unconstitutional. As written, one could be
barred from earning a living as a home inspector on the basis of unproved allegations,
while, ironically, a convicted criminal who, thus, has a resolved complaint, could
operate as a home inspector with impunity, an absurd result.
8. The Amendment is tainted by its provenance. It was prepared and proposed
by a home inspector who is a member of Loveland’s Construction Advisory Board
and has ties to the real estate industry. The Amendment he has proposed would
eliminate his direct competition which is a clear violation of 5-2(a) of the
Loveland City Charter relating to Ethics.
9. Finally, despite InterNACHI’s having met with the Construction Advisory Board
and provided Jon Rudolph with a torrent of material germane to the proposed Amendment,
the proposed Amendment omits any mention of InterNACHI in the Acknowledgement Section,
an oversight that could not be unintentional.
Respectfully submitted,
Nick Gromicko
InterNACHI