CAHPI.. Restricting Trade ?

This sure sounds to me to be very simular to what CAHPI is trying to do with the Home Inspection Industry in Canada .
Charging some HIs $500:00 and others $1,100:00.

Todays Toronto Star
Real estate association faces probe - Business - Real estate association faces probe
Competition board is asking if CREA is restricting trade

March 26, 2007
**Tony Wong
**Business Reporter
The Federal Competition Bureau has launched an investigation into whether the Canadian Real Estate Association is being anti-competitive by making it difficult for discount brokerages to operate, and making it potentially more expensive for consumers to buy homes.
On March 16 the bureau hit the Ottawa-based organization, which has 85,000 members and represents the majority of realtors across Canada, with a court order requesting extensive records detailing how it and related boards operate.
“Information obtained from industry participants indicates that rules enacted by CREA and proposed interpretations of those rules have restricted, and will further restrict, access to the MLS database, and have prevented and limited, and will further prevent and limit the entry and expansion of potential competitors in the residential real estate brokerage industry in Canada” said a statement from senior competition law officer Jean-Pierre Bornais in Federal Court court records obtained by the Star.
Bornais said he interviewed 13 real estate brokers across Canada in a preliminary probe before filing the court order.
Last November, Realtysellers Ltd., one of Canada’s largest discount brokers, announced it was shutting down because it could no longer operate in the face of proposed changes to the Multiple Listing Service, which is owned by CREA. Other low-price agencies have complained about new rules that could bar some of their listings from the MLS, a members-only computerized database responsible for about 90 per cent of all home sales in Canada.
“The commissioner must consider whether CREA has engaged in, or is engaging in, a practice of anti-competitive acts, or has committed, or is about to commit an offence by restricting access to the MLS database,” said the court filing.
CREA’s board last year announced a series of proposed changes designed to protect the MLS trademark. One proposed that agents could no longer “merely post” properties on the MLS unless they represented the seller for the term of the contract. Another prohibited the seller’s name from appearing on
Discounters argued the rules meant that they could not post new homes for sale on the MLS at a cheaper price to customers who simply wanted access to MLS. Selling a home outside MLS is usually more difficult, since the database is by far the most popular vehicle used by consumers and realtors when accessing housing listings.
A spokesperson for CREA was not available for comment yesterday. But on Saturday, despite the competition bureau investigation, the organization decided to go ahead with the controversial changes to the MLS rules at their Annual General Meeting in Ottawa, in an overwhelming vote of 92 per cent in favour of the new guidelines, according to one source.
In a letter given to members at the meeting and obtained by the Star, the organization tells members, “If CREA lost control over the use of MLS trademarks, the public would suffer, because the public would no longer be able to depend on the integrity of brokers using MLS trademarks to identify their services, or on the accuracy, completeness and uniformity of MLS data.”
In an earlier letter, CREA president Alan Tennant said the board is consulting with their lawyers. “Some of the information that CREA has been asked to provide resides with real estate boards and associations,” said Tennant.

Roy Cooke . “National Certification” …Home Inspection… CMI…

with the dual fees alone it appears to me that CAHPI has created a discriminatory/two level system, which seems to fligh in the face of the equal opportunity for all message they are trying to present.


The reason for the “dual fees” has been explained numerous times.
I understand why you don’t like it but if they won’t change the formula the only choice you have is to participate or not.

Explained the way Bill sees it .
Strange how you Believe Bills stories.
If you have read all you will see where he has made many mistakes in lots of them.
This National Certification is being mainly paid for with Tax payers money.
Having been a member of CAHPI/ONTARIO I like most other see it as Blackmail to get NACHI out of Canada.
If they join OAHI at about $400.00 I can do the National for $500:00.
Does this not look starge to you.

It’s not a matter of believing Bill. I don’t know him.
He has simply presented the reason for the dual fee structure.
You etiher accept his explanation or not.
You either consider it “fair” or not.

How often in life is one presented with “unfair” situations?
You either dwell on them or move on.

He explained his reason I guess we have to carry on and agree to disgree.
You seem to feel it is OK to lie and OK to use taxpayers money for one side only .
Do I need it not in the least .
I will continue to fight so others can see that they are being treated unfairly.

Roy Cooke… I can give a NATIONAL CERTIFICATION home Inspection.

No it’s not OK to lie and it’s commendable that you want to fight for others.

If tax payer money has been used illegally then that should be pursued. If the activity to allege is not breaking any laws then the organization making the rules has the right to do so. Is it possible that some are being treated unfairly-sure. Wouldn’t it be better for those on the inside of the org with some integrity fight for changes?

Yes and there are a large group who are just doing that , you read some of the members posts on thsi BB.
Roy Cooke

I wish them well Roy. Change only happens when people who care stand up and fight for it.

since it seems to be ok with you that fees differ for CAHPI members vs non members maybe it’s just as ok with you if the rates were changed (increased/decreased) for members of different ethnic backgrounds and/or religous believes. As I see it, it is nothing more that a form of discrimination dispite the fact that the national program with heavy taxpayer support via CMHC is supposed to be all inclusive and unbiased. Obviously it is not, quite the way to market such a program and attract intrest. NOT!

Let’s try to compare Apples to Apples.

I will repeat in different words.
If illegal activity as defined by Canadian or Provincial law has occurred then the alleged illegality should be addressed through the courts.

If a private organization wishes to charge different amounts based on criteria they establish(and not disallowed by the government) what recourse do those who don’t agree and are outside that organization have?

Try this.
I don’t presume to tell you how much to charge for a HI or tell you how to run your business. Is this not as it should be?


This is not provincial law so much as CAHPI is I believe a Federally Incorporated Company. Therefore it comes under Federal jurisdiction, its not a provincial matter.

We have a body that through its National Spokesperson along with others with the assistance of taxpayers money, being used to triumph one association over others.

Statements have been made in the press that grievously portray the National as a body which will Certify all 5,000 inspectors by 2007.

No one can provide any docuementation repeatedly asked for, now a situation has developed with the Federal Agency taking a second look at their press release.

There is also a concern with limiting competition by way of advertising or suggesting that the National Certification is the choice. This flies in the face of fair marketing.

Yes we have a right to express our concerns because we are taxpayers, and some of us are members, while others aren’t but are not digesting the swill thats being passed off as truthful marketing.

Thanks for your concerns and support,


Roy I respect your opinion - but that is an unfounded “assumption”. If CAHPI association members contributed 50% and the government subsidy matched was 50% - than who was the "mainly paid’ - inferrence majority? Now add in thousands of hours of a committee - that added more -in-kind contributions. I hope my years of time and losses away from business - had some value.

Besides this is not a restriction of trade. It’s recognition of the majority of members in an association that supported the project over the past years. To me to expect everyone should be a given a “free” pass is reverse discrimination and completely unfair. There are other examples such as FNNBOA process that have very similar two tier fee structures, as well as many education and seminar fees.

Michael’s comments make perfect sense! Please and respectfully - Get over it.

I don’t give a rats a** if an organization is private or not if it descriminates against any specific group in any way it is wrong period. That holds even more true if large sums of taxpayer money have gone into the support of such a group, with its written mandate being to be inclusive of all. Your milage/opinion on this may differ, but we all know, opinions are like a**holes everybody has one. So let’s agree to disagree.

please give it a rest. I just like Roy and Ray and most likely others had payed into the Nationl for nearly 10 years and had been there since the earliest talks on national certification, before leaving OAHI. Are you trying to tell me now that my fee is to be more than double just because I am indipendent. Please tell me how that balances with the mandate of equal inclusion for all. Just because I have payed in for longer than some others does not make them any less equal IMHO.


The reason for the price variance from what I have read indicates the extra charge is to ensure the system is self sustaining. Thus the burden to administer the program is through non members who will be up-charged $600.00, is that correct?

Then there are mandatory courses such as the legal risk reduction course, reaccessed every 5 years and pay an additional service charge of $200.
And that no money will be provided by CAHPI to the National? But taxpayers money has gone into OAHI and CAHPI and HRDC?

Why would taxpayers money be spent on a self regulating body that has no assurance of being successful be a prudent investment?

Would it be wiser for each provincial body to use the National as the standard and licence inspectors provincially? I mean either way its taxpayers money in the end, right? And that seems to be the objective in
Ontario, right?

Why do you bring in the FNNBOA it has nothing to do with this
Claude can you tell me why you ask me to be respectfull when Bill Mullen is the person who wrongfully calls me a liar.
Claude can you tell me why you have said basically the same words to me before and ignored Dave Bottoms who was a member of OAHI and CAHI and the editor of the Canadian Home Inspector the Magazine of CAHI and CAHPI.
He continued to belittle NACHI and many of its members and you said zip.
You ask me to be respectfull where Claude I ask you to please do the same thing .
You are a member of both OAHI?CAHPI and NACHI .
How can you wear both shoes with out trying to give directions both ways . I and others have asked you many questions and you disappear and give no reply.
Why should you ignore Bills slanderous posts and jump on me .
Shame on you Claude you show your bias regularly.
I not seen you try the fair play method.
Please do not try the BS about how many hours where put in with OAHI .
I was on committees with PACHI.OAHI and NACHI .
Big Deal I and others are on these committees for the betterment of all Home Inspectors and because we want to be .
Repay is self gratification .
I attended more OAHI meeting when I was with OAHI and was always early and regularly stayed to help set up and clean up.
I do not belong to an association for repay neither should you???.
It would be nice if you do not run away and hide with out answering the questions.


Roy what is a “national certification home inspector” or “nationally certified home inspector”? I am glad you opened that can of worms. It speaks highly of exageration and ambiguity. It’s misleading. Being a certified home inspector is very different than claiming to be a nationally certified inspector. If you have proof to officially prove otherwise - I will gladly donate $100 to NACHI to a charitable cause of your choice. Feel free to privately email to me your proof.

A reference to “unfair practices” if they are directed at one or more potential consumers. It’s an attempt to mislead - the exact same thing some seem to be focusing on CAHPI for.

Check out “business practices act or fair trading act”.

BTW: My comment respecting FNNBOA - was used as an example of your claimed allegation of unfair restrictive trade. Not that it is - which is more to my point.

I tried to provide an example of other venues that must also be deemed unfair - if we want to “fairly” compare “apples with apples”.

And furthermore, since you profess to refute my statement - please advise me how many hours did I donate in-kind betweem 1999 and 2006 to the CHIBO project.

BTW2: I also belong to ASHI, OACETT and CSC - what does that have to do with wearing many pairs of shoes? Perhaps it makes me more knowledgeable and open-minded - than you think.

I as I have said before can back up my statements and I let my conscience be my guide and always try to do what is proper and give help where I can .
Self gratification is all I need .
Please send me a copy or post it here when you get the NACHI receipt .
For the futue it might be a good idea to believe what I say and post.
.Many questions still have not been answered

Thanks Roy Cooke

Ray - respectfully - agreed the intent of National Certification is it must be sustainable and self-sufficient. That is but one part of the cost.

Another is the additional work (time) and cost of the certification committee to review unaligned applicants. And yet another part is the concerns and costs in instances of discipline not though a committee but through legal means to handle issues.

So perhaps one may see that there are “many” factors that account for differences in the two-tier cost of processing an application. These are the same concerns that have been shared and expressed by other associations in that CAHPI followed in their system.

I am not aware of any money given to OAHI or CAHPI-Ontario.

From a personal view point - I like the americanized association models of one umbrella group such as NACHI or ASHI with regional chapters. I guess that being the top down model. Everything being handled away from the provinces and out of potential of harm or allegations by any group or association. Than again currently CAHPI National technically has no individual members. It is only an association of associations.