The CAPHI / OAHI inability to accept or extend the olive branch to/from Canada’s largest home inspector organizatiion will eventually undermine their entire programme. “The Powers” are watching their perfomance at least as closely as any other HI org.
Fellow Canadian Inspectors, here is a message from Bill that he has asked me, and given authorization post to the NACHI forum.
I would like to have this response of mine put on the NACHI forum and
you are welcome to say it’s directly from me but I’m not allowed to post
messages to the NACHI Forum.
CAHPI and the National Certification Authority not only reached out many times but has been in direct contact with Mr. Gromicko and others inviting NACHI to participate in the National Certification Program.
We were rebuffed totally and Mr. Gromicko advised his followers to ignore the Certification Program and ‘not waste their money.’ The olive branch has been extended by CAHPI in the past and was refused.
You are correct that the powers that be are watching CAHPI. In fact, we have copied all correspondence between us and NACHI to the government agencies so they are very aware that we have tried to be fair.
For clarification purposes, the National Certification Program is a National project and OAHI (or any provincial association) has no direct control over it. It is therefore not a CAHPI/OAHI matter. OAHI is merely a provincial association that has agreed to assist with some of the details and procedures. Many months ago I invited NACHI to submit some information for Equivalency Evaluation by the National Certification Authority. Had NACHI complied, you and all NACHI members would now have much more involvement in the process. Unfortunately, Nick decided not to cooperate, thereby depriving his members of a significant opportunity.
We are spending an enormous amount of volunteer time making this project work, and we choose to utilize that time where we know it will be welcome and beneficial. NACHI’s negative responses in the past indicate that any time we would spend at one of your sessions would be counter-productive.
The National Certification Program is inclusive in nature, so when we shift to the permanent certification process and open the doors to all Canadian Home Inspectors shortly, all will be welcome to apply, including individual NACHI members.
Bill Mullen RHI
WHAT A CROCK OF BALONEY. Mr. Mullen the same person who said Nachi would be irrelevent! Did he copy that statement to government officials, along with all the other crap? NO!
Would Mr. Mullen allow me to post my views, Roys view, or Nicks view on Bills propaganda machine the CANUCK? Not.
Bill must be desperate.
Sure is odd how the players have all appointed themselves, no solicitation whatsoever for positions.
It is also well known that regardless whether one is a member of Nachi or not the process was to be inclusive. It was not and there was lots of bias both from Mr. Mullen and OAHI. OAHI actively seeks to hazzle dual members!
And for the record the poll indicates the majority of Nachi members will not apply. This is not Nicks doing. This was the Canadian members doing.
Claude you should know better than to post such a pile of crap!
Paul Martin tried that approach and look where it took him…
I guess this shows what we have said all long.
The self appointed group who say they are the salvation of the inspection industry in Canada are not doing as well as they would like all to think they are.
I am so glad to see Bill at least tell the truth and admit they have as we said spying on the NACHI site on a continuing basis.
What a great way for a CAHPI to act .
Can you remember every large company that has stooped to spying has always failed .
We at least at NACHI have been truthfull and open to all .
We offered CAHPI a free booth in out 2007 conference and CAHPI has not had the courtesy to reply .
NACHI also offered NACHI Members prices to CAHPI members at the same conference still no answer.
Surprise more CAHPI members can see how good NACHI is and continue join.
Thanks Bill …Roy Cooke
It’s to bad you do not allow the same access to CAPHI’s message board that by your statements reveal that you have to this board. Your comments show that you are reading this board.
As for your comment that Nick is “depriving his members of an opportunity”. I read this board all the time and have done so for the past 3 years. At no time have I ever seen or heard Nick say that I could or could not do this or that. It is my choice. As for your national certification I applied and then thought better of it and withdrew my application. Again it was my decision.
By your comment that Nick has deprived me of an opportunity says to me that your attitude is that your organization, CAPHI/OAHI thinks they have the right to dictate your members behaviour. Need I remind you we live in a democracy? Membership in this or any other organization is voluntary.
I believe your attitude and that of CAPHI has to change. If it does not then it is doomed. I will not have anything to do with any organization the thinks they have the right to tell me how to think do or say and which organization I can belong to.
If you continue to serve yourself and not your membership you will become an association of one.
Best of luck Bill.
May the light shine bright.
You only have to open your eyes to see it.
Claude, thank you for posting Mr. Mullen’s letter to me. I will take this opportunity to respond below;
Dear Mr. Mullen
Thank you for your note posted on this bulletin board through the offices of N.A.C.H.I. member Claude Lawrenson. I understand your irritation at the comments I posted earlier but must point out that “where there is smoke there is fire” and certainly, judging by your ‘voice’ there is something going on behind the scenes.
I would like to point out to you several false statements and assumptions under which you are labouring;
You personally and the chief officers of your organization are on record as having made many derogatory statements about N.A.C.H.I and all members of this organization. I will not attempt to document them here, as others have a more complete catalogue of ‘your’ insulting, demeaning, and unacceptable words than I. Suffice it to say that these are not the actions of an organization that has been tasked with building a working relationship with ALL Home Inspection organizations in Canada. Reports from within your organizations offices indicate that this hatred of all things N.A.C.H.I. continues to this day and that, in fact, the statements I have referred to above are but the tip of the iceberg as confirmed by C.F.I.H.I. I trust that a record of these offerings has also been sent to the parties you mentioned.
C.A.P.H.I. was mandated to involve as many Home Inspectors in Canada as possible. What percentage of the oft quoted 5000 actually were contacted by your orgainization? 1% ? 5%? Without corroborating evidence as supplied by C.A.P.H.I. we will never be sure. However if a straw poll is acceptable it appears that a real number is somewhat less than even that modest 1%. this is not the sort of “inclusive” programme that was originally envisaged. Certainly with a budget of $2 - 8 million tax dollars every inspector could have and should have been involved.
You and the chief officers of your organization are constantly decrying N.A.C.H.I. as being nothing more than a privately owned AMERICAN organization. ( for your information being AMERICAN is not a sin in this county . . . yet) ‘You’ refuse to have anything to do with N.A.C.H.I members and claim that big bad old Nick put the skids to any kind of involvement by N.A.C.H.I. members in the National. Well sir, if ‘you’ had really wanted to include us ( N.A.C.H.I. members) in the programme ‘you’ would have made the effort to go over the head of Nick and appealed directly to Canadian Members of N.A.C.H.I. Like those who list all of Rush Limbaugh’s listeners as “Ditto Heads”, marching lock step, you have assumed the same of us. We are independent home inspectors capable of independent thought and actions. Unfortunately, because of the attitude of you and your organizaton the fleeting moment of cooperation may be past.
And that is your fault.
Statements of " Alll are welcome" and " This is an open and inclusive programme" do not constitute a real, honest and determined effort to involve anyone other than those already inside the stockade. The failure of C.A.P.H.I./OAHI to reach out to the members of Canada’s largest home inspection organization is a failure to live up to the mandate passed on to C.A.P.H.I./O.A.H.I. and will ultimately doom the programme from within.
You cannot have it both ways. You cannot say that Nick put an end to the involvement of N.A.C.H.I. members and then say that you won’t talk to us because of Nick’s statements. The fact is that you never tried. Because you don’t want us. Never did.
I might add that being offered the chance to be governed by a group who have expressed their disdain and dislike for all N.A.C.H.I. members is both; more than a little uninviting and; not the same as being involved in the planning and forming of the national programme.
So, Mr. Mullen, if you were to ask for advice on how to heal this wound that you have created I would suggest that a genuine offer be extended to N.A.C.H.I. members to become involved in the process . That there are many concerns that have not been addressed is a given. That these concerns might have been addressed had a majority of Canadian Home Inspectors been involved is also a given. The blame for the fact that this consultation was not carried out as per the mandate given to C.A.P.H.I. lies squarely on the sholders of you and your organizations.
If you wanted to give a sign of a more open and inclusive programme to N.A.C.H.I. members, we would suggest that the list of inquisitors that have been appointed to vet applicants, should be abandoned and the people on that list sacked. Nobody in his right mind will subject themselves to the misitrations of these persons, particularly those appointed in Eastern Ontario. Their views on N.A.C.H.I. members are well known indeed and the fairness of any verrification process in which these people are involved is questionable at best and a joke at worst.
Although I do not expect that this or any other communications with you will make the slightest difference to your " stockade mentality". I do, none the less, hope that ‘you’ will recognize that you can reach out and build bridges anew with N.A.C.H.I. and its Canadian members. Whether or not this happens is entirely up to ‘you’.
The ball is in your court.
Thank you for your time, patience and efforts on behalf of all the inspectors you never contacted. We deserved better treatment at your hands.
Dominion Home Inspectors Inc.
The following is based on my personal viewpoint. It is not intended to reflect the views of CAHPI or the NCA.
It was extremely unfortunate that NACHI publicly posted and decided to take the position of warning its members not to waste their money. That is now and will remain a matter of public record, obtained right here from the forum based on a post by Nick to the Canadian NACHI members.
In addition, it is my understanding that NACHI and NICK himself as well as Robert Brown were also sent an invite to have its education, courses, and Canadian members apply for recognition. These are all key ingredients in assuring benchmarking of competency for assessment of NACHI applicants. To date a number of NACHI members have chosen to participate, a number have completed their TIPR and are awaiting results of their “background” review. Also a few have decided to publicly protest their participation and have dropped out. That is certainly their choice.
To this date nothing has transpired to signal NACHI’s willingness of participation. Albeit at times possibly there have been a few mixed signals. Even a vote in the poll posted by less than two dozen members does not equate to large resounding win that NACHI members choose not to participate. That is certainly a matter of ones choice. But it is also equally inopportune that some choose to attack the tangible benefits of professionalizing home inspectors in Canada, by trying to look at the politics of associations versus the betterment of all home inspectors in Canada as a profession (void of association). Those messages were heard loud and clear and seemed to speak to the indolence of those opposed to national certification. As Bill has noted, it would be foolish to post statements without documentations of support to prove time and time again the other side of the issue. Certainly previous attempts and letter writing campaigns have been offered to claim that fairness is not part of the CAHPI vocabulary. That is a far stretch from the real fact. Certainly there have been many heated words communicated on both sides of this debate, but that does not equate to tainting and portraying every person as corrupt and unethical, regardless of membership affiliation.
The case in point being my recent post presented here for Bill. His response would never see the light of day here – so he asked me if I would kindly post it. Once again, it seems it’s as expected met with unfair comments, and pointed personal attacks and innuendoes. That proves to be the exact point of really how unprofessional we can really become. Again, it’s interesting to see the blame deflected at others involved in the process, while choosing to ignore the prospect of fairness and open mindedness at the cost of profligacy and protectionism. Perhaps if Canadian NACHI members really want a “stronger” voice to support those that have decided to ignore the “waste your money” comment and seized the opportunity to do what was in their own best interest. Perhaps they also see it in a different light!
Claude, I am most disappointed in your reply. Not becasue of your inability to move away from the stockade mentallity of C.A.P.H.I. as that was completely expected. No, the disappointment arrises from you ( Bill?) once again hiding behind the claim of my posting “unfair”, “pointed and personal attacks” and “innuendoes”.
Frankly I find that comment not a little insulting.
I asked that C.A.P.H.I. move beyond their personal and professional hatred of N.A.C.H.I. members and this organization and it has been shown once again that ‘you’ are incapable of doing so. That, sir, is why the national programme is doomed.
As I stated above, N.A.C.H.I. members are not “ditto-heads”. We make up our own minds. We, and roughly 4000 other inspectors have waited and are waiting for some kind of olive branch from C.A.P.H.I. It appears as though we wait in vain.
On a personal note; please inform Mr. Mullen that I did not use the above letter to insult him. Believe me. If I had wanted to insult Mr. Mullen he would have known the difference.
Claude responded with…
Again the info was posted. Many voiced their concerns and opinions. It was decided not to partake because of the misinformation that was shown to disseminate from CAHPI, not once or twice, but repeatedly.
To show such disdain I suppose Mr. Mullen would have no problem in releasing archived posts from his CANUCK list?
Again lets compare apples to apples. I have many posts from various people who post on the CANUCK list and there are many, many worrisome posts which are questionable in their information and tone regarding NACHI, members and Nick. Yes comments from members of NACHI are on public record because “we” have the right to voice our opinions, are free to associate with whom we choose, and free to make our own decisions based on what was present or in the case of CAHPI that information that was not presented.
I fail to see the bearing of the above view. Mr. Brown does not speak for me and many others. Nick has made statements on Certification based on what he found out, but at no time did Nick or Robert Brown speak without consultation. And obviously many have seen the light on this whole matter because unlike OAHI no one pulled the public information posted for everyone to see and read and come to their own conclusions. Ditto the CAHPI board before it was pulled. This was nothing but blatant interference in the flow of information. Then you wonder why so much vehemence has been expressed here on the NACHI board.
Here we go again. NO IT DOES NOT! This whole program is based on certification meeting CAN P9, which it does not. That means the program is not complient! It is also now known that other matters have come to light that no one ever mentioned and it appears this whole program is a make-it-up as you go. There is also a major concern of people having been appointed to positions without any democratic process. It is also apparent there is political infighting, turf wars and outright arrogance on the make up of the BOD and who was appointed to the Nat. Cert. Agency. Call it what you want it is nothing more then friends appointing others to a clique. They have even gone so far as to protect one another.
Freedom of choice. I like to think that those of us who dropped out saw the manipulation of due process and fairness. It certainly appears from the evidence over the years CAHPI never had any intention of including anyone but themselves, until that is NACHI members began to see what was going on because we were permitted to post info that otherwise would not have been known outside the circles of CAHPI.
And ditto those comments regarding CAHPI.
Is that poll any different then the CHIBO documents where many decisions were based on a poll of approx. 69 members? Sixty nine members representing the rest? Sixty nine people determining the future of us all. Mixed with self appointed agenda driveng directors?
Tangible benefits? What tangible benefits? Everyone I think wants co operation. Everyone wants a unified standard. Everyone wants to better themselves. What people don’t want is a system which is flawed with its own infighting, politics, clique mentality, or being reviewed by the likes of certain people who once again were appointed base on who they know not what they know. For the record I would not let myself be reviewed by the likes of whom you Claude have appointed. You appear to have fallen into your many roles by the same process. Where is the credibility of fairness. Who is ensuring professionalism from CAHPI and OAHI? Apparently no one.
What? You are kidding right? I all by myself posted many public documents about Nat. Cert. Chibo, et ceteras on the OAHI CAFE for members to see and decide for themselves and to come to their own conclusions because all the info at that point was what CAHPI wanted disseminated. As a result of the fruits of my labour to make people knowledgeable on what was about to unfold, the consipritorial actions of management had my posts removed, and subsequently I was suspended from defending myself from the likes of Mr. Mullen and his side kick Mr. Bottoms. Not to mention theirs and others comments on the CAFE. Fortunatley people are beginning to see the light of what is going on and what has gone on. Because you folks are only accountable to yourselves all this has been buried. There in lies the problem; self regulation wherein the self appointed do as they please and are not accountable because of make up of the body itself.
You have no one to blame but yourselfs. You are using taxpayer money, members money, and members good will. CAHPI through its spokesperson Mr. Mullen and a few others have caused the letter writing because people saw through the baloney of poor governance and poor communication, and protection of certain parties because of their connections. Even Mr. Guihan seems to lack ability to reply or act with a standard of care or due diligence and he’s the President? Just runs the show at HQ?
And do you really think Mr. Mullen would allow the same courtesy on his CANUCK list? Absolutely not. Do you really think Mr. Mullen would have permitted posting of public links to documentation that would reveal for all to make up their own minds? I don’t think so. Respect begets respect.
Well no one has proven any benefits to National Certification. No one has proven it will improve our lot. No one has proven the system is fair because of the remaining issues with appointments. No one has been cognizant to release a finnished product. No one has been cognizant to ensure this program meets CAN P9. No one can assure some of the TIPR inspectors do not have conflicts. No one can prove that anyone will get a fair shake as a member of another competing body.
What is needed is a fair and representative body that speaks for all, acts for all, ensures good governance, accountability and openess. What is also needed most is a democratic process.
As to my offer to privately email NACHI members information which shows the National is possibly being made up as it goes is a concern and goes back to why it is so important to ensure compliance with CAN P9 to ensure the body overseeing this fiasco is doing the right things. So far that is a far reach.
George - I condone personal attacks and unfair treatment. Yes, it has happened on both sides, but there seems to be a few that perpetually keep stirring that pot. The facts on many claims outside of the issue of name calling are yet to proven one way or the other. Yes there are two paths of information, CAHPIs and NACHIs, it unfortunate the two have not come closer together.
My message simply indicates that it appears both sides of the issue claim they have facts supporting their POV. In my opinion both sides have bad mouthed - so does that make it right? Not in my way of thinking. But I also agree and hope that the line towards a common goal should be the target, not the ongoing banter about who is biggest, or best, or the claims about the old boy network!
I simply wish we could all learn to get along!
Another thing that should not be overlooked in all of this is the repeated abuse of OAHI members who for what ever personal choice also are members in NACHI. There has been an undercurrent of distrust by OAHI of NACHI members, and this worrisome policy was echoed in the OAHI news letter by none other then the Chair of the DPPC, who by gosh is also on the executive of CAHPI. That includes OAHI’s abuse of power by reporting members who were using CHI as per ASTTBC. At no time were these OAHI members presented with anything but a directive to clean up or you will be drummed out. This same mentality has permeated the National way of thinking. Fines have been levied, and accusations made in letter from OAHI without so much as presenting the evidence. People have been intimidated by directors and fines collected all based on accusations. Its pathetic.
Now I understand that Claude has fallen from grace within OAHI on the Technical Review Committee because of his opinions and views expressed here. The committee has been taken over by one person who in my opinion is part of the major problem within OAHI. But this is the way the system works.
One must also not forget that OAHI was and is a major player in CAHPI and certain elements have sold out OAHI and its members by stiffling information. Information that has been filtred and slanted to suit an agenda. OAHI has intwined itself in CAHPI, but the fact remains a provincial body that is part of the overall scheme of Certification has its own accountabilty problems, hiding of financial info, minutes, and denial of service all based on directives which are legally questionable because these decision do not fit within the confines of the by-laws. The system is rotten, and the best thing to correct the misguidance is for the executive of OAHI and CAHPI to resign along with a few committee members who have to much power and protect each other. A self regulating body has no business conducting its affairs in such manners, nor does a self regulating body entitle it to do as it pleases for the benefit of a few.
…Sorry why should NACHI wish to support CAHPI we have been treated like mushrooms from the get go. It is up to CAHPI to take take olive Branch they offered before and then CAHPI proceeded to destroy it in less then 24 hours .
Why should we feel they can be any different now .
Roy Cooke …
"George - I condone personal attacks and unfair treatment."
Don’t you just hate ‘typos’? Claude, I assume that you meant " I do not condone . . . "
I agree fully with your stated desires. It would be great if we all could get along as equals; equals in the National and equals in the business. Until C.A.P.H.I. learns that N.A.C.H.I inspectors are equal in every way then there can be no involvement of N.A.C.H.I. Name calling advances nobody’s cause and only serves to set us apart. However it takes a better man than I am to be called a ‘human rectum’ or worse and in return smile and say thank you.
How C.A.P.H.I. / O.A.H.I. stop their local representatives ( some of whom have been appointed as applicant interrogators) from their personal attacks on N.A.C.H.I. and members will prove to be a greater challenge. There is one representative of C.A.P.H.I. who routinely bashes N.A.C.H.I. and members, personally attacks the reputations of inspectors in the area, spreads rumors of legal troubles, financial troubles and goes as far as removing business cards and brochures from realtors offices in an attempt to damage his competition. With this sort of representative at the local level, how you will accomplish your vision is a very good question. With this sort of representative can you expect the average N.A.C.H.I. member or non-aligned inspector to want to be involved in the national?
There are as many reasons as members in all three organizations to continue down this path. Hopefully as we N.A.C.H.I. members bring order to our own house C.A.P.H.I. / O.A.H.I. will be seen to do the same to theirs. Clearly the first move toward reconciliation must come from C.A.P.H.I. / O.A.H.I. as the mandate was to involve as many Canadian Inspectors as possible and to date that has equally clearly not been done.
Thanks George - that is what I meant!
Level heads will prevail in the end. We all have to work together to make the industry a better place for the consumer. Cutting up one group or the other does not help the public and as much as we are in business for profit, our ultimate goal is to aid the buying public to make a decision based on our report. To demean the industry in any way is counterproductive to the goal.
It seems to me that NACHI is equal to or better then other HI assoc.
The wording of the above says to me that you have a Superior attitude and that NACHI must submit. Well that will not happen. If you had invited NACHI’s input as a partner maybe the responce to your invitation would have been more positive.
Sorry Claude. Must be thick today. What “is what I meant”?
Nick do we have a brochure that outlines all the qualifications required to be certified by NACHI and to become a CMI?
The reason I’m asking is that there seems be be a lot of misinformation about NACHI’s standards.
My plan is to distribute the brochere to all the real estate offices along with a list of all the NACHI certified HI’s in this area.
Can you help me out here?
George, Maybe it was a Freudian slip.