Claude & Bill



For years…I’ve told them the right way to do it: Wait till you get an actual approval for something before you announce it, and when you announce it, post the actual documents like I do in the right column of

Yup that is true!

Having said that, it is a shame that all the crybabies and malcontents found it necessary to make such a noise that any chance of something positive happening went down the drain, for now. Maybe something can happen in the future.
What a shame

Pretend it’s 2013 and your client wants to see your Standards of Practice. You’ll have to send them to this online store and tell them to have their credit card ready: (Note that even the CSA calls them “Top Sellers”)

Is this really what you want for your industry?

If Bill had not thrown so many stones and told the truth things sure could have been different .
Bill has reaped what he has sown .

I think InterNACHI and CAHPI should get together and unify their SOPs and beat everyone to the punch with a unified Canadian SOP.

Great idea … Roy

I second that !

Who knew? :shock:

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.

We don’t need any dual members to unify our SOPs.

I didn’t know CAHPI uses the ASHI SOP.
Who cares?

Can someone detail the points that are different?

Vern - I say its mostly semantics. They all are very similar. Some claim theirs the best - but that is another debate.

I have sat on several Standard’s committees over the past decade. In reviewing most SOP’s - I see very little difference. The problem being is the perception of what consumers expect - versus what inspectors are required to do to properly complete the defined scope of work.

As we know through experience expectations are often high and the home inspector often seems to take the blame for many things that are beyond the required “scope of work”.

The other concern is the degree of risk or weighting the risk involved for either exceeding or failing to meet the “required” SOP.