Add an Engineering Technician Diploma and an Ontario Firefighter Certificate including Fire Prevention Theory and Inspections Certificates from the Fire Marshals Office to your qualifications and you will come close to my qualifications.
"Now, are they better or worse prepared to do inspections than someone who takes a short, unproctored online quiz with the help of anyone available and then goes out and buys a flashlight and screwdriver and has some business cards printed up??"
**That’s a very good question. do you have any proof, figures, polls, surveys that prove that a nationally certified inspector is better prepared or is it all opinion?
No disrespect, Roy, but who other than yourself has decided that you are ‘better prepared’?
Yes there is proof that Roy and any other number of inspectors are competant. It is called the market place. The very fact that they have been in business successfully for all these years proves that they are doing the job as it should be done.
The fact remains that with a less than 3% failure rate there is no demonstrated need for the national. It represents the answer to a question that was never asked. In fact the purveyors of the national are doing us all a disservice by convincing those in government and real estate that there is a problem with home inspectors when there isn’t one.
**
That is the only real proof and, more importantly, the only proof that counts.
I could impress five hundred of my “peers” with pounds of diplomas, test scores, and the like…and have nothing. It is what the person who gets my report thinks that will decide if I stay in business. It’s not the fluff and the bells and the whistles that will influence his judgment…he only cares about the results.
Hey I think the online exam is great, but as an educator - I question the potential for it misuse. I suppose one could also hypothecate that if one scores well on the online exam - does that really mean that they know the material?
I feel the point here is the possible temptation and opportunity to cheat or some may call it seeking assistance can be greater than the same exam conducted in a more controlled (proctored) environment. Can you cheat on a home inspection with your client? Not likely or not for very long, without being discovered and served with a lawyers reality check!
97% satisfaction rate! Where is the problem that needs fixing? As long as this process is all completely voluntary and licensing does not exist. I doubt the numbers will change.
man this thread has really drifted.:neutral:
No! I do not give discounts. My fees are reasonable for the amount of time I spend on an inspection and the knowledge that comes with it.
Yet, you endorse CMI which required no verification of your credentials…
Take the blinders off Roy.
Sure sounds a lot like your precious CMI designation…but at least the NAC has some teeth.
Thanks Roy you are right - now we are way down stream!
Summary OHIO Survey
Real estate agents: 15% of H.I. reports are inadequate
Homeowners: 13% later discovered problems in the home
Overall rating of H.I. satisfaction: 8 to 8.5 out of 10
If we are at really happy with that 3% than we are well on track, but the study indicates possible areas open for improvement.
Jason quipped…
Really! Care to elaborate? Its only another self regulating body that can only try and discipline those that subscribe. It has no authority via legislation to do anything measurably. They may not let you in if qualified, but will let you in if you are qualified and have a criminal record. Meanwhile back at the ranch…
**Real estate agents: 15% of H.I. reports are inadequate - TOO HARD ON THE PROPERTY?
**
Homeowners: 13% later discovered problems in the home - HOW MUCH LATER , A YEAR, TWO . . . ?
**
Overall rating of H.I. satisfaction: 8 to 8.5 out of 10 - BASED ON WHAT, THEIR DRESS, THEIR LANGUAGE, THEIR MOOD. REPORT TOO SEVERE?
NOT ENOUGH DETAIL
**
And you Jason are so much like Dave Bottoms .
Been a member of NACHI and left ( was yours free too )
Just can not stay away complain and ridicule .
What do you do for a living now ?
You seem to have much knowledge like Dave has but do not seem to want NACHI to succeed.
Can you tell me how I verify your credentials ,that is if you have any ?
You seem so unhappy with every thing it is disappointing
Teeth in The NC you really are kidding your self it is so much like the Whistler ( Make money for every one except the Home Inspector ) it is not funny.
TTYL out for inspections .
Roy Cooke A Happy NACHI member
Take the personality BS out of it, Roy. Jason has posed an interesting question.
In fact, I think that Nick’s invitation to Bill to communicate on this issue has much to do with the similarities between CMI and this national designation in Canada. Perhaps there is discussion of linking the two in some way, shape or form.
What do you see as the difference between your CMI designation and that beiing proposed by Bill’s group?
George - I agree - those are all possibilities, but some have put a lot of faith in that same report. Obviously it is open to interpretation.
My take - even if you factor out half - the net result still indicates areas that could be improved.
Yes I do feel eventually the CMI could be a great thing for home inspectors every where .
The NC is just a money making effort and a very large cost for some and a Continuing cost larger for those who do not join CAHPI .
The NC is just trying to blackmail Home Inspectors to JOIN CAHPI.
Not much comparison between the Two .
“you sayTake the personality BS out of it, Roy.”
Please tell me why I should take a non members complaints when I feel they are trying to destroy NACHI .
One interesting question does not make him a winner.
Roy Cooke A Happy NACHI member
Roy - respectfully, the Whistler (PDI Project) is old news. Life and the project has moved on, slowly, but at least its not all what you may think it was. Last I heard it was revised and in the testing stage. As Bill indicated that project took a back seat to National Certification. That does not mean its dead.
sort of strange you pick out one word to say any thing about
are you satisfied with the rest of the post?
Roy Cooke
Everyone thanx for the input. However I see that the question that I posted has been hijacked by more than one other topic.
Please start a new thread if you want to change the subject.
Steven
Jason and other NACHI detractors pose no threat to the association. In fact, they are essential to our growth.
You see, every challenge they publicly make on this message board (which is the most read board in the industry) gives us the opportunity to respond with a complete and truthful “infomercial”. It confounds them as to how, in spite of their criticisms, our membership continues to grow while other associations are stagnant or shrinking.
If they weren’t already there, we would have to invent them…just for the marketing opportunies that they provide our association. Why do you think that Nick granted them the privilege of posting?
Its interesting in itself how the CMI developed. Politely - Jason’s comments reflect a number of views already expressed on the “standards” applied from the first applications for CMI up to and including the tightening up of the “standards”. Those discussions pros and cons are all over the NACHI forum.
In comparison - the national certification project for Canada set the standards and has applied the standards consistently from the start. There was no free passes given - therefor no grandfathering, no send in your money and earn a quick credential. Each applicant had to provide a pretty thorough background to validate their education and experience. The Test Inspection portion provides a practical peer review of examining the on site field components - or practicum of the skills of home inspections. That being the inspection, benchmarking to the SOP, reporting both verbally and through the inspection report.
They may be similar, but at the current time in following the CMI they are not the same. Certainly they can and do share some components in common.
Sorry Steven - you are right - however, that seems to be fairly normal as part of SOP - standard operation procedure.