No…No reason for it. All NACHI committee’s are advisory only.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbushart
*
The COE is in writing.
What would a member who violated them expect from the association? What do members who sacrifice, in some cases, to comply with them expect from the association when others choose to ignore them?
Only our chairman can speak for the entire committee, and I will let him weigh in on our charter and the authority by which we act.
I will simply tell you that we are properly acting within the authority granted to us when we investigate a complaint made by the member of the public as to the duties of a member of our association to that member of the public, as it pertains to our code of ethics.
James,
Have you read the Charter that you have referenced?
What is the extent of the Authority and by whom was it granted?
If our chairman wishes to contribute to this discussion, he will explain by what authority we serve the membership. Only he can speak for the entire committee, as I have stated before.
Exactly, having a charter and set of rules on the web site would reflect best upon the membership and help to set standards. And all ethical members would appreciate this, and some unethical will not. James, can you provide that link for us?
Getting ready to exit stage left?
Let’s get back to the original question posed by a complaintant.
Even if the member was, indeed, a NACHI member, it would need to first be established that the inspector completely breeched the SOP and/or committed a fraudulent act. These are things established in a court of law, and not by ESOP. Once a determination has been made, the complaining party can file a formal complaint. However, if the NACHI member is found guilty of performing a negligent inspection, he/she may remain a NACHI member, as we are all entitled to make mistakes. The majority of complaints we receive against NACHI members are due to the fact that homeowners are under the false impression that we will either arbitrate/mediate for them, or will threaten the member with expulsion if they do not indemnify the client. Both assumptions are false.
As to Ray’s dribble regarding NACHI being on shaky legal ground for expelling a member, you are wrong. NACHI is a privately held corporation, and may do as it pleases. I dont know how you THINK things work, or WISH they worked, but these are FACTS. If NACHI expells a member for any reason, they are free to attempt to sue the corporation, and may actually get their yearly membership dues (or a pro-rated portion of them) returned, but the expulsion remains in effect until such time as it may be lifted. There need not be any formal by-law or procedure related to these actions, but they are perfectly legal and defensible. The COE states many things, and ESOPs charter is to modify/develop/interpret the applicability of provisions of both the COE and SOP, and help decide when and if someone violated the COE and what to do about it. Most of the time, a simple e-mail is all it takes to clear a matter up.
As to John B’s comment regarding whether or not ESOP is an advisory board, he is mistaken. We report solely to the NACHI Board of Directors,and are influenced by no other entity within the org. In order to take action on a matter, we do so with the approval of the Board, but we do not ADVISE them as to what actions will be taken. We inform, and absent of an objection, the action moves forward.
If John B’s comments are incorrect or mistaken, then so are Nick and Blaines full understanding of all NACHI committee’s.
The conversations and emails between the three of us concerning committees has never deviated from the point that they are indeed “advisory only”. Only makes sense…
Sorry Joe I disagree why if there is a concern should some one who has the authority at NACHI not get involved .
I believe instant action is the best .
Many complaints are from a misunderstanding but even if it is a problem ,many times instant action puts out the fire .
I do not Think the home Inspection industry should ignore a complaint and get much bad advertisement.
If and when it can not be dealt with expeditiously and quietly then let the chips fall where they may.
To ignore a wound leads to blood poision.
Many times the client just wants to talk to some one of authority.
All court cases should be avoided where possible
Sorry, John. You are absolutely mistaken. Your own role may be advisory, but that fact has nothing to do with our role.
Roy… So, the next time one of your clients complains to ESOP that you screwed them, and their roof is so bad that they have to spend $10,000 to fix it, we’ll get involved and order you to talk to the client to work things out. Better yet, we’ll “hear” the case, and order you to settle for $5000. What a great deal for everyone. If you dont, we’ll just throw you out of NACHI.
The premise is ridiculous. ESOP is not in place to work out complaints of negligent inspections. We have no authority beyond whether the COE has been violated. Performing a negligent inspection is not a violation of the COE. It is a matter settled through mediation, arbitration, or through the courts.
This association has NO BUSINESS interfering in a business transaction between two parties. Plus, there are 2 sides to every story. When a complaint is made against an inspector by a client, it is only an accusation. It could be a false one, at that. Unless, of course, you want us to decide something of a legal nature, and order members to make restitution. As everyone knows, we have no authority to do so.
I agree. Sounds advisory to me.
.
We both agree NACHI has no authority but I am sure you all so agree with me, a simple discussion can frequently smooth things over to every ones advantage and with no news paper bad publicity
Are you implying or stating that you have some type of control over the ESOP Committee, John? We all know that you do not.
In fact, there has been no involvement on your part regarding any of the committee’s activities in the past year or so.
Yes. sir. Hopefully, that step will be taken by the inspector.
As I understand from the original complaint. The thoroughness of the attic inspection is at issue. You might want to review the results of this member pole prior to drawing any negative conclusions about this one individual inspector. Looks as though 30% of the membership may have considered that portion of the attic and related damage inaccessible…
http://www.nachi.org/forum/showthread.php?t=4257
Again, a disagreement between the parties relating to a home inspection is a civil matter. It should not, does not and will not involve NACHI or any other HI organization.
Farsetta spewed this diddy…
Thats news to me that a private club can do as it pleases. I don’t know about state side but up here in Canada if memberships are sold the Corporations act applies, as does other legal rights and obligations. Again I repeat if Nachi is acting without any manner or form of by-law or policy, and the member is being disciplined the association is on shaky ground and leaves itself open to legal action if it is proven that due process was thrown out the window and actions were taken that could be best described as a dictatorship. I know and have first hand knowledge of this because this is exactly what one Ontario Association does and is doing.
Sorry you think anybody with an opinion or astute enough to ask hard questions is dribble.
Do you have a link so that Members may review the governing Charter of the COE Committee?
Mrs Jowers,
Have you researched the disclosure laws of your state to see what duties may have been neglected by the seller and/or his agent?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbushart
*The COE is in writing. *
What would a member who violated them expect from the association? What do members who sacrifice, in some cases, to comply with them expect from the association when others choose to ignore them?
*Only our chairman can speak for the entire committee, and I will let him weigh in on our charter and the authority by which we act. *
I will simply tell you that we are properly acting within the authority granted to us when we investigate a complaint made by the member of the public as to the duties of a member of our association to that member of the public, as it pertains to our code of ethics.
James,
Have you read the Charter that you have referenced?
What is the extent of the Authority and by whom was it granted?
I have read an excerpt of it, as it applies to our committee, I believe. It was only a sentence or two long.
As to your second question, I will (for a third time) refer you to the committee chairman who is the only member of our committee who is able to speak for the entire committee. I believe he has already answered your question in his post to John Bowman, but if you require clarification it will have to come from him.
If you have only read excerpts of an alleged Charter, how are you able to render opinions with regard to COE inquiries if the basis for review is Incomplete and/or Unavailable to you?