Canadians have a big advantage, they have 50 little countries to look at when writing inspection regulation. Or better yet, Provincial governments should have me attend their home inspector licensing meetings (like Alberta did) so that I can help them keep them from making a mess of things.
Texas consumers have almost no innovation or choice when seeking a home inspector. The reporting sytems are all state mandated and unified. The fee structure for Texas inspectors is the absolute lowest in the nation. And guess what? Are you sitting down for this one? It takes 440 hours of state mandated schooling to get a home inspector license in Texas… the highest requirements in all the world.
Nick we have an over abundance of inspectors now. The fact is that in Ontario the pie has been getting smaller and smaller, because we have private course givers, college courses, and self taught hang out a shingle type inspectors.
Au contraire, Nachi is not a membership driven body, it is not democratic, we don’t get to elect our leaders they are appointed. From what I have seen in that regard its been a big joke and disappointment.
No one has come up with an alternative. Nachi can’t offer assurances anymore than that which CAHPI/OAHI has tried to assure.
This is why its absolutely critical for all home inspectors to become involved, make your voice heard and lobby for what is right for the industry.
I agree, it is why neither NACHI or myself has ever once proposed any sort of NACHI involvement in managing licensing programs anywhere. Where the state has, without our consent, inserted NACHI into legislation, like they did in my home state of PA where they made membership in NACHI mandatory by law for every inspector in the state from inspection 101 to 250… we have fought to have that requirement reversed.
NACHI is a private trade association that offers inspectors (licensed or not) the tools they need to succeed. We want to keep our identity.
What we do offer to governments considering licensing is our free advice… take it for what it is worth.
"One problem with your scenario. Your little club is just that, it remains to be seen if it flourishes, and chances are with provincial licencing it will remove CAHPI and NCA from the equation. Even though the National program may be used as the benchmark it will not be CAHPI/National responsibility to oversee or enforce the provisions"
Thanks Ray for explaining that, but I am afraid that Bill isn’t bright enough to see the difference.
"It then gets worse… home inspection schools open up on every corner and start pumping out licensed inspectors by the thousands. It gets worse… no one earning any money means no one can afford to be excellent, which harms consumers even further. Then often a jackass board starts approving themseleves and their buddies as the only continuing education providers, which makes things even worse for inspectors and consumers. Then hungry, the peer reviewers start coming down hard on everyone to try to hang on to their industry. Then the credential-only association that pushed for it all realizes no one is joining because the government is now offering the real credential…"
Thanks for explaining that Nick but I am afraid that Bill isn’t bright enough to understand this either. ( Next time he is in town kissing your back side you might want to give him a crash course)
It takes a hell of a lot more training than that to become any decent tradesman like gas fitter, carpenter, electrician, plumber, mason, oil burner mechanic, HVAC tech…things we all have to know about to be an HI. Maybe Texas has got the training aspect right!!
WOW go away for a couple of days and all hell breaks loose.
As I said on another thread there are a lot of rumours out there. The facts will be presented on Jan 21 2008.
All HI’s are invited and I ask that each inspector bring his favorite realtor. CAHPI members welcome.
Brian;
We are generalists doing a ‘visual inspection’, not code enforcement officers, electricians, plumbers, engineers etc. etc. etc. Hold yourself out to the level of a ‘specialist’ and you will be judged accordingly. I think that was Nick’s point.
You are foaming at the mouth again. You show how little you actually know, as you don’t know squat about the industry outside your little realm of your myopic backyard.
Ray, I don’t have any where enough experience in this subject to argue. But, any sort of Goverment involvement, makes me uncomfortable. The fact that CMHC would simply endorse the other association, and make no mention of alternatives, makes me see what they are capable of.
A person would think with all their ability to find things they could just be A little more up to date then 2004. This is the Group who is making a lot of decisions that could effect all of us . I wish they would give out some information .
This is like CAHPI ( Bill Mullen & Claude Lawrenson ) lots of sizzle by lacking information to help us make an informed decision …Cookie
Investigating Claims Against Home and Property Inspectors
63555
One of the fastest growing sectors of the housing industry is the home/property inspector (HPIs). HPIs face complaints and/or legal action from clients who contend there are building defects not included in the HPI’s report. Errors and omissions insurance is increasingly expensive or even unavailable, forcing some HPIs to operate without insurance. Most claims are for foundation defects such as cracks and water infiltration. The national association that represents HPIs is working to resolve these challenges. Consumers need to be aware of the insurance issues.
CMHC I suspect only gets one report as to the progress from CAHPI, and what they want CMHC to know. CMHC only appears to be a promoter and supporter, but is not an oversite body and likely hasn’t required and checks and balances or any form of accounting, relying as I mentioned on CAHPI reports only. Certainly CAHPI is not open to outside review, and as such that leaves opportunities that may be taken for granted.
My opinions of course. As always I am open to correction.
CMHC had a representative at every meeting of the CHIBO committees and every meeting of the NCA before, during and shortly after the Pilot Project. Even now they have a person on the Certification Council. They also have reviewed and audited the NCA financial books and meeting minutes as was required for funding over the years.
Checks and balances were very much in place every day. Even now the NCA makes all information available to CMHC and HRSDC to show good faith and demonstrate the fairness and transparency of the project.
I’m not trying to be argumentative, just trying to provide some clarification.
I think that the reality of CMHC involvement is that some of the ‘voices’ in the industry convinced a back office drone that there was a huge problem with home inspectors and that caused a subsequent throwing of up to two million tax payer dollars at the problem with the fervent hope that it would go away. Now with all that money invested they can hardly turn away from the cess pool they have created. So they publicly support this flawed and unfair programme because to do otherwise would be an admission that they had once again spent OUR money unwisely on a problem that did and does not exist.
And worse, it now appears that the hogs are going back to the trough for yet more money unless we all complain to our elected representatives.