Fraudulent inspections

Today I came across a NACHI member conducting fraudulent wind mitigation inspections. I went into an attic and his card was on the rafter along with five or six marker lines. It was dated Feburary of this year. The lines were no more than 4 inches apart. I am sure he took a picture of this and sent it in as 6 inch nailing. This roof was put on prior to 1992 (still had staples) and the nailing pattern was 12 inches, which could be seen by shiners in the attic. Most of the house had impact windows, but some did not. I would love to see this report. It is however a moot point, because that buyer did not purchase the property.

He also did a 4 point inspection. I wonder if he knew the roof needed to be replaced, the fuses will need to be replaced, the water heater was 26 years old, and there was a leak in the master bathroom, among other things.

He is obviously new to Florida. His web site has a sample report of a home in North or South Carolina (I forget which).

Just curious how you fellow inspectors would handle this. This is flat out wrong and fraud. Ethically, I have an obligation to turn him into the state (I have no idea if he has a license - it was not listed on his web site). Or at the least, should’nt Citizens be notified. This is the type of inspector who is ruining business for all of us by issuing these types of reports.

Feedback is greatly appreciated.

You seem to be soliciting support for reporting on a competitor. Do what you think must do.

NACHI has no standards (SOP) for wind mits and the code of ethics does not apply to any ancillary service, so nobody here really gives a darn.

WSiegel writes:

How can you be “sure” of that?

Oh, so you really aren’t sure.

Exactly, you are just “wondering.”

You don’t say.

That much is clear.

I thought you said you hadn’t seen his report but would love to. Maybe I’m just sleepy. Oh wait, here is your quote again:

'll go you one better Bill:
Question 3 was marked “A”.

Of course, the inspection wasn’t performed by the person named on the report. The company is “borrowing” a contractor and using his license.

This as well as the home inspection will be on my website soon as the people have authorized me to use it.
The owner of the inspection company is a member of NACHI and will be reported to other agencies, with a little more power than this one.

The Buyers are being threatened by the Realtors that if they back out after getting my report, they will be sued for breach of contract.

An anonymous complaint to the city for the illegal addition, no permits pulled for the kitchen, bathrooms, a/c installation, or window installation should straighten some things out for them.

In other professions, like my wife’s, if you are aware of someone doing something improper, you are required to report it to the appropriate authorities.

And the main problem here, is the bolded portion of your last statement.


I expected no less from you. I would post the picture but 1) I am no longer a member and cannot do so, and 2) then everyone would know his name and I am not ready to reveal that.

If his card is there, it has a date on it, and it has wind mit and 4-point written on it, I am sure that he sent that picture in. That is downright fraud.

Thank you Nick. You helped me make up my mind. Once again, you are a stand up guy in this profession who really doesnt care what goes on out there so long as your number are good and you make money.

I’ve seen shiners that were 18" apart, but when I looked at some of the hip rafters they were 3" apart or 6" apart. I’ve seen staple shiners and throught the roof deck was stapled, only to look further and find that the roof had been re-nailed with 8d nails.

I won’t turn in a competitor for doing a “fraudulent” wind mit, I’ll simply try to do mine correctly. Remember, fraudlent means with intent. The inspector may simply have made a mistake, been having a bad day or something else. If he left his card in the rafters, I doubt he was trying to perpetuate a fraud. Without seeing his report, we have no idea what was on it, and turning him in could be “fraudulent”.:wink:


Sorry, I disagree. This inspector just opened up the hatch and took out a marker and made some marks. He either does not know what he is doing or does not care. People like that need to be turned in, or at least investigated. It is people like him who are ruining our profession and driving pricing into the ground.

How about you ever so popular C.O.E.?

It is a joke. Nachi NEVER does squat to scumbags like this.

It reminds me of the scumbag that was putting my signature and info on his completely wrong wind mits. I had all the proof I needed plus the person who he gave it to at the insurance agency and nothing was done.

Looks like another crooked inspector strikes again.


do not waste your effort. You have better things to do.

No one at Nachi, the OIR or anywhere else gives a rats ***. I cannot believe our initials and the address on every page and the asinine photo requirements have not solved all these problems. :roll:

Blaine correctly writes:

Let me type this again…slowly…

Ancillary services are not covered by the SOP or the code of ethics. If they were, you would not see NACHI mold inspectors charging to remove it…NACHI radon inspectors charging to remediate it … and so on.

(Repeat that to yourself, three times)

If you have a state law that forbids what you saw…then you live up to your wife’s expectations and report the offender to your state. Not NACHI.

Or, you could man up and call the guy, yourself.

Just don’t expect action to be taken against a member based upon an anonymous message board post by a non-member regarding an alleged action that does not fall under the NACHI SOP or code of ethics.

Sounds reasonable and worthy of doubt, good call.

I would have to see the report complete with pictures and signature before reaching conclusions. As a side note, I would reject any report with a picture of only 5-6 marks on one truss to verify a roof deck attachment.

What is this picture for?

I don’t expect any action to be take by this org.
I guess to some, the code of ethics only applies if you are performing a home inspection!

Why on Earth would I call the guy? By the way, we don’t even know who the “guy” is. The person who performed the inspection I am referring to isn’t the one named on the report. That is fraud.

Speaking of which, we had a little meeting today at the home I inspected which the photo above was from. Seems the homeowner not only remodeled the home himself, without any permits, he also put on a new flat roof, without permits as well.

And apparently, not only did this inspector not know the difference between plywood and plank lumber, he also doesn’t know that in order to identify a roof to wall connection, you actually need a wall under the roof for it to be connected to!

That picture was from the other inspectors wm where he checks the box for plywood nailed every six inches.

Okay…one more time…:roll:

Not just “to some”…but to ALL … the code of ethics ONLY applies when a member is marketing and/or performing a home inspection. Ancillary services, such as those described in the first post, are not covered under the code of ethics. Period.

Read it again. You are almost getting it.

Personally, I think they should be covered but those who make these decisions do not agree.

And that is the problem.

I would think, that according to Citizens, if one has to be a NACHI inspector to perform these inspections, then said inspector would be expected to follow the code of ethics for that organization. The organization has been approved to conduct these inspections, not the person. The person merely has to pay a fee to belong to the organization.

That now brings me to another point. I as Mr homeowner, look for a NACHI inspector to do my wind mit. He does it wrong. I may now have a lawsuit not only against the homeowner and NACHI. You can argue all you want on this one, but if it gets before a judge, it will be his decision.

Thats the picture from the other inspector’s report? The sheathing doesnt necessarily have to be plywood nailed every 6" to qualify as attachment-A. There are other acceptable scenarios which would be equal to 55 psf uplift, no?

C-Or-Dimensional lumber/tongue and groove decking with a minimum of 2 nails per board-