How the Client Fidelity Pledge Will Work

That is exactly what has been suggested in the past, which also eliminates the HIDDEN clause in a PIA. If a Client indicates they would like to partake of a vendors offerings, all they need do is sign a form that I would always have available in my briefcase, or electronically via email. No Client would lose out on a good deal. It is just their choice to OPT IN, as opposed to OPTING OUT. They are in control of their info at all times, until they authorize otherwise.

The pledge is what it is, Nick.

There is absolutely no legitimate reason for a contract with a home inspector to inspect a house to waive or to otherwise interfere with his client’s privacy or their past actions to limit themselves from unwanted solicitors.

There are only illegitimate reasons … and those inspectors who are making this promise are setting themselves apart from inspectors who include such language.

It’s very simple and those who feel that they must include such language in their contracts for the reason that you suggest should NOT TAKE THIS PLEDGE. No one is suggesting that they do.

So the pledge permits me to release my client’s info provided I procure permission on a separate piece of paper?

No, it does not.

The pledge says what it says.

CLIENT FIDELITY PLEDGE

My clients are my livelihood. I respect their rights to privacy and respect the fact that it is I who serve them. They have entrusted me with their inspection, including ancillary services that may not be a part of a standard inspection. As such, I believe I owe my clients an absolute right to know that their personal and private information is safe with me.

Therefore, I promise that I will not provide to any third party any personal or private information (to include contact information) about my client(s) or the property I have inspected, in exchange for compensation of any kind (including but not limited to products, services, incentives, rebates, barter, cash, condition for use/participation, or consideration) that I might receive, either directly or indirectly, from anyone.

I also promise that my inspection agreement will not include any clause(s) or language that could, in any way, be considered by anyone to waive any rights of privacy that my client might have, inclusive of any waiver of rights or restrictions relative to telephone contacts, e-mail communication, or solicitations from commercial and private enterprises of any type whatsoever.

The client has the right to know, ultimately, who they are entering into agreement with and how that may affect their rights to privacy. I stand by these principles. I therefore acknowledge that if I willfully violate this pledge, it may be construed as misuse and may also constitute false and misleading marketing or advertising. I take my clients rights to privacy quite seriously, and this is My Pledge.

This has nothing to do with you Nick.

You lowered the bar of what is considered ethical behavior when you refused to enforce the NACHI COE and then modified it to help promote vendors.

Others are trying to raise back up it.
*
Oh what a tangled web we weave when we first practice to deceive.* Walter Scott

Jim, if I post a hypothetical example, will you reveal your opinion as to whether or not I’ve violated the pledge… or will your response be simply

?

I don’t know. I would have to read your hypothetical example, first.

You have to understand, Nick … this is an individual act on the part of the inspector who … alone … must be accountable for his actions.

If he elects to take this pledge and he provides a client or a competitor with the opportunity or circumstance to report him for false advertisement due to his actions … he, alone, must answer for it.

This is not a club and it is definitely not for everyone. Only those inspectors who are absolutely certain that their business models comply with their published promise should participate in it. More is not necessarily “merrier”.

It is only for those who want to set themselves apart … not for those who want to provide private information about their clients to contractors and pretend that they don’t through some spin or interpretation.

Now, what is the question?

Nick when I went to the Boost your Inspections seminar in Toronto I was happy with all that was there, but since this time I have been getting e-mail after e-mail to join a group.
You do know who that group is. I was also asked by others what sets me apart from other Home Inspectors.
Guess what I say in return?
I am fully trusted because I have no interest in giving added features into my Home Inspection without my Clients asking first.
I will not add vendors to my list either as I will say you check who you should call.
All my Clients have full understanding what I can provide.
What is nice is when I get a phone call saying thanks for the advice to dig deeper to see who we can trust.
This goes for any work, warranty, alarms systems, engineers, electricians, plumbers, roof contractors ect ect.

Thanks. Here is the hypothetical:

Whereas my client expresses interest and concern about home security during the home inspection.

Whereas I know about the 5 free months or $200 donated to the consumer’s charity of choice offer that was made to all InterNACHI members and their clients here: http://www.nachi.org/forum/f32/new-alarm-systems-offer-secure-24-exclusive-international-association-certified-home-inspectors-member-offer-83533/

Whereas I alert my client about this value (as I should).

Whereas my client asks if I can arrange for the home security company to contact them.

Whereas I fulfill my client’s request and release his/her contact information to the security company.

Have I violated the pledge?

Maybe, just maybe there are inspectors in this organization that are sick and tired of the drama and the weakness shown by the two people running this organization. You can play games, spin, hypothesize or do whatever you want. This program does not have anything to do with NACHI, you, Chris or any vendor.

The changes that have been made by either you or Chris over the last six months have done nothing more than divide the membership, weaken this organization, taint the once strong COE, and drive many away from the message board as well as membership.

Off to NACBI.

LOL.

Stephen, the inspection industry must not have gotten the memo… I just realized that we exceeded our 10,000 North American members cap: www.nachi.org/nachi-stats.htm

Exactly.

Nick can and will deny it. He has no choice but to maintain the illusion.

Read only mode will become ever more common around here.:shock:

So, are you lying now or were you lying then?

Post#7

When we raised dues to $499/year on January 1, 2013… I thought that would do the job. I was wrong.

The problem (that I fully admit that I failed to predict) was that the drastic raise in dues to $499 gave staff more funding to develop and provide more free www.nachi.org/benefits.htm which in turn caused more inspectors to join/renew. My mistake.

Nick,

Try this for a tag line:

Driven by Principals, Separated by Character.

You can spin this however you’d like. It does not matter. You created the monster, then removed any chance this organization had to try and separate itself from the swirling cesspool which has been created.

InterNACHI has absolutely nothing to do with this Pledge. It wields no influence on it, and no should bother to engage you with reference to it. Pretzl Logic was the name of an album by Steely Dan. It should not be the mantra of the Founder of the worlds largest home inspector association.

Spin whatever tales you want, and justify your actions as a means to an end. The e-mails were pretty clear. You never really wanted to clamp down on anything. When things got close, you turned tail and ran for the hills.

Next time, try and separate yourself.

It is what helped make NACHI the best in its day. Contractors, lead brokers, telemarketers, alarm companies. They all play a specific role, none of which has any direct part of the home inspection process.

I do not endorse the changes which came through to the new COE. They were suggested by you, were never asked to be run by members of ESOP, recommendations were made, ready to be ratified, and then denied by you.

In reality, we were probably better off leaving it alone. It was crafted long ago by 6 individuals, after weeks of trial, deliberation, and refinement. The recent process followed none of that, but that’s okay too.

Driven by Principles, Separated by Character.
This is my tag line.
Is it applicable to InterNACHI?

Instead of concerning yourself with trying to poke holes in the Client Fidelity Pledge, why not concentrate on making a silk purse from a sow’s ear; the revised COE.

Nick it is simple you can’t because in the end whoever you promote is a vendor and they should not be allowed to promote the interest to make money on the MB.
Money is money no matter how they receive it.
Mike Holmes has done the same thing. He says he offers the best Inspectors in Canada.
Why because he has aligned himself with many vendors to say his Inspectors are better than other Inspectors.
If you look into what has happened since he started this Holmes Inspection Group you will clearly see this is not even close to the truth.
Thing is how do you stop a speeding train?
By removing the wheels that drive it. Vendors drive the wheels and the only way to get the vendors out is replace them with NEW WHEELS. InterNachi has everything we need to keep that train going smoothly without vendors.
Vendors can support InterNachi but not the other way around.

from 2007

Is “eventually” here yet?

It’s here.

And 1,000 of them, or more, are probably newbies that have yet to inspect one house. Which appear to be the new Nachi/Vendor strategy, market to rookies.

Wasn’t there at least 1,000 that signed up for Ben’s “How To Become A Home Inspector” webinar last night?

Most that did actively participate here are veteran inspectors, which is becoming fewer and fewer by the day.