OK, Nick I and many other NACHI Inspectors have an important issue that we would all appreciate some of your infinite wisdom and opinions on.
This is an important topic as many if not the majority of your InterNACHI members are being called inferior and less of etc. an Inspector because they do not offer certain ancillary services such as Insurance to their clients.
Now please remember InterNACHI has a SOP as do all Licensed States. In no SOP ever has an Inspector been required to also be an insurance salesman and in most states I would believe that is not even legal but that is another topic altogether.
OK, so about a year ago I was considering offering warranties with my inspections, and every time I tried to get some real unbiased info on the boards it became another pissing match with certain vendors. So I then wrote to you and also to Ben for your professional and much valued opinions and guidance.
I was told by you and I believe even Marc Cohen, that for the most part that these warranties (including your own Mountain Warranty) were basically useless for the end client. But they did offer some use as a marketing tool for the Home Inspectors. For that valuable information I truly thank you as I do believe it has saved me some time and money and potentially from any legal issues…Thanks Again Nick
Now I personally am a huge fan of Bens for education, and for marketing you and your team cannot be touched by anyone. I have never seen you direct or recommend anything to your members that you yourself did not believe in or that could cause harm to them, their clients or their business.
That being said.
OK, so as of yesterday there is talk about a sewer insurance that can be offered to clients. Details have been asked for but not given as of yet.
In your opinion would such a thing like this be a good and prudent thing for NACHI inspectors to get involved in?
Do you personally feel that such a thing could possibly lead to some type of legal/liability issue for the inspector?
Would it be a violation of the COE for a vendor to publicly disparage another member or group of members as well as be Destructive to all that do not use this new unproven product, simply because they choose to not promote such an insurance policy and call them Inferior NACHI Inspectors?
Thank you very much Nick in your opinions and Guidance here. You professional and unbiased opinion as the Founder of InterNACHI is greatly appreciated by all of us.
In your opinion would such a thing like this be a good and prudent thing for NACHI inspectors to get involved in?
It could be okay, depending on the coverage, the inspector’s involvement, and how the “coverage” is presented
Do you personally feel that such a thing could possibly lead to some type of legal/liability issue for the inspector?
Possibly. If it is truly insurance, then the inspector’s role may be questioned when it comes to a sale.
Would it be a violation of the COE for a vendor to publicly disparage another member or group of members as well as be Destructive to all that do not use this new unproven product, simply because they choose to not promote such an insurance policy and call them Inferior NACHI Inspectors?
In my opinion, a resounding YES. But everyone knows that it is now up to Chris, as he administrates the Vendor COE
If it is “truly insurance” … the provider and the inspector will be licensed to sell insurance in the state where it is being offered.
If it is not “insurance” … it is simply another gimmick designed to look like something legitimate so that it can be used to dupe the public for financial gain.
Exactly Jim, and that is why in the other thread in the plumbing section I was trying to get some basic information. The spin was put on the questions as expected and no pertinent information was given, well other than the usual that any inspector that doesn’t use it is somehow inferior to those that do.
Amen… To complicate things even further, here in Florida, by law, to inspect a property with a septic system requires a license and the tank must be pumped. So… How would that work?
Yes. That’s why I’m interested in it. I love risk. I love risk because the cost of managing it is typically much less than the profit generated by assuming the risk. In the same post #1 that you asked these questions, you said about me:
Thank you, and I practice what I preach. My niche in my own contracting business that bears my name is one that specializes in projects that every other contractor won’t take because it requires putting expensive equipment and finances at risk. Now I’m not claiming to be foolish or unsafe. I manage my risks. And there are heavy costs in managing risk. Joe Burkeson mentioned septic systems in this thread. Let me use that as an example as I am a licensed installer. You can probably imagine the preparation I go through to get a crane on the side of the Rocky Mountains in order to drop septic tanks. But I then offset those costs many times over with the extra profit those projects command.
3. I leave that to Joe Farsetta to answer.
The basic information that you need to avoid it is simply this … Thornberry sells it and Nick promotes it. It’s simply another gimmick to exploit newbies as they pass through.
The basic information that you need to avoid it is simply this … Thornberry sells it and Nick promotes it. It’s simply another gimmick to exploit newbies as they pass through.
Newbies? Thats funny. The largest inspection company in the US will be including sewer warranties soon. They do 15, 000 home inspections per year. They also offer recallchek and home warranty.
They are a multi inspector firm that needs to harvest client data and resell it to lead brokers in order to cover their overhead and remain competitive with their inspection fees.
Do you know how ridiculous that sounds? Do you really think that’s why they would want to offer anything related to ISG? Inspection companies that use ISG products don’t get paid to do it. They offer recallchek and warranties to make an easier sell and to differentiate from competition. Not to mention that if the clients perceives a higher value, they’ll pay more for an inspection. Your above statement makes absolutely no sense.
Selling private information about home buyers to lead brokers has been a staple for multi-inspector firms for many years. These gimmicks are provided to them for free in exchange for private data.
You’re contradicting yourself. First you say they are getting paid, then you say they just get “gimmicks” as compensation. It sounds to me like you don’t really know what your talking about. Perhaps your just bitter at the person behind ISG, rather than the product itself.
