I expect everyone to treat him respectfully. If you want to go off like a nut, start your own nutty thread please.
For technical reasons he may show up as an invisible member of NACHI. I expect him to post today sometime.
Wendy, this is a Canadian thread so don’t start anything.
Ray, this is a sane thread, so don’t go nuts.
Thank you in advance.
Welcome aboard Bill hope you come back long and often.
We can get irritating some times but no one holds a grudge .
Roy Cooke.
Cookie
Great idea Nick.
As Bill will no doubt be watching this thread may I be the first to ask some questions?
1- How many of the 5000 inspectors in Canada were directly involved or even indirectly involved in designing the National Certification programme?
2- How many of the Home Inspector Organizations in Canada were directly or indirectly involved in designing the National Certification programme?
3- Exactly how much money has been given to C.A.P.H.I. by the Federal Government to supply seed and development funding for the National Certification programme?
4- Why, despite numerous announcements that information was forthcoming have Canadian Inspectors been kept largely in the dark about the National Certification programme? ( recognizing that releasing information to a C.A.P.H.I. convention does not represent open dissemination of information as directed by the C.M.H.C.)
5- Why has C.A.P.H.I. gone out of it’s way to attempt to isolate and possibly even destroy the N.A.C.H.I. organization in Canada and do you personally and professionally recant any of the offending statements made by you and members of the C.A.P.H.I. organization?
6- Why is there no provision for ‘grandfathering’ in the National Certification programme?
Thank you for the opportunity to ask and have answered at least a few of the questions that have remained unanswered for so long.
I reserve the right to comment on any answers should they be provided.
Well, let’s start with how much $$$ he sucked us in for in speaking fees.
Zero
He started his thread, already. I hope you guys keep it civil.
If it isn’t civil it won’t happen. I’m not here to argue. I’m here to provide information.
I trust that everyone here will be civil, or start their own thread elsewhere.
Bill, please post.
Honestly Nick, I don’t care what Bill is being paid to appear at the convention. If it really is ‘zero’ then the bigger fool he! He should be paid something for his time being a target at a shooting gallery!:mrgreen:
Now back to my questions above . . . . .?
mmmmm
Bill
How do your feel about being presented with an Honourary Membership in NACHI?
BTW how do we know Bill is Bill, we are only told its Bill. After all the nonsense last week with Dave Bottoms going crazy posting under all those names, for all we know it could be Dave Bottoms.
Bill give us a sign that its you here.
Thanks.
Raymond:
I’m retired from active duty so anything, even honourary that I receive makes me feel good. Heck, I’m thrilled when I wake up in the mroning.
Bill Mullen
George:
I have a long history as a volunteer in this industry. I don’t believe I need 'battle pay. I have sppken to large alienated groups before and it doesn’t concern me. We’re all just people and more importantly, we’re all in the same business. There is always common ground.
Bill Mullen
Nick has invited me to say a few things on the forum to clarify a few misconceptions, add some factual information that seems to be misunderstood, and hopefully help people understand more about the program and how it will help the entire industry and all Canadian home inspectors.
I need to make it clear from the start that I do not intend to get into arguments with anyone about the program, the past, the present or the future. Everyone has an opinion, but dredging up the past will add nothing positive. However, I have a few ‘rules of engagement’ because I want to provide some positive information, not get mired down in innuendos and accusations based on past perceived shortcomings:
I am here as a private home inspector, and I will be giving my presentation at the convention as a private home inspector. I just happen to have a lot more information on one particular topic than almost anyone else, and I am happy to share it. Neither my presence here or at the convention is sponsored by CAHPI. They are aware of it, but have neither encouraged or discouraged it.
I will try to reply to any questions specific to the present and future National Certification Program that are asked politely and with respect.
I reserve the right (because I am an invited guest) to decide what topics to discuss. Any properly worded polite and respectful question about the certification program won’t be turned away. However, if you preface it with a negative diatribe against me, CAHPI or anyone else, don’t expect an answer.
I will not reply to any question that challenges my right to be here or which accuses me, my association or any other person of wrongdoing, misrepresentation, lies, or anything else derogatory.
I will not discuss what was said or done in the past. I believe in moving ahead. Remember, I am now retired from active CAHPI duty, so I really don’t have any agenda.
Nick and I have laid down our swords and we both believe that the Canadian home inspection industry can benefit greatly if we all try to get along. There are now and likely always will be differences in philosophies, but even dogs and cats can learn to live together.
If this part of the forum turns into a pissing match, or an outlet for unsubstantiated accusations and innuendos, I will leave and not bother saying anything until May.
We will have a one-strike rule. If you break any of the rules even once, I will have no future dialogue with you.
Now, before I go I want to respond to a couple of erroneous statements made recently.
Raymond Wand this morning said:
“When Bill was in Kingston, (the town, and not the Kingston Penn) he swore up and down that he was not compensated, and did it of his own free will. Well we all know it came out subsequently that Bill had in fact been compensated!”
The truth:
In early 2005 I gave a presentation to the Kingston NACHI group. I paid my own train transportation (about 250.), took two days off from my business and paid for most of my meals. My hosts provided a hotel room for one night and a supper. I hardly call that compensation. That trip cost me personally at least 1500.
Raymond Wand asked Nick how I was being compensated for my presentation. As Nick said, I did not ask for and was not offered anything…nothing. I am doing this because I believe in our industry and I want to help improve our overall well-being. I am pleased that Nick has now offered to comp my room, but I did not ask him for that. As a speaker, I believe I also get free registration, but I haven’t really had that confirmed.
I also heard that someone has suggested that I am being paid a fee of $ 10,000. While that would be wonderful, I have a bad agent and he didn’t negotiate very well. I will come home from Toronto with no more money than I go with.
Some have stated that people on my Canuck Forum are forever badmouthing NACHI and Nick, as well as a couple of other people. That is false. About a year ago we decided to take the high road and not speak badly about NACHI or Nick. For the most part, everyone has stuck to the agreement. Every once in a while someone slips, but they are quickly reminded about their error. In fact, about 20% of the Canuck Forum membership is made up of NACHI members.
It has been stated that OAHI controls the National Certification Program. Once again, false. OAHI is a provincial association and the program is national. Ontario had no more input into the program or control over it than any other province. In fact, decisions are made by the National Certification Authority, not the CAHPI Board or any provincial board.
It has been stated that the Pilot Project was unfair to non-CAHPI inspectors. As coordinator, I ensured that there was a fair representation of NACHI people and non-affiliates included. In fact, at least two NACHI members can confirm that I made special arrangements after the Pilot project started to include them just to ensure fairness. (We had a list of alternates in case anyone bowed out)
Roy Cooke has said many times that the Pilot Project was to be First come - First serve’. That was never the case. The confusion was caused by an error in a message sent out by the OAHI office announcing the project. When we at National saw the error, we had them change it promptly. While we appreciated Roy’s support for the project, he was unfortunately not among those chosen in the random selection process.
I am genuinely looking forward to helping people understand the details about the Certification Program. The rules, regulations and procedures have been tried and tested during the Pilot Project, and we are moving ahead now. Very shortly an invitation will go out to all Canadian Home Inspectors, and I will ensure that this forum receives everything at the same time as any other group.
Bill Mullen RHI
National Certificate Holder # NCA00001
Bill
How do you see non CAHPI members who are Certified being disciplined if they live in Ontario. Am I to believe that these members will be subject to OAHI brand of justice in light of the problems/concerns with due process being usurped and breaches of the by-laws and the Corporations act?
How can CAHPI and the National ensure OAHI is complying with its end of the bargain for those inspectors in Ontario, given the make up of the board of Directors of CAHPI, et ceteras.
Thanks Bill.
Nick on the above note from Bill, I would like to ask you Nick what this new relationship does to CMI? Seems that in my opinion the National and Certification is far superior with the notable exception that it has not been audited, then is CMI.
Does this mean Nick that you are abandoning the CMI in favour of National Certification?
Thanks
Raymond:
Please see # 3, 4, 5 & 7 in the 'Rules of Engagement.
Bill Mullen
Hi Raymond:
I’ll try to answer the question you posed to Nick my way and then I’m sure he’ll provide his twist.
The MCI and the National Certification Program can live in harmony just as the RHI and the NCP will. (Like cats and dogs as I mentioned earlier)
It is possible, however, to do an ‘equivalency’ review on the CMI and find out where they differ. If the MCI group wishes, we can advise them of the differences and they could adjust their requirements if they wished…and I stress that it is only if they wish. It’s a totally voluntary thing.
Bill Mullen
Bill…
Having read the first post’s from you in quite some time on this BB, I must admit I am looking forward to hearing more from you. I am not a full time inspector, I am a full-time contractor. When I was injured I looked at HI as a career choice for the future, not for the present; 40 inspections per year are plenty for me for now. With the amount of city folk moving to rural area’s for recreation and full time living, I will be very busy in the near future doing inspections and am looking forward to it.
I have followed everything posted on the National here and elsewhere, I have read every post by Mssr’s Wand, Cooke, Lawrence and others. While I think the jury is still out on the effectiveness of the National and while I am a feverent supporter of licensing in Canada, your willingness to impart information on this BB has helped me to alter my mind-set slightly in one major regard; I will do everything in my power to attend the Convention, whereas before I had little interest.
Thank-you for posting and I hope everything stays civil.
Nick
It might behoove Nachi to have CMI/CMI reviewed by CAHPI/National for equivalentency.
Thanks Bill that is very kind of you.
However there remain concerns about membership and discipline. This I feel these must be addressed because this dovetails with CAN P9, and OAHI jurisdictions. I do realize that this matter is beyond your control but do not believe it does not obsolves the National of ensuring full compliance with any regulatory requirement, and other legal concerns that that may arise.
Thanks Bill.