I offer the following for information only. Like you Bill, I am not interestied in becoming mired in a protracted argument. If you find any of the following to be argumentative rest assured that this was not my intention. Rather I and many others feel that C.A.P.H.I. needs to hear from independent inspectors who are not part of either C.A.P.H.I. or O.A.H.I.
Originally Posted by gluck 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?
I don’t have hard numbers because this has been a ten year project. I would think there would be at least 200 directly involved at various times and several hundred more indirectly. 200 INSPECTORS OUT OF 5000 IS HARDLY A REPRESENTATIVE NUMBER. THIS CERTAINLY INDICATES THAT C.A.P.H.I. HAS NOT INVOLVED THE MAJORITY OF INSPECTORS IN THE DECISIONS THAT MAY AFFECT THEIR FUTURES..
2- How many of the Home Inspector Organizations in Canada were directly or indirectly involved in designing the National Certification programme?
Not sure of the exact number, but every Home Inspection Association of record was asked to participate when the project began. “HOME INSPECTION ASSOCIATION OF RECORD” INDICATES THAT AGAIN MOST OR AT LEAST MANY HOME INSPECTION ORGANIZATIONS WERE NOT CONTACTED. BECAUSE OF THE EARLY START DATE OF THE WHOLE PROCESS, A DATE THAT PREDATES THE EXPLOSIVE GROWTH IN NUMBERS OF HOME INSPECTORS WE HAVE SEEN OVER THE LAST FEW YEARS, A VAST MAJORITY OF INSPECTORS HAVE AND STILL ARE NOT INVOLVED IN THE PROCESS. THE INPUT FROM THESE INSPECTORS SHOULD HAVE BEEN INCLUDED IN THE DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PROGRAMME AND WAS NOT. THIS IS NOBODY’S FAULT OF COURSE BUT REMAINS A MAJOR WEAKNESS IN THE NATIONAL.
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?
Overall government funding likely reached about a million dollars. (I haven’t got the figures right in front of me) This amount was at least matched by contributions from CAHPI members and others. However, CAHPI received very little actually until near the end. CAHPI did not exist until 2002 when it was formed from the amalgamation and agreements of several smaller Canadian organizations. CAHPI is the result of the National Initiative, not the creator. I APPLAUD THE C.A.P.H.I. MEMBERS WHO MATCHED FEDERAL FUNDS. THAT IS AN ACT OF FAITH AND SHOULD BE APPRECIATED BY ALL. THESE CONTRIBUTION HAVE GIVEN THE C.A.P.H.I. MEMBERS A VOICE IN THE PROCESS THAT HAS BEEN DENIED TO THOSE OUTSIDE THE PROCESS. AS TAX PAYERS, EVERY INSPECTOR HAS A STAKE IN THE PROCESS AND THEIR TAX DOLLARS SHOULD ALSO ‘BUY’ THEM A VOICE. UNFORTUNATELY MOST HAVE BEEN EXCLUDED.
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.)
See # 4, 5 & 7 in the ‘Rules of Engagement’
THE TERM “RULES OF ENGAGEMENT” CERTAINLY SAYS A LOT ABOUT THE MIND SET. WE HAD HOPED THAT YOU WOULD BE A LITTLE MORE OPEN MINDED. THAT BEING SAID, YOU ARE ON RECORD AS HAVING MADE NUMEROUS STATEMENTS ABOUT N.A.C.H.I. AND THE MEMBERSHIP THAT WERE DEROGATORY AT BEST. PLEASE FORGIVE US FOR HAVING LONG MEMORIES.
UNFORTUNATELY YOUR RULES PRETTY WELL GUARANTEE THAT ANY MEANINGFUL DISCUSSION IS IMPOSSIBLE.
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?
That’s your one strike, but since you might not have yet read the rules of engagement, I’ll ignore it…once. BILL, PLEASE DON’T THREATEN ME. YOU ARE ON RECORD. ARE WE SMOKING THE PEACE PIPE OR ARE YOU GOING TO HIDE BEHIND "THE RULES OF ENGAGEMENT’?
6- Why is there no provision for ‘grandfathering’ in the National Certification programme?
The purpose of the National Certification Program was to identify Home Inspectors who possess the knowledge and ability to perform home inspections to meet a certain criteria. Grandfathering does not address that. Some may argue that after ten or fifteen years a person must be doing inspections correctly. The TIPR process (Test Inspection with Peer Review) allows us to evaluate the abilities of inspectors in the field. Everyone must pass at least one TIPR. During the Pilot Project, we actually has some very experience inspectors fail. They were doing inspections for many years, but doing them wrong.
The process does not force experienced inspectors to necessarily go back to school. The TIPR examiners identify where a person falls short and he is then encouraged to upgrade a bit in that area.
The system ensures that a person must actually know how do do a Home Inspection before he/she gets their National Certificate. ANY INSPECTOR WHO HAS BEEN IN THE BUSINESS FOR YEARS AND HAS CONDUCTED HUNDREDS ( THOUSANDS?) OF INSPECTIONS ALREADY KNOWS THE “RIGHT WAY”. PERHAPS IT IS THIS SEEMING INSOLENCE THAT SHOWS MOST CLEARLY WHY SO MANY INSPECTORS ARE SHUNNING THE PROCESS. SOME WOULD CALL IT GAUL. OTHERS WOULD SAY THAT THOSE WHO ARE RUNNING THE NATIONAL CANNOT KNOW WHAT “THE RIGHT WAY” ACTUALLY IS BEFORE THEY CONSULT A MUCH LARGER AND MORE REPRESENTATIVE NUMBER OF INSPECTORS. SADLY THIS HAS NOT HAPPENED.
Thank you for the opportunity to ask and have answered at least a few of the questions that have remained unanswered for so long.
With all due respect, these and many more questions have been answered in the past. “WITH ALL DUE RESPECT” HAD ANY OF THESE QUESTIONS BEEN ANSWERED CLEARLY AND CONCISELY, I WOULD NOT BE ASKING THEM NOW. THEY HAVEN’T. I AM.
I reserve the right to comment on any answers should they be provided
