Dan, we don’t give any credit to any applicant for passing the NHIE. Every applicant must fulfill all of our requirements regardless. We also don’t give any credit for ASHI membership, or any association membership for that matter. We also don’t give credit for number of inspections performed, P.E. status, military status, age, code certification, college degrees, life experience, etc. Everyone has to fulfill www.nachi.org/membership.htm
I am aware that there are 30-second, onlline application diploma mill associations out there though, where all an applicant has to have to join is a valid credit card: http://www.homeinspector.org/join/application/default.aspx
Disgusting.
[quote=gromicko]
The NHIE has single handedly done more to destroy ASHI than anything I could ever dream up on my meanest day.quote]
That may be true, but the fact of the matter is, a statement was made that INACHI would be a part of this legislation, no where do I see this, the NHIE clearly is. It appears the promise you received from Rep Accavitti and the statements made at that time have been forgotten about. Once a board is in place, they have the power to approve or deny what testing method equals the NHIE in there mind. Until we, as an association, start going after licensing legislation like ASHI does through lobbing, having an equal say in the wording of regulations and having qualified people in place, INACHI’s voice will never be heard by the state’s representatives.
The NHIE is an exam, it is not a trade association and it is meaningless, everyone passes. Are you asking for a harder exam?
The fact is that we met numerous times with Rep Accavitti, I met with him in his office in MI, he spoke at our chapter meetings, he promised that there would be no mention of ASHI anywhere in the Bill, and he kept his promise, ASHI is out.
What else did you want from the man?
I have absolutely no clue as to what you are talking about with regard to our “voice.” Of ALL the legislation proposed in the past 5 years only 2 Bills have mentioned ASHI intitially (Washington and Georgia). BOTH STATES heard our “voice” and immediately deleted all references to ASHI. Poof… ASHI gone. Not one mention of ASHI anywhere in any of the legislation passed or proposed. Again, what more do you want?
Don’t worry about licensing boards, they can’t do anything but slightly raise or slightly lower the bar (above or below what the law requires), for ALL inspectors. They can make no rule that doesn’t apply to ALL inspectors, including themselves. I’d love it if licensing boards sought out tougher exams, but they won’t. States want minimum licensing requirements. So, everyone gets to pretend that they demonstrated competency by passing one, easy, minimum standard exam… once.
Yes I would, It has been said numerous times our exam is superior, why shouldn’t it be mentioned in this bill? besides, if tougher exams are in place, it may prevent no nothing inspectors from going into business and dirting up the place.
The fact is that we met numerous times with Rep Accavitti, I met with him in his office in MI, he spoke at our chapter meetings, he promised that there would be no mention of ASHI anywhere in the Bill, and he kept his promise, ASHI is out.
What else did you want from the man?
.
[/quote]
I have absolutely no clue as to what you are talking about with regard to our “voice.”.
[/quote]
References to our association would be good. ASHI may not be named, but we both know where the NHIE comes from. The ridiculous part is being able to buy NHIE answers off e-bay for $20.00
Of ALL the legislation proposed in the past 5 years only 2 Bills have mentioned ASHI intitially (Washington and Georgia). BOTH STATES heard our “voice” and immediately deleted all references to ASHI. Poof… ASHI gone. Not one mention of ASHI anywhere in any of the legislation passed or proposed. Again, what more do you want?
.
[/quote]
Don’t worry about licensing boards, they can’t do anything but slightly raise or slightly lower the bar (above or below what the law requires), for ALL inspectors…
[/quote]
They can also make decisions whether a particular exam meets state guidelines. INACHI has been fighting this since I became a member 5 years ago.
They can make no rule that doesn’t apply to ALL inspectors, including themselves. I’d love it if licensing boards sought out tougher exams, but they won’t. States want minimum licensing requirements. So, everyone gets to pretend that they demonstrated competency by passing one, easy, minimum standard exam… once.
Michael writes:
and
Well I hate to break the bad news to you but having been involved in licensing for many years, I can tell you that states want EASIER licensing exams… not harder.
Licensing is designed to set a MINIMUM standard. The states want to make sure that every applicant who desires a license… gets one easily. That is one of the reasons the number of inspectors nearly triples everywhere licensing is adopted.
So INACHI’s exam is above NHIE and has the potential of not being considered because of the low pass rate associated with taking our exam?
While I’ve not taken the FULL NHIE exam I did complete the sample test consisting of 50 questions and found it to be comparable to the InterNACHI exam. I’m sure there are those who have taken both exams in their entirety who could shine more light on the comparison between the two.
Have any of you taken both or at least the sample NHIE? Either way as far as I can see this bill does not take sides with one organization over another but like I said before I know for a fact ASHI is pushing for it. I’m not naive and understand people/organizations typically have a self preserving agenda. Having said that who can blame them for their efforts in this area? But what I do appreciate is how the bill says other testing will be accepted if it meets requirements. To me that means the bill is at least partially unbiased.
Look at this the other way around. What if InterNACHI was behind this bill? Would the members applaud this organization for it’s efforts to secure it’s name? After all isn’t it our goal to be THE organization associated with HI’s and to have such influence?
[quote=vsantos]
While I’ve not taken the FULL NHIE exam I did complete the sample test consisting of 50 questions and found it to be comparable to the InterNACHI exam. I’m sure there are those who have taken both exams in their entirety who could shine more light on the comparison between the two.
Have any of you taken both or at least the sample NHIE? Either way as far as I can see this bill does not take sides with one organization over another but like I said before I know for a fact ASHI is pushing for it. I’m not naive and understand people/organizations typically have a self preserving agenda. Having said that who can blame them for their efforts in this area? But what I do appreciate is how the bill says other testing will be accepted if it meets requirements. To me that means the bill is at least partially unbiased.
As I stated in regards to Nick’s posts, just because the word ASHI does not appear in this bill does not mean it’s not ASHI driven and in fact uses ASHI’s exam, period. As an association, we are continually battered by the likes of Dan Harris ond others because of or “useless entrance exam”. To get one state, whether it be Michigan, Ohio or who ever to recognize our exam to be equaled to NHIE would put this organization on a level playing field.
States want everyone who desires a license to get one. That is why they want MINIMUM standards and why http://exams.nachi.org/oe/stats.php won’t work for them. I certainly hope and pray that we never stoop so low as to develop or administer an exam equal to the NHIE or any other “everyone passes” exam.
If you want an inspector with greater competancy than a mere MINIMUM standard license you have to seek private certifications such as www.nachi.org/rigorous2006.htm
On another thread on this forum you will see that the reason attorney Joe Ferry is able to defend our members from lawsuits and the reason AIG, the sole undewriter of E&O insurance for our industry gives ONLY InterNACHI members big discounts is because we AREN’T a MINIMUM standard organization like those associations who use the “everyone passes” NHIE or states who set very low bars for licensing: www.nachi.org/requirementcomparison.htm
Being licensed is like being up to code… it is such a MINIMUM standard that anything less is outright illegal.
We averaged all the state licensing requirements in existance, printed them off, stacked them up, and took pictures of the stack… a state issued license is not much to brag about. http://www.nachi.org/requirementcomparison.htm … unless of course you are a 16 years old paper boy with a 10 speed bicycle, you probably don’t brag about your MINIMUM standard driver’s license either.
One of the main reasons we did “CERTIFIED MASTER INSPECTOR” www.certifiedmasterinspector.org is that consumers (the general public) assume you are licensed and operating legally! Marketing “I’m licensed” to consumers is one sure way to scare them off.
Anyway…
Michael writes:
I agree.
I should be fair…
While I’m picking on “cake walk” exams like the NHIE I should also point out that exams that are too difficult harm consumers as well by allowing a greater percentage of incompetent wild guessers to pass by freak chance.
Read www.nachi.org/examsthatharm.htm
Anyway… a good exam has to be just right to have any meaning.
I totally agree.
Nick, can you contact Rep Accevitti and ask him why? Why NHIE instead of our exam? Like you said it is superior. I feel that NACHI , the nation’s largest home inspection organization, should be setting the testing standards; not an organization that has no interst in protecting the consumer.
2 reasons why:
First, The NHIE is not a private trade association… it is an exam. The states do not want association membership to be required… and neither do I. That is why there is no mention of ASHI and won’t ever be. There exists only 2 states left (AL and PA) where membership in InterNACHI is required by the state. I’ve been fighting those 2 states for years to drop their association requirement. PA is about to. If the states used our exam like New York did, they’d have to mention InterNACHI. The states all want to be association-neutral.
Second, The NHIE is a MINIMUM standard “everyone passes” exam. The states want EVERYONE IN and licensed. So even though we have much better exams in place www.nachi.org/aboutexam.htm and www.nachi.org/cmi.htm, the states don’t want harder exams, the states want easier exams. Furthermore… SO DO THE INSPECTORS! I could easily insist that the state include on of InterNACHI’s or CMI’s harder exams…but given a choice to pay $225 to take an easy exam (like NHIE) for licensing… or… pay $225 to take a hard exam for licensing… what idiot is going to risk $225 on a harder exam? You?
The state wants everyone in… that’s why licensing nearly triples the number of licensed competitors you have… almost overnight.
I am firmly opposed to licensing in the state of Michigan. Yes, ASHI is behind the attempt to implement the requirements (I have received literature on it). Licensing (sp?) does not a great HI make. Instead much like any hoop you jump through it can discourage self-regulation of the industry. Instead, the state may require without notification, validity, and substantize arguement the change or removal of those very licensing requirements they created to improve the industry. Have you ever been to Michigan’s DMV. Or sat in a board of Education meeting. Politicians (and I am not a basher) can NEVER do the work that Nick and members of this organization can do which is help educate and regulate its members with self policing. If Congress and the State legislature can self-regulate why can’t the HI industry?
You see the NHIE mentioned in licensing bills because the NHIE has its people in the shadows pushing the licensing bills. They need licensing laws to make their test relevant. Without a state mandating it (or ASHI mandating it) no one takes it.
Thus, to fight the NHIE is also to fight licensing. They are part of the dark and dirty “coalitions” made up of ASHI members and their favored vendors who are working with the state real estate associations to pass laws that mandate attendance in their classes.
Let’s repeal these laws where they exist and fight them where ever they are being threatened.
Accavitti has obviously forgotten about your conversation with him. This is the latest report out of lansing in regards to financing the home inspection regulatory board.
According to the membership lists of the National Association of Home Inspectors
(NAHI) and the American Society of Home Inspectors (ASHI), there are currently
approximately 120 home inspectors active in Michigan. The bill, then, would generate at
most $240,000 in revenue initially from the $100 application fee and the $100 license fee.
(It is assumed that, initially, home inspectors would either be exempt from the
examination requirements or not be eligible to sit for the examination. The ASHI only
requires members to pass two examinations and conduct at least 50 inspections. The
NAHI certifies members who’ve completed at least 250 inspections, complete an
examination, and take continuing education courses. The NAHI membership lists 26
members as Certified Real Estate Inspectors. Members of the NAHI include regular
members who’ve completed at least 100 inspections and associate members who have
completed 40 hours of training or at least 20 inspections.)
Going forward, the bill provides that fees established within the Occupational Code
should bear a reasonable relation to the department’s costs of regulation and
administering the act, and provides that fees established under the act be adjusted
annually based on inflation. (This provision appears to conflict with itself in that an
annual adjustment for inflation may not result in the fee schedule bearing a reasonable
relationship to the department’s regulatory costs.) In this regard, the fee schedule
Analysis available at http://www.legislature.mi.gov HB 6088 Page 4 of 4
established in the bill for home inspectors would increase annually by the rate of
inflation, although license fees for other occupations regulated by the Occupational Code
are established by the State License Fee Act (1979 PA 152, MCL 338.2201 et seq.) or
separate licensure acts and, therefore, would not be affected by the bill. The bill would
create the Occupational Fund, which would receive money from any source under the
Occupational Code and the State License Fee Act. Directing revenue from the State
License Fee Act appears, on its face, to be an impermissible amendment by reference, as
the State License Fee Act includes a section providing for the disposition of fee revenue.
The complete report can be read HERE
Unless I’m bad at math, 120 inspectors at 200 ea. is only 24,000.00, not $ 240,000.00, which is why I’m betting the state will not pass licensing, no monies to be made, no monies available to implement/operate.:twisted:
</IMG>
After using all my fingers and toe’s, I agree with the $24,000.00. However I do question there only being 120 inspectors in Michigan, I get that many calls in a month from the competition checking my rates!!! 
That figure came from ASHI and NAHI. Remember…in their minds, if you do not belong to their “society”, you are not a real home inspector.
[quote=jbushart]
That figure came from ASHI and NAHI. Remember…in their minds, if you do not belong to their “society”, you are not a real home inspector./quote)
Understood, but more to the point as I have stated in other post’s, Nick claims Inachi will be considered in this bill, guess what, at this point, it’s not happening that way.