… an enterprise promoted to NACHI members by Nathan Thornberry, who claimed to manage its marketing and other services, was sold by him as being a state compliant entity whereby a home inspector could purchase engineering services and “resell” them to clients and contractors for profit.
While claiming that the services were compliant in “46 states”, Thornberry would not say which states the services were noncompliant. Instead, he invited NACHI members to sign up for the service and then, at that time, inquire as to its legitimacy in their state.
He presented the service as being legitimate and safe for home inspectors to use … and ridiculed those who stated otherwise.
According to the State of South Carolina, the following cease and desist order has been issued against “My Engineer on Call”.
So … you maintain that, even though this service is not licensed in the state from which it operates and has been ordered to cease and desist providing its services and its advertisement of its services to citizens within the state in which it operates … it is still compliant in every other state. Right?
You encourage NACHI members to continue to use it. Right?
So … you are refusing to cease and desist with the services referred to in the order in South Carolina and you continue insist that you are compliant, in spite of the order to cease and desist? Is that what you are saying?
I noticed that your site still continues to advertise its offerings of engineering services after having been ordered to cease and desist. Are you defying the order? Just curious.
When the director of the licensing board had contacted me in response to a message I left for her to call me about the services provided by MEOC and its compliance with South Carolina statutes … she had already researched the site, its content and its licensing status. She informed me … without me providing her with any information … that the business was not licensed and was not allowed to provide any of the services that it was advertising, according to her observation. She told me that a “cease and desist” order would be issued, and it was. She sent me a copy of it, which I have posted here.
Whatever “misinformation” this guy is referring to could only have been provided by a member of the engineering board who did the investigation before even returning my call. It sure seems to me that the state went through a whole lot of trouble and expense just to collect an “$80.00 fee”, assuming he is telling the truth about that.
Perhaps he will let us know when the cease and desist order has been lifted and the company can resume doing business … a business that he has been promoting and representing as being compliant for over a year, now.
I repeat my often stated recommendation to any inspector who might be considering using this or any other service offered by vendors that relate to regulated services (sale of client personal information, warranties, engineering services, etc) to check with their own local agencies and authorities to see if they are compliant with the rules. I recommend that you NOT rely upon message board posts, private telephone call assurances or other sources that are NOT provided by those who regulate such activities in your state.
The MEOC website is its own worst enemy, for within its pages is a clear description of the services offered and of the training provided. Within those descriptions is the information needed for any licensing board to interpret things to be the practice of professional engineering.
Once that is decided, the issue of who is providing the service arises: a company or an individual. Both may require licensure within the state providing the service.
Finally, the laws within the state will dictate who may provide the service. With an inspector being the prime, the issue really comes to light. Here in NY, the practice would be prohibited. There is no way around it.
I was informed by the authorities in South Carolina that they have been promised that the language you are referring to in the MEOC website will be changed to reflect services that were not inconsistent with their law. In a telephone conversation with the administrator of the board, I was advised that they would not issue a license for the services described on the website and the subsequent report of an agreement for modifications to the site are consistent with that conversation.
The lies and misrepresentations that Thornberry has published concerning “misinformation” allegedly provided to South Carolina and a simple “$80.00 fee” in order to be compliant is not consistent with the email that I received, this morning. But then, he has been lying for months that the service is compliant, in the first place. Why should he start telling the truth about it, now?
I checked with Missouri and was told that this service is not compliant with my state’s laws governing engineering services and you have checked with yours to discover the same for New York.
The state in which this company is based has also ruled that it is not compliant with their state laws and a “cease and desist” order was issued to forbid them, under threat of civil and criminal prosecution, to stop advertising their services in South Carolina.
Thus far, no one has reported that the authorities in their state has approved a service whereby home inspectors purchase engineering solutions and services from an engineer and “resell” it to their clients and contractors.
Business is great, thanks, and the recent storms and a few house fires have been pretty much “promoting my business”](http://publicadjustermissouri.com/) for me, unfortunately. Every time an insurance company denies or underpays a claim, a public adjuster has a new client.
As to the unethical behavior of NACHI members and vendors … they cast a shadow over the entire association (and its members) no matter what state they operate in. Condoning unethical behavior with silence, turning away from it while passing out candy to real estate salesmen, has never been my style.
A NACHI member has been called out by the State of South Carolina for promoting a service that is not compliant with that state’s laws and a NACHI vendor, one who has already been found guilty of multiple ethical violations, continues to promote this service.
It is important to note that the unethical vendor who promoted this unlicensed service was publishing that this service was, indeed, “100% compliant” when it obviously was not. He makes similar claims of other services he offers, as well.
When NACHI had an ethical standard, inspectors who conducted their business outside of the law were subject to being sanctioned, but the ethical standards were set aside several months ago. Inspectors are now backed by the association as they conduct business that is inconsistent with state laws and regulations.
Inspectors who sell their clients personal information to third parties and are secretly receiving sales commissions when their clients buy products without disclosing this financial benefit to their clients … are also being encouraged to participate in the resale of engineering services that are being sold to them in violation of the statutes within the very state from which the business is operated.
Now, while NACHI may no longer have enforceable standards for the ethical conduct of its members … it does not necessarily mean that members who conduct their businesses in an ethical manner should blindly accept and participate, by their silence, in the same decay.
Public forums such as these help the public to know and to understand that there are home inspectors and vendors who will exploit them while operating outside of the state rules that are in place to protect them.
They can recognize that there are certain services being offered by home inspectors that are noncompliant with state laws and that there are certain products and services that are used by some home inspectors to reveal their private information to third parties for the inspector’s personal financial gain.
They should know that the engineering services being “resold” to them may have come from an entity that was ordered by its state to “cease and desist” from providing that service.
They should also know that not ALL home inspectors participate and/or condone such behavior as this … even if it happens “20 states away”.
Some of us who have publicly objected to this unethical conduct have been called “child molesters”, “pedophiles”, “morons”, “failures” and “losers” by the unethical vendor who wants to continue his scam … even in spite of state orders to cease and desist from providing the service … in his personal effort to silence us. While this additional unethical conduct brings his character to the light of day for the public to observe … his personal attacks in his effort to “kill the messenger” have only intensified the efforts of those who oppose his unethical conduct.
While having abandoned its ethical standards … NACHI still provides for its members the ability and opportunity to openly discuss concerns with the products, services and activities of its vendors. That is what this thread is about. In light of the fact that the ethical standards have been officially set aside by NACHI, discussions of this nature have now become increasingly important so that new members or members of the public do not blindly accept that … simply because NACHI endorses it … that something is necessarily legal or beneficial to the public.
When and if the providers of this service change their business model (and their website) to be in compliance with the state law of South Carolina and are eligible to apply for the proper license so that they may begin to legitimately operate their business, inspectors can evaluate the services that they are allowed to offer, at that time, to see if they might benefit by providing them.
Perhaps inspectors will forgive the vendor promoting these services as having been “100% compliant” at the time they were not, and consider trusting him with their business reputations and more.
By then, I predict that certain state entities will be taking issue with home inspectors who are licensed in their state and who are privately and secretly selling the private information of home buyers to vendors and who are being paid kickbacks from the vendors when the home buyers make future purchases … without disclosing those financial arrangements to their home buying clients. This is already in violation of some state laws and will likely be addressed in future state laws, as well.