NACHI proposes to adopt CAHPI NCP

It has come to my attention that NACHI is proposing to adopt CAHPI’s national certification program for Canadian HI’s. NACHI will administer the program for all NACHI members. Those that qualify will earn the CMI designation. Current CMI’s will be grandfathered.
The proposed fee for application and review will be $350.00 for all NACHI members. The program review committee will be made up of Current CMI’s resident in Canada. If the program is successful in Canada it will be adopted across North Amercia.
Since the current CMI qualifications are more stringent then the NCP, those requirements where NCP falls short will be raised to meet the CMI standard.
If the responce to this proposal is positive it will be implimented.:nachi:
Any truth to this?

Vern :
You must be trying to give Bill Mullen a heart attack!!!:wink: :wink:

Things aren’t good in OAHI there is much infighting, turf wars, ego’s (big ones) and denial of rights which are determined by a few in OAHI, even the OAHI lawyer is aware of grave concerns, questions as to other concerns remain unanswered and certainly OAHI has fallen short in advertising, bookkeeping, hidden funds, the membership registry, etceteras. Its amazing what the members are willing to tolerate, their insurance program is in limbo.

I can see many members in OAHI and CAHPI jumping ship and going this route. Due to cost alone!

I think Bill Mullen would even cross the floor because he too is looking for a better alternative!

I would love to know where this came from. While I do not see control of the National Certification Program being turned over to NACHI I would welcome the event. This is what we are all concerned about. The National being able to dictate the terms of acceptance is in my view the very thing that will hold it back for all NACHI members. I do not believe the impartiality of the National where it pertains to our association. This is evidenced by the costs involved for CAHPI members versus NACHI members. The difference is astonishing. The argument that the costs already incurred by CAHPI are, in my view, unfounded. I do not believe that CAHPI has funded the majority of the costs for the study and that we as tax payers have paid far more that our share. It was biased from the start and will continue to be as long as the National is controlled by CAHPI. I know that there will be a view that the NATIONAL is not controlled by CAHPI but that is ludicrous. The NATIONAL knows which side the butter is on and who put it there. That the National will be turned over to NACHI to govern and test NACHI members may well happen and I would welcome it.That current CMI members would be grandfathered will not fly. That was what the big fuss was about in the beginning, the grandfathering of RHI’s. I am glad to see that did not happen and I will be dissappointed to see it happen in the future. I agree that the CMI designation is harder to achieve than both RHI and the National and would gladly see the qualifications raised to that level. What bothers me about the National is that they can decide that your education is not sufficient for their qualifications and we have no recourse. It appears that the judgment is final. No return of fee paid and come back when you have what they consider to be that proper education. In other terms take the Carson Dunlop course, spend the roughly $10,000 to get what they consider to be the appropriate amount of education and go through the process again. I can’t seem to get an answer as to what they are willing to accept as a qualified school only that you have to submit the classes taken, pay the fee and wait for the answer. This is what is wrong with the process.
If Nachi were to be able to administer the process for NACHI members it would greatly aid in the process and I welcome the prospect.
I have always thought that the whole issue was a way to increase the membership roles of CAHPI and now this appears to be the case. Do the math and you will see that it is less expensive to join CAHPI and then get accredited, you will definitely save money. Now try to tell me this was not the idea in the first place. NACHI has enough strength to cause CAHPI to be nervous and the NATIONAL is the old guard circling the wagons.
My rant for today

Larry Grandfathering will have to used because there is no other way around it. Its just to complicated and time consuming as evidenced by CAHPI to do otherwise. I think grandfathering was part and parcel of the problem right from the get go. Grandfathering will be a bonus and should be used as it will be a big carrot for senior members. Grandfathering can be established to have minimum requirements. Just because someone is an inspector does not make them qualified. But I think a combination of educations and experience and length in biz do.

Whats wrong with the CAHPI and the National is that its been filled with appointments and rewards by those who created it. Its their sandbox and they will play with the sand as they see fit, others have been excluded for a reason. The reason things appear to be changing is because people are speaking up and seeing that all is not as portrayed. No one to blame but the people who have mismanaged the program from the get go. Do you not think there is a big conflict of interest with the President of the National also beinb VP of CD and providing a course at Seneca or in comparison the Registrar being an owner of ISS and courses at Humber?

Stake your territory out now so you can benefit later has been the motto of CAHPI. Conflicts is the name of the game…

As I have stated numerous times it all comes down to numbers. CAHPI cannot make this fly without adequate interest from outside its own backyard. The price for admission into the National has no where to go but down. Its just not appetizing at the present cost. Someone screwed up with marketing and pricing.

Vern, I hope that you are right. This would be the best outcome for all inspectors in Canada. The unification of the National and NACHI would finally put an end to all the bickering and infighting and at the same time remove the good ol’ boys and their special interests from the equation.

Grandfathering is a logical and desired outcome. To tell an inspector who has been successfully practicing in the field for years that he is not a qualified inspector is just plain stupid. These inspectors have proven their qualifications in the free market. The complaint that an inspector can practice for years without providing an acceptable and compliant report is ridiculous . That is what a nationally recognized S.O.P. is for and NACHI has the best in the country. If the inspector was not providing an acceptable and compliant report then he would not be in the business for all those years. This is not physics.

Logically, the acceptance of C.M.I’s as nationally qualified inspectors, or perhaps the acceptance of nationally qualified inspectors as C.M.I’s would be the next step in unifying the home inspection filed in this country.


Your points go back to the Ohio Study wherein it was found that less than 2 percent of inspections where found to be inferior.

I am sorry Grandfathering is very practical. Any inspector who has been around for awhile or acts as an expert witness against contractors and other inspectors cannot be considered to be inferior. Grandfathering is not liked because its to expedient and does not allow for the association to charge for review. The lack of grandfathering is just another excuse to make money for reviewing those that are truly qualified.

How do you regulate grandfathering? Do all current inspectors get grandfathered? All applicants should have to demonstrate the ability to perform the functions of a qualified inspector and be able to produce a report that will be concise and be able to discuss their findings with a client. I have heard of more than one RHI who is no longer in the inspection field. The cause is not the issue here but the fact that he or she is no longer practicing. So, who gets grandfathered? All current RHI’s and CMI’s? The problem with the CMI program was that initially all you had to do was pay the fee and you were a CMI. Thankfully that has changed. Still, all you have to do is file an affidavit stating your qualifications and pay the fee.
I believe that the NATIONAL is a good idea, in theory. In practice it is a farce. There is an inspector in this area that has stated he wasted his money taking the Carson Dunlop course. He told an acquaintance of mine to not waste the time or money and just hang up your shingle and call yourself a home inspector. Do we need that kind of representation in the industry? He may be a good inspector but to actively condone anyone just calling themselves a home inspector without proper training and background is not wise and he has just lowered the bar for the rest of us. What we are trying to do is raise the bar. If he is a member of any association he is not following the code of ethics. As an industry we do not need that kind of inspector.
The point is that grandfathering is not a good idea as it will lead to animosity. Prove your worth and the designation means something.

Larry good questions.

  1. Grandfathering would only include current practicing members.

  2. Those already in competing associations already have met stringent entry requirements which would be well established and documented.

  3. Criteria should be established as with other organizations/associations which have used grandfathering.

As to your other concerns; yes they require definition and a policy to ensure a minimal standard is required.

Again I will rebutt the 2% figure. Page 68 of the Ohio - Home Inspector Licensure Study states “Ohio homeowners rate the home inspector they dealt with 7.7 on a scale of 1 to 10 on accuracy of the inspection report, while real estate agents from licensing survey states rated home inspectors 8.3 for report accuracy”. Thats 77% or 83% - or a far distance from 98%.

That at least to me - is a good enough reason why grandfathering can be misleading and unfair.

Larry your post is right on target. I could not agree with you more. Prove your worth - or prove you can walk the walk and talk the talk, or write it up as a professional.

I completed the NCP last year as one of the BATA applicants NC#00025. I am a journeyman carpenter with over 20 years experience in residential construction and have numerous certifications and diplomas that compliment my home inspection business. My working and educational background was thoroughly checked, as well as my inspections that had been completed to date. At no time did I ever think that I should be able to grandfather the NCP due to life experience, and was more than happy to exercise my ability as a competant home inspector by successfully completing the NCP. I do not qualify as a CMI because the total of my home inspections and continuing education credits does not add up to 1000 hours as of yet. What about my 4 year apprenticeship as a carpenter and thousands of hours of on the job work experience? Doesn’t this qualify me as a CMI? Can’t I jump on the ol’ grandfather bandwagon, too?

I do not believe in the grandfather clause for two important reasons.
(1) A working apprenticeship, so to speak, must be completed in order to ascertain the proper knowledge and practical qualifications.
(2) This knowledge and skill must be demonstrated to a group of your peers for evaluation in order to determine a pre-conceived competence level.
Any one can say they are more than qualified to be a home inspector. But they should be have to prove it before a panel of their peers. There are too many so called “Certified” individuals parading around as home inspectors that have no business doing so. This is why our industry’s image has suffered over the years. The only way to improve our image as home inspectors is for everyone, including you Raymond, to demonstrate their competence in the field. If the “grandfathers” in our industry are outraged, then it only confirms everyone’s suspicions that they are only afraid of not making the grade. Prove your competence and all suspicions will be laid to rest.


Brett Bernier
What is your feeling on the

( In appreciation of your initial application, the National Certification Authority is offering a discount of $50 off the current fee of $500 + GST (CAHPI affiliated) or $1100 + GST (unaffiliated) if you re-apply before March 15, 2007. Only those individuals who applied for the Pilot Project will be eligible for this discount. ) and those who did not apply originally will pay the full $1,166:00.
Of course those who where part of the original group paid $107;00.

Roy Cooke

Good post, congrats on your accomplishment of earning your NC.

As an educator I though that your COE called for you to present all sides of the issue.
The other side of the above quote is that **the numbers were the same before and after licensing. **
**Licensing did not change the quality of inspections. ](*,) **
**[size=2]The number was 1.3% dissatisfaction or 98.7% satification for the all survey **[/size]
[size=2]questions before and after licensing.[/size]

The study also showed a marked increase in the number of inspectors three years after the law was passed. This equates to less experience thus more mistakes hence lower quality of inspection. dud!

In some of the states that implemented licensing they called for the inspector to have been in the business for three years and had completed a minimum number of inspections.

Its a moot point considering we have already heard about one National Cert holder not being able to ascertain copper from Aluminum.

Just because one is a National Certificate holder does not equate with competence. One cannot deny experience. Look up “grandfathering provisions” on Google.

The arguements thus far in disfavour of grandparenting are not compelling, since CAHPI/National has no legislation and is completely voluntary, and the fact that OAHI in Ontario has quasi legislation.


Who says you’re qualified? A non legislated, self governing body, thats who! If no one joins CAHPI and partakes your Certification will be meaningless ole boy.
Besides I have already proved my competence within OAHI and ASHI.

Grandfathering is not about being freightened about making the grade, they are two seperate issues in my humble opinion.

Don’t get me wrong Grandfathering should not be a cake walk. Yes there have to be limits.


  1. Applying members must already be in an Association for a minimum 6 months.

  2. College accreditied Home Inspection course graduates would be grandfathered

  3. Grandparenting is only open for a six month period, after that any applicant must be college accredited, or be a fully accredited within another self regulating association.

This is our chance to make things right and to do it right. We need everyones input, we do not need dictorial processes, nor do we need to make it an exclusive club. We all can see what the short comings have been lets build it right and they will come. We need to operate this matter under democratic principals and under by-laws.

Vern we are talking about two very different issues here. My post stated and is taken directly from the report -

I would tend to believe that accuracy of the inspection report and the survey results from the homeowner and also the real estate agent is a major factor is the credibility of the profession.

I fail to see how that is distorting the facts, when it is taken from the same report and clearly stated on page 68.