Originally Posted By: gromicko This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
To:
The NACHI inspector shall not perform or offer to perform, for an additional fee, any repairs or associated services to structure on which the inspector or inspector's company has prepared a home inspection report, for a period of 12 months. This provision shall not include services to components and/or systems which are not included in the NACHI standards of practice.
This change is designed to protect consumers.
NACHI's Code of Ethics obstacle course is being modified now to reflect this change.
Originally Posted By: jfarsetta This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Thanks, Nick…
The Ethics and Standards of Practice Committee really wrestled with this one. Any time the COE is modified, it involves long and heated discussions. This change, while subtle, is designed to protect the consumer, and not be unneccessarily restrictive to those who offer ancillary services, beyond the Standards of Practice.
I believe it was well thought out, and long overdue.
Bravo, ESOP Committee, for another job well done.
-- Joe Farsetta
Illigitimi Non Carborundum
"Dont let the bastards grind you down..."
Originally Posted By: syared This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
The standards got toughened?
The old standard stated NO work on the property anywhere. The new standard allows for SOME work on the property, how does that make us a disinterested third party. It seems like a not so fine line line has been created, the standards of practice are loose enough to allow someone to do a wide variety of work on the house.
Originally Posted By: dfrend This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
I wasn’t involved with this, but the membership was asked for input. Remember that the committee cannot make everyone happy. Damned if they do, damned if they do not. It is inlie with most other associations I have seen. Remember that some inspectors have other businesses. Yes some are even handymen.
And it was tightened, a lot.
Three simple words made it probably more than twice as restrictive as the old one. "Shall not perform". Technically before you could perform repair, just not OFFER to perform them. Now, you cannot perform OR offer to perform. This means if you do run a handyman business, your HI clients that call you not knowing you are the same guy that runs the HI company cannot have you perform the repairs. This could be bad for those in small areas.
Originally Posted By: Scotty Lee This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Would this have not been better: Inspectors shall not repair, replace, or upgrade, for compensation, systems or components covered by NACHI Standards of Practice, for one year after the inspection.
Originally Posted By: dfrend This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Scotty, why not join and then you could have had your input? Members discussed this. Like I said, there were those for and against. Input was sought and the committee made their decision.
Originally Posted By: jpeck This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Scotty Lee wrote:
Would this have not been better: Inspectors shall not repair, replace, or upgrade, for compensation, systems or components covered by NACHI Standards of Practice, for one year after the inspection.
-------------------------------------------
Scotty,
No.
Think about it a minute.
Let's say you miss something, something that you are licensed or otherwise legally able to correct, your statement says that you cannot go back and make those repairs. You would have to hire a contractor to do so.
That is because you did not include "for compensation", which, by the way, is what the NACHI Ethics should say instead of "for a fee".
Originally Posted By: Scotty Lee This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Scotty Lee wrote:
Would this have not been better: Inspectors shall not repair, replace, or upgrade, for compensation, systems or components covered by NACHI Standards of Practice, for one year after the inspection.
-------------------------------------------
Jerry,
Go back and read what I said. I did say "for compensation"
This would allow you to go back and make a repair without a fee.
Originally Posted By: Scotty Lee This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
dfrend wrote:
Scotty, why not join and then you could have had your input? Members discussed this. Like I said, there were those for and against. Input was sought and the committee made their decision.
Thank you for the offer, but I can not and will not join NACHI until changes are made starting at the top. Unfortunately NACHI has some talented members who care about the home inspection industry, but the outward appearance and antics of Nick the Owner of NACHI have started to tarnish many that are associated with NACHI. I wish it was not so, but it is. Many of the quickly formed chapters are floundering and several have a battle going on for who is in charge of the chapter or who's idea it was to start it first! Why not make a requirement of say 10 members are needed before a chapter can be started.
As for the change in the code of ethics; Why did the committee make the decision instead of putting it before the membership for a vote and comments on the proposed change. This sounds like something another association would do.
I wish NACHI could pull it all together. I am rethinking(in favor of going) about going to your convention, but I would like to know if it will happen if you only have 100 or less person attend and if I pay and it does not happen will I receive a refund. It is less than 90 days away and I count less than 20 persons who say they are going based on the post on the website. Do you have any numbers on how many have registered so far?
I will be in the shadows watching and offering an opinion when it looks like a voice of reason is needed.
I just wish we could all get along as none of us are any better than the other person.
Originally Posted By: dfrend This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Like Dave said, there are already more than 100 paid and booked in rooms.
Quote:
As for the change in the code of ethics; Why did the committee make the decision instead of putting it before the membership for a vote and comments on the proposed change.
They did put it in front of the membership. As for voting, I don't know about the other associations, but most organizations have COMMITTEES for a reason: to make decisions on behalf of the membership. Does every ASHI member vote on COE changes? I'd be surprised. Regardless, they asked the membership for input and then decided as a committee, exactly what a committee should do. For that I commend them. I may or may not agree with the change, but they acted in the memberships best interest and with our input.
Like I said, they can't make every member happy, but your criticism of them is unwarranted, especially since you have no idea WHAT they did.
