Originally Posted By: Nick Gromicko This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Oh, I see. You mean you weigh it heavily? I agree. Perhaps we should raise it’s multiplier. Some will argue that a home inspector and a building code official have little relevance… but I agree with you.
Originally Posted By: rzimmerman1 This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Number of years in business? 1 x 1 = 1
Full Membership in NACHI? Add 25
Licensed as a home inspector by state or province? Add 10
Passed NACHI?s Inspector Exam? (with score of 75 to 90 enter 1): Add 20
Completed NACHI?s Ethics Obstacle Course? Add 15
Number of battery operated inspection meters owned? 5 X 2 = 10
Use a pre-inspection agreement? Add 12
Use computer software of any type to generate your report? Add 5
Earned a high school diploma? Add 2
Have a website dedicated to your home inspection business? Add 2
A required score of 100 to be a certified Master Inspector. The above totals to 102 and these are very basic. I bet every NACHI member could meet the above or so close that all would be CMI's
No weight = No value = 
valued quote from James Bushart
"An association of members will stick together and be there for each other, whether they are directly affected or not."
Originally Posted By: pdacey This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
#s 18, 26 and 30 have no place being on the list. They have nothing to do with being a master of anything.
CMI, should not be attainable for everyone. The requirements should be difficult, very difficult. Only about 20-30% of inspectors should be able to to qualify for it. If it's within reach for everyone, it has no meaning or value.
To become a master in any of the trades requires years of experience and training. This should be no different.
I've been inspecting for 2 years. I easily qualify for CMI based on this check list. I am no master by any means.
Originally Posted By: Blaine Wiley This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
of 2500 fee paid inspections performed.
A master inspector should need to be very proficient in the nuts and bolts of inspecting and in the communication of his/her findings. I see little or nothing about the communication area.
As a non member, I have to ask how can you make a discussion out of your new marketing gimmick ? If you want to be recognized as a creditable HI org start will valid qualifications,verify current and enforce current requirements prior to attempting to be superior to others.The president and a couple members of your org answered it best.
PS: If you want additional requirements to make a new superior inspector qualification, another suggestion would be, require all NACHI members read www.nonachi.blogspot.com The LARGEST Home Inspector Blog in the world.
Originally Posted By: wjung This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Nick,
with all due respect, I think the evaluation for CMI status, as it stands, is laughable and will do nothing more then confuse the consumer. However, more importantly it will provide more fodder for the NACHI detractors. I was born and raised in Germany took my initial apprenteship as heating and sheetmetal technician over there and I must say, to attain a MASTERS designation is a lot tougher then what you are proposing and thereby in fact has meaning once an individual has attained that level. In order to attain a masters level in my past trade I would have had to complete my journeyman’s license (4 years) that included minimum 1 day per week in trade school, then spent time working as a journeyman (2 years), then continue for another period of time (2-3 years) including more weekly trade school and a final master piece of work for my masters license. As you can see in order to attain that level in a trade I would have had to spend 8 - 9 years of training and working in the trade. To just start adding up a few numbers with whatever given multiplier is ridiculous and as I stated laughable. In my opinion, Blain is thinking a little more on the right track, if you where to take your system, remove a number of point that make no sense or have no bearing on an individuals ability, add a requirement of a minimum of 2500 inspection and a minimum of ten (10) years full time in the business you might be looking a lot better. However that would also most likely cut the CMI designation down to only about 20% - 30% of the membership, which it should do for this type of designation. However, by doing so you may now have elevated its meaning and status way beyond what is currently being offered. If you were to then federally trademark and/or license that designation so it can only be attained through NACHI you may in fact attract a lot more individual to this association in order to attain such a designation.
Originally Posted By: hgordon This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Not sure that I would state minimum to be 2500 inspections AND 5 years in the biz…after all there are thos areas in the country that inspectors will only do 200 in two years because that is all the market has.
Why not something like this:
Minimum
2,000 Inspections, or
5 years in the business, and
A minimum of 40hr paid HI School attendance, or
2 years related and verifiable industry experience, and
Be a member FULL Member of NACHI in good standing, and
Originally Posted By: wjung This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Blain,
if an individual works at doing 250 inspection a years (which may not be sufficient income for some) it would take them ten years to fulfill the 2500 required fee paid inspection. That however would make the five year doing fee paid inspection redundant, so making it a minimum 8 - 10 years may be more in line.
As for writing a proctored CMI exam, there are individuals that are exceptional at writing tests and others who couldn't save their lives if they had to write one. Therefore the exam, although a valid point may become redundant.
Defect recognition may be measured by an examination of let's say 200 photos of known defects that have to be identified within a given time limit this exam should also be proctored. You could also accept current defect recognition courses and exams that have been administered/proctored by other associations.
Communication skills can be evaluated by applicant members submitting their reports for peer review, which would have to meet a set standard of communication, but yet be written in a manner so that the client (layperson) can understand your recommendations.
As for providing guaranties that every CMI is exceptional I believe is impossible since even the best inspectors have bad days and none of us are perfect. I feel that the only assurance that can be provided is that CMI's have met standards that no other designation is offering.
Best regards
Wolf
