New NACHI licensing in New Hampshire... all NACHI.

New legislation requires every inspector to abide by NACHI’s Standards of Practice and only NACHI’s.

Also, first to license commercial inspectos.

Also, outlaws unethical practice of working on their own inspections.

Also, outlaws unethical practice of bribing REALTORs with sleazy preferred vendor schemes.

Also, limits liability of an inspection to 1 year from date performed.

What is the present status of this bill, Nick?

The lawyers at the State only finished their work on it 20 minutes before the meeting and the legislators brought 40 copies in its final draft to the meeting. It gets a number assigned to it in the morning.

Congratulations, Frank.

I know of the sacrifice and effort that you have put behind this bill in the face of strong opposition from the ASHI contingency in your (and surrounding) state(s). Godspeed.


Thank you for your kind words. Your help and support mean a lot to me.

Here is what I posted on another thread.


Greetings to All!

I am happy to say that one year of long hard work finally saw fruition. Tonight I finally had the chance to present a completed copy of the New Hampshire Building Inspector’s Licensing law to our members.

I have happy to say that we had NACHI, ASHI, NAHI, NIBI and “independent members” from a three {3} states attend our meeting.

We had the distinct honor to have three {3} State Representatives, and our founder Nick Gromicko come to our meeting and have and open and frank “Questions & Answer” session that was opened to the floor.

All I can say is that the State Representatives were professional, knowledgeable, and unbiased in the frank and honest comments about this bill. After all was said and done they all agreed that this Bill was well written, unbiased, and that it was going to help the consumer while not hurting any inspector.
Ø The last comment made was “We are going to proceed with this bill.” Nick was invited to come back to New Hampshire and to attend the first public hearing on this bill.
Ø I am happy to say that Nick accepted the State Representatives invitation.

The first and only time that I had seen Nick was at a seminar in 2003. At that time I thought that he was a “Good Speaker.”
Tonight he changed my mind. All I can say is that in four years Nick has changed. Tonight he was not a “Good Speaker.” Tonight Nick was dynamic, articulate and certainly handled himself in a top notch and professional manner.
Ø In other words……… “Nick Blew the Room Away!”

Our founder handled each and every question with ease, and professionalism. His answers were clear, to the point, informative and oft times humorous! I guess that the three {3} state crowd NACHI, ASHI, NAHI, NIBI, liked what he had to say because the spontaneous applause was heartfelt and often.

Our three State Representatives were all pleased with the meeting.

I am proud to say that I am a member of NACHI!

All I can say is……Thank You Nick! You really made a difference. We all look forward to seeing you at the next Public Hearing!

1st Picture.
Seated: From Left to right. Nick Gromicko, State Representative Gene Charron, State Representative Angeline Kopka.
Standing Frank Carrio State Chapter President, State Representative Benjamin Baroody

2nd picture:
Standing from left to right: Nick Gromicko, Frank Carrio, State Representative, Benjamin Baroody
Seated fro left to right: State Representatives Gene Charron and Angeline Kopka.
Attached Thumbnails](“")]("”)

Frank, tell us of the other Chapter members who worked on this legislation.

Every member and even non members that requested a copy of the proposed bill was sent a copy for review and for comment.

Written and or verbal Comments, and suggestions were received from;
Marcus Hutnick, Chapter VP
John Hastings, Chapter Secretary
Members: Henry Finzel Jr., Ron Racine, Robert Porkney, Peter Russell, Scott Falvey, Chris McDonald, Dave Dyson, Dave Hamel, Ron Carter, Mike Bussing, Greg Quack, Daniel S. Gagne, Robert LeQuire, Hank Vanderbeek, Don Belmont, Roger Smith, Steve Keaney, Michael Demers, Robert Suess, Rick Silva, Steve Billingham, Bruce Simmons, David Paul. ASPRIE member, Dean Gordon ASHI Member Daryl Justham, and many others.

Plus…State Representatives: Benjamin Baroody, Angiline Kopka, Gene Charron,

I for one, am glad to see licencing for commercial inspection in this bill.

What can I say but,“WAY COOL!”.

This is NACHI! :cool:

I’m always confused by the comments regarding NAHI Inspectors doing work on their own inspections. As I’ve said probably a hundred times on various sites - in 28 years I’ve known of many home inspectors in ALL of the associations (including ASHI & NACHI) that had various types of repair companies, maintenance companies, warranty companies, radon mitigation, mold remediation, termite treatment, etc, etc all sorts and types of companies that perform work on houses they have inspected.

Most of those are set up as a 3rd party corporation - kind of like ASHI did with the EBPHI to get the NHIE up and rolling. Some of the biggest home inspector companies in LICENSED states have these arrangements.

I find NAHI’s view upfront, honest & refreshing. IF ALL PARTIES ARE INFORMED, and ALL PARTIES ARE WILLING - then and only then would that be OK under NAHI’s SOP. As far as preferred vendor arrangement - last week I was reviewing several RE contracts in the state of Kansas in light of the pending legislation and discovered MOST of the Realtors Contracts had a provision in there that said the buyer and seller agreed to the fact that the Realtor, Broker, etc may have financial arrangements with the lender, title company, insurance company, inspectors, etc. In short it was part of most of the state RE Contracts. If its OK for all the others … ???

When you say “Nick blew the room away” do you mean that he got on his knees and blew the room away?..LOL

Dan, let me help you get unconfused.

Inspectors are the only impartial parties to real estate transactions.

Any argument that says inspectors should be allowed to trick consumers is silly. That they should be permitted to sell what appears on the surface to be an impartially generated inspection report but then ONLY AFTER the consumer hires the inspector and ONLY AFTER the report is generated and ONLY AFTER the consumer pays the unethical inspector, and only AFTER it is too late to hire a truly impartial inspector… unethical members are permitted to pull the ol’ bait and switch and say… “Oh, by the way… I can do the roofing job for you because I just happen to be a roofer as well as an inspector.” And this B.S. about “gettign other bids” and “proper disclosure” is just that… B.S. Proper disclosure, in anything, has to occur BEFORE the consumer makes the purchase decision about what inspector to hire… not AFTER! Disclosing that your service lacked impartiality AFTER the consumer hires you is NOT as disclosure… it is a bait and switch scam.

Aside from a lack of ethics regarding harming consumers… it also harms our profession. Orkin and Terminix do WDO inspections for free… why? Because they want the repair work. A large contractor in Southern California offers free home inspections too… why? Because they want the repair work. Do you want to compete with free? I don’t.

As home inspectors… impartiality is our prime virtue. Without it, we don’t have a profession at all.

Luckily for me, our industry, and consumers… NACHI, ASHI, several other associations, nearly every franchise, several attorneys general, Civil Justice, and many state inspector licensing boards all agree, and prohibit the very disgusting practices that other association’s Code of Ethics permits.

It is embarrassing to me and our profession to sit and watch State legislators being forced to have to make laws to prohibit some Code of Ethics… but I’m pleased to add the State of New Hampshire to the long list of the unconfused. I’m going to outlaw this bait and switch repair service-generating scam and their REALTOR bribing preferred vendor scheme… across the entire globe… one licensing board/state/province/country at a time.

BTW… I even have supporters at Scumbag NAHI themselves who agree with all of us. Scumbag NAHI’s largest chapter, located in Pennsylvania, wrote a letter in opposition to Scumbag NAHI’s board secretly changing their Code of Ethics to permit preferred vendor schemes.

I understand that there may be another one of their own chapters about to do the same.

And finally, I have one of the world’s most renowned business ethics experts saying right on NACHI TV a lot worse than I do about this. I’m going to play it for everyone in the world as part of an online homebuyer/REALTOR Public Service Announcement.

Maybe I’m not saying it right. So let me try one more time tactfully. I cut my teeth on we don’t repair what we inspect 28 years ago in the infancy of home inspection. I don’t even want to fix things because of the liability. When I find a significant defect, and refer a client to a specialist for further evaluation or repair - I have directed the liability away from me.

I don’t want to get back in the liability loop by offering to repair it myself.

However, in todays busy world I can’t imagine going to a dentist for a dental check-up and being told I have a painful abscess, **BUT **because of his dental ethics he has to send me to another dentist to fix my problem. OR in the middle of July having the HVAC Tech out and having him tell me my A/C unit is grounded and the compressor needs replacement, BUT he can’t repair it because of the NEW A/C standards that prevent him working on anything he has checked for 12 months afterwards - and he will need to refer me to someone else, and I will have to be hot and sweatty for another week. OR the Pest Control Company, Radon Mitigation Company, Mold Remediator, etc that during a check-up finds Termites, High Radon, or Stachy B BUT can’t address the problem because of their SOP.

What you say sounds good **BUT, **in all of these cases a client, seller, realtor has a choice - they can ignore the 1st persons findings and do nothing; get a 2nd opinion; use the 1st person to correct the problem; or get someone else to correct the problem. Repair is not considered unethical at all.

Why then is the HI the only person/trade considered unethical in that situation? Number 2 as I’ve clearly stated before - there are now and always have been members of NACHI, ASHI, NAHI, CREIA, TAREI, some Franchisee Groups, etc that own 3rd Party property repair companies, pest control companies, radon or mold mitigation companies, warranty companies that are simply a different CORPORATION or COMPANY and perform services on houses they’ve inspected. This exists even in licensed states where SOP’s say the inspector can’t … because they are a different 3rd party company from the HI company.

There are also states I’m told where the right to work laws in some way don’t prevent this. Now back to my original statement. I was trying to be tactful by saying I’m confused - **I’m not confused in any way, shape or form about this issue. **I personally don’t consider it any kind of a conflict of interest for a client to ask an inspector to repair something if the inspector: (a) has the skill; (b) is willing to take on the extra liability; © if before closing it would require the sellers OK also; (d) if done after closing its nobodies business except the client and inspector; and (e) in some areas may prevent the agent from shuffling a naive buyer to a sleazy handyman.

In my opinion if the home inspector isn’t ethical enough to do what most other professions can do - he or she ought to be in another line of work.

I hope this clarifies my position statement for all.

Good question Dan… I’ll answer it, though I think it over obvious to all. At least it is over obvious to state legislators, attorneys general, NACHI, ASHI, Civil Justice, home inspector licensing boards, inspection franchises and consumers everywhere.

I have no problem with HVAC contractors or dentists. I hire them both. When I hire them to look at my compressor or my teeth I know UPFRONT that they make a living doing repair work. They aren’t being deceptive and as a consumer, I don’t feel deceived. They call themselves what they are and I know what they are.

However this is something quite different and unconscionable: An association that permits its members to deceive consumers and pretend that they are home inspectors offering impartial inspections… when in fact their members aren’t generating impartial inspections (ones that suffer no conflict of interest)? Their members are secret contractors using my industry to generate work and falsely calling themselves inspectors instead of contractors. The contractor doesn’t disclose this secret and doesn’t disclose this conflict-of-interest until it is too late (after the consumer hired him/her to do the inspection). A proper disclosure should occur BEFORE the consumer chooses what inspector to hire… not after.

Some associations give its members (to the detriment of consumers) a competitive edge over my NACHI members as they can charge less (and in some cases nothing) knowing that they will get a certain amount of the contracting work their inspections generate (just like contractors offer free estimates). My members can’t compete with free. Luckily, the real estate industry doesn’t rely on biased free estimates from contractors… instead the real estate industry correctly relies on impartial inspections by independent inspectors.

It is widely assumed that “home inspectors” are impartial and that their reports do not suffer from a conflict of interest. Home inspectors are much like Judges… they look at all the evidence and issue an opinion which is deemed to be impartial by all parties. A Judge’s opinion and an inspector’s report may be correct, it may be incorrect, but it certainly doesn’t suffer from any secret conflict of interest. Dan, I bet I know what you would call a Judge who you discovered lacked impartiality and was secretly profiting by selling your opponent legal advice to help him/her prevail against you in his court room… you’d call him a Scumbag.

All associations should require that all their members be forthright with consumers in all their marketing literature and websites and stop calling themselves “home inspectors” and instead call themselves “contractors” just like dentists don’t call themselves “dental inspectors.”

I hope this clarifies my position for all.

Until then, Scumbag NAHI is perpetrating a fraud on consumers and a class action law suit should be filed.

I hope this clarifies my position for all.

Huhhh… A class action suit for fraud on consumers…:roll: :roll:

To clarify I am not in favor of inspectors performing work on homes they inspect.
Tell me how that is perpertrating fraud on consumers, compared to your policy that it’s none of the consumers business if the inspector has any HI experience, training or knowledge prior to you marketing them as certified inspectors to the unknowing public…:roll: :roll: :roll:

I’m going to suggest to my elected superiors that maybe ASHI and NAHI join forces and file a class action suit against NACHI for having that policy which can cause far more financial harm to a consumer than an inspector repairing a defect identified in the course of an inspection to a HI org SOP and disclosed COE…



You indirectly support my contention about by not addressing their COE and instead switching to NACHI. Thank you.

Anyway, to answer you… NACHI’s COE prohibits our members from being anything less than 100% forthright about “experience, training, and knowledge” Read 1.3 and 1.5 of

Nick. Help me understand what your saying…
From what I get from this is that you enforce your COE??? And NAHI doesn’t.

If banning a member a member that works for someone else, and to the best of my knowelge DOES NOT belong to another HI org.]
for not marketing your org ,I have to say your enforcement is lacking any value.
That gives you the authority to call other HIs scumbags on an open BB???.:roll: :roll:


I’ll be glad to help you understand…

No, I’m not saying that NACHI enforces its COE and Scumbag NAHI doesn’t.

What I’m saying is that NACHI’s COE requires its members to be truthful and forthright with consumers other’s COE permits its members to trick consumers into thinking they are home inspectors performing impartial inspection reports when in fact they are secretly contractors using my industry to generate repair work.

See the difference? It’s HUGE.

As for the second part of your post about banning a member for not marketing NACHI or something… I have no idea what you are talking about with regard to that comment. We don’t even require members to reveal that they are members and we are one of the few trade associations in the world that permits invisible membership as proof.