I realize this post is over 2 years old, however, like the topics taught in class, no less relevant now. AHIT remains the best option for many reasons. I find it humorous how many home inspector forums and blogs are so critical of everything. I’m sure it has something to do with the fact ours is an industry if critical thinkers who make a living finding problems.
I was there in the class mentioned. As is common in many home inspector forums, context was not provided in the original post. The instructor provided a great deal of context for how you could be shooting yourself in the foot using other programs for reporting. AHIT’s app is designed to effectively deliver the report on site with all the detail the client needs. In addition, it is designed to be more customizable than any other app on the market in order to grow with the inspector’s skills. Delivering the report on site is a competitive advantage over other inspectors and can help grow the business faster.
As for selling it, context for that was also provided. It was clearly stated to the entire class how AHIT is dedicated to students’ success rather than being a teaching mill running as many students through as possible to find qualified employees for a multi-inspector firm like many other schools. While not a perfect formula, but very effective, AHIT’s profitability is built around how many home inspectors are using their reporting system. They are a for profit business just like so many other businesses. How many of you are willing to run your businesses at a loss because its better to give away things for free? The app is not perfect, nor is it for everyone, but it certainly is not “horrible.” I use it every day and have completed thousands of inspections with it - every one of them delivered to the client on site. “Horrible” is a subjective term and I hope the inspector who used that term doesn’t use similar opinions in his reports.
As for Nick’s comments, I expect him to say what he did because ours is also an industry where every inspector believes he’s got the only winning formula. I’d be happy to go toe to toe with anyone and discuss how NACHI training (or any other, for that matter) has its strong points in addition to drawbacks.
Lets address “outdated” information. How can you inspect homes 1-100+ years old without a complete understanding of construction techniques, tools, materials, and conditions from the last 100+ years? Yes, some of the photos were a little grainy, but no less effective or relevant. As a matter of fact, just in the 10 homes inspected following classroom training, students saw nearly 80% of the exact defects, systems, and components illustrated in those “outdated” photos. Relevance? Yes. Tons of it.
There were many reasons for not getting on the roof. Rain, roof material conditions, height, and pitch prevented the class from accessing the roof on several of the homes. It happens in real life, too. We learned how to inspect the roof from the ground with binoculars, ladder at the eaves, etc. Just like real home inspectors have to do every day.
Not traversing the attics is a liability issue for any school. They have several instances where students didn’t follow directions and put their foot through the ceiling. Call me crazy, but that might get expensive and limit opportunities for future students. The instructor also provided context for this. The class was advised to perform another 15-20 practice inspections AFTER class before performing fee paid inspections in order to master the process, flow, communications skills, and reporting. AHIT provides technical support from instructors to students after the class to assist with this. I remember the phrase spoken many times in class that no experienced home inspector can argue with, “Repetition is the mother of skill.”
Washington requires 120 hours of classroom training and 40 hours of field training - more than any other state in the country with the exception of New York. Not one minute was wasted in those 160 hours. But, 160 hours should not be considered as replacement for experience. No one can put decades of experience into a two week class. Some of the learning must occur once class is completed.
WIFI controlled appliances were addressed, as were AFCI technologies. They were addressed in the context of a home inspection. In other words, home inspectors test the functionality of the equipment, not the accessories like remote apps and advanced features.
In summary, “new” does not necessarily mean relevant. Home inspectors see a lot of old stuff. We also get a lot of questions from clients expecting us to explain the hows and whys. AHIT blended old and new technologies, materials, methods and tools throughout its curriculum, making up the base knowledge anyone needs to start their new career. In addition, there was satisfactory information provided to prepare for marketing a new business, pass the state exam and demonstrate competency for a license.
Finally, yes, I was the instructor. I continue to teach for AHIT, have served on the Washington State Home Inspector Advisory Board, and work to assist in developing, updating, and improving our offerings to students and inspectors with the rest of the team at AHIT because I believe in what we’re doing and in our commitment to our students.
Thank you for reading my post.