PA Membership

[system]

Originally Posted By: Chris Morrell
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.

---

I have a few words, but not just yet. I just came across a couple of websites that might pertain to this discussion. I’d recommend taking a look at what I’ve highlighted in red.

http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=f4pusq.2.1 wrote:

Word Mark NATIONAL HOME INSPECTOR EXAMINATION Goods and Services IC 016. US 002 005 022 023 029 037 038 050. G & S: Title of written examination taken by professional home inspectors to determine their qualifications for association membership and/or state licensing. FIRST USE: 20000300. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 20000300 Mark Drawing Code (1) TYPED DRAWING Serial Number 76025291 Filing Date April 13, 2000 Supplemental Register Date May 15, 2002 Registration Number 2619101 Registration Date September 10, 2002 Owner (REGISTRANT) American Society of Home Inspectors, Inc. CORPORATION NEW YORK 932 Lee Street - 1st Floor Des Plains ILLINOIS 60016 Attorney of Record Harry S. Rosenthal Disclaimer NO CLAIM IS MADE TO THE EXCLUSIVE RIGHT TO USE "EXAMINATION" APART FROM THE MARK AS SHOWN Type of Mark TRADEMARK Register SUPPLEMENTAL Live/Dead Indicator LIVE

http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=f4pusq.4.1 wrote:

Word Mark EBPHI Goods and Services IC 042. US 100 101. G & S: Preparing, administering, and scoring of standardized tests, namely, the administration of the national examination for professional home inspectors. FIRST USE: 20000301. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 20000301 Mark Drawing Code (1) TYPED DRAWING Serial Number 76082249 Filing Date July 3, 2000 Published for Opposition January 1, 2002 Registration Number 2551987 Registration Date March 26, 2002 Owner (REGISTRANT) American Society of Home Inspectors, Inc. CORPORATION NEW YORK 932 Lee Street SUITE 101 DES PLAINS ILLINOIS 60016 Attorney of Record Harry S. Rosenthal Type of Mark SERVICE MARK Register PRINCIPAL Live/Dead Indicator LIVE

http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=f4pusq.6.2 wrote:

Word Mark EXAMINATION BOARD OF PROFESSIONAL HOME INSPECTIONS Goods and Services IC 016. US 002 005 022 023 029 037 038 050. G & S: Provides test administration and written examinations for professional home Inspectors. FIRST USE: 20000301. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 20000301 Mark Drawing Code (1) TYPED DRAWING Serial Number 76025292 Filing Date April 13, 2000 Supplemental Register Date March 21, 2002 Registration Number 2608326 Registration Date August 13, 2002 Owner (REGISTRANT) American Society of Home Inspectors, Inc. CORPORATION NEW YORK 932 Lee Street 1st Floor Des Plains ILLINOIS 60016 Attorney of Record HARRY S ROSENTHAL Type of Mark TRADEMARK Register SUPPLEMENTAL Live/Dead Indicator LIVE

http://www.homeinspectionexam.org/ wrote:

The Examination Board of Professional Home Inspectors (EBPHI) is an independent examination organization whose objective is to promote excellence and exemplary practice within the home inspection profession and to serve the public through its quality assurance efforts.

http://www.homeinspectionexam.org/policies_handbook/1EBPHI.html wrote:

Examination Board of Professional Home Inspectors?, Inc. The Examination Board of Professional Home Inspectors (EBPHI) is an independent, not-for-profit entity, founded in 1999 for the specific purpose of developing, maintaining and administering the National Home Inspector Examination (NHIE). Administration of the NHIE is intended to insure that home inspection professionals meet basic knowledge and practice requirements. Successful completion of the examination answers the needs of the public, government and home inspectors. Certain states license these professionals and may require passing this examination as a licensing requirement. The American Society of Home Inspectors, the largest organization representing the profession, requires passage of NHIE as a qualification for full Member status. The National Home Inspector Examination has been developed and is maintained in accordance with accepted psychometric standards, and administered by the independent Examination Board of Professional Home Inspectors.

And last, but not at all least:

Joe Kelly wrote:

4. Your entrance exam, is it "recognized or accredited", and by who? It was not even conceived until long after enactment of our law, and was generated in house. It is your organizations entrance exam and if not ?recognized or accredited? does not qualify, by definition, with the law.

It sure appears that the NHIE was generated "in house." I wouldn't have guessed looking at any of their literature, though. I also wouldn't have guessed by your post, Mr. Kelly.

Like I said, I don't have much time. I would like to applaud Robert Wills' post, though. As a NACHI member and a former home inspector, I'm frankly outraged by your both imbecilic and childish comment. You've personally insulted me and my fellow NACHI members, and though I won't let that veer us from the original theme of this topic, I do plan to open a new topic as soon as I have the time. Fortunately for you, I spend most of the time I do have helping the members of this extraordinary association, so it might be a while.

Oh, one last thing, Mr. Kelly. Because I know you were wondering, imbecilic refers to the word "imbecile," which can be defined as "A person of moderate to severe mental retardation having a mental age of from three to seven years and generally being capable of some degree of communication and performance of simple tasks under supervision. The term belongs to a classification system no longer in use and is now considered offensive." (Dictionary.com) Please understand that my comment was meant to be completely offensive.

---

--
Chris Morrell
Director of Information Technology
http://www.nachi.org/


[system]

Originally Posted By: Chris Morrell
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.

---

Very well said, Jeff. I started my post a while ago, and just came back to it to finish it up. It appears that both you and Joe M. got a post in while I was away. As for the IQ thing, let’s just say that I didn’t go into a intellectually demanding profession for nothing Let’s also say that I have everyone beat… so far (competitive spirit over here).

---

–
Chris Morrell


Director of Information Technology


http://www.nachi.org/


[system]

Originally Posted By: jfarsetta
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.

---

Chris,


From your post:

"performance of simple tasks under supervision". In Mr. Kelly's case, would that have to be under DIRECT supervision to truly be compliant?

Yo Ho! Sorry...


Joe F

---

[system]

Originally Posted By: jmyers
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.

---

Geezz,


And all this time they had everyone believing their exam was totally seperate from the association. That would make it absoluetly certain who is doing the lying around here.

Chris,

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA, ROTFLMAO! 

Joe Myers

---

[system]

Originally Posted By: Chris Morrell
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.

---

What can I say? Every once in a while it feels really good to stoop to someone else’s level. I’m not advocating it by any means, and I almost feel bad. Almost.

---

–
Chris Morrell


Director of Information Technology


http://www.nachi.org/


[system]

Originally Posted By: Nick Gromicko
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.

---

I watched Noel Zak of EBPHI say in court that their pool of questions came solely from ASHI members. Talk about in-house! So much for being phsycobable evaluated. As a former senior research analyst for a major university I can’t think of a bigger goof. Of course my IQ struggles at the 100 level.


Some states that require passing the NHIE made that requirement under the false belief that EBPHI was a separate entity unassociated with any one particular home inspection association. Hell EBPHI doesn't even own its own trademark, ASHI does. (this is why the judge agreed that EBPHI had no standing when EBPHI sued NACHI for trademark infringement) EBPHI even shares the same building address as ASHI. Someone snookered a few state legislators.

NACHI's Executive Director may be intellectually-challenged (my politically correct term for being...well...on the same level as my buddy Joe Myers let's say), but at least NACHI never devised a hugh scheme to decieve our law makers in an attempt to enslave and bilk our own members.

I know Igor doesn't like me to remind ASHI members (especially now that so many of them are members of NACHI) how their ASHI membership dues hurt ALL inspectors, but its true. Instead of renewing your ASHI membership, do something nice for all inspectors...flush the cash down the toilet...and stop feeding the dragon.

Nick

PS This has become a 2-page thread for those of you unfamiliar with this message board. You are on page 2.

---

[system]

Originally Posted By: Nick Gromicko
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.

---

Joe Kelly:


Hope we're not too hard on you. You are still very welcome to join us and I hope you do. We need all the warriors we can get.

Nick

PS At this point it seems you can run, join, or resort to off-topic personal attacks. Which one ya gonna do?

---

[system]

Originally Posted By: Joe Kelly
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.

---

Mr. Gromicko,


You may have noted that I have not been responding to any of the off topic, side, comments, but there is one question which should be answered. ?Who am I to be asking these questions??

I am a welcomed and requested potential member of your organization who wants to make sure that the professional affiliations I associate with, and endorse, will legally allow me to conduct business in the state where I reside. A question all PA Inspectors deserve to have answered.

Sure the legislature could have included, or excluded any variation of verbiage, however they decided on what was signed into law and that is the standard we must abide by. There are many ways things can be interpreted, and only the author can give the intended meaning. What is your definition of the word Supervised?

I believe the minimal requirement of performing 100 supervised inspections is to ensure competency and consumer protection by direct oversight. Offering free ridealongs is a great concept but it must be carried through to the required minimum set by law. In your scenario, review by a board, after the fact, leaves both the inspector and consumer unfulfilled. The purpose of supervision is to be able to catch potential problems before they become complaints, and the supervised inspector deserves that minimal protection. A review board, having not actually seen the condition, or catching it after the fact, is not providing education to the working member rather providing a signature service. Although you don?t brand working members, they are just that, often times doing their first Inspection, and you don?t think the consumer needs to know that? The law does and that is why the ?Reliance by Buyer? paragraph was included, amended, and signed into law. By using your compliance statement, the buyer may be being deceived into thinking they are hiring a seasoned veteran and that is why the difference needs to be made, and the novice supervised. To protect the consumer.

You like to use analogies, If someone just got laid off from a factory job, would you want them to build your house for practice? On the job training is a great educator but that is where supervision comes in.

Why won?t you show your 1999 member list now? Now is when I am trying to make the decision to join your organization, if I join and then get the information, the association has been made. What purpose would it serve to post my ?private? emails? Do you think you will expose me for something? If you really wanted to, you would have done so already.

I do apologize to the members for the poor wording of my last post. I did not mean to insinuate all members could not pass another exam. As with any profession, or organization, as previously stated many times, there are both good and bad in any group.

It?s like pulling teeth, but we are slowly getting to the answers. What are the names of the colleges using your exam? What is your interpretation of the ?Reliance by Buyer? statement in our law, and how does it relate to your compliance statement?

Joe Kelly

---

[system]

Originally Posted By: Chris Morrell
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.

---

Mr. Kelly,


I, for one, appreciate your apology. I, in turn, would like to apologize for my comment. We all have our puerile moments, after all.

I think that in a 'discussion' (argument sounds so...) like this, both sides will always tend to avoid certain questions, and then make an effort to point out that which the other avoided. This is part of good argument. I think that it's always beneficial to regroup your original questions and ask the unanswered ones again. We've made some real progress. What would you still like to know?

I, personally, would like to know:

1. What you have to say about the ASHI 'in-house' issue. They're not doing anything officially wrong, but I would consider it misleading. This is only a hunch, but I would guess that some of the states that require the NHIE are not aware of the extremely close ties between ASHI and the EBPHI. By the way, take a look at the addresses:
   
   Examination Board of Professional Home Inspectors, Inc.
   932 Lee Street, Suite 202
   Des Plaines, IL 60016
   
   American Society of Home Inspectors, Inc.
   932 Lee Street, Suite 101
   Des Plaines, IL 60016
   
   
2. Why you felt obligated to intimidate and harass our members.
   
3. What our memberlist as of 1999 has to do with our compliance in 2003.
   
4. What your explanation is for the $5,250 an inspector would have to pay under your RAMP program. That's one heck of a price to pay to help someone do their job. (Do the math: $51/inspection * 100 inspections + $150 for the contract)
   
5. You state "I know of other associations who reject nearly half of it?s paying applicants..." Can you list these, and provide statistics to back up your statement?
   
6. Why, when you insist that NACHI is non-compliant, no authority has contacted our organization or interfered in any way?
   

I'm sure that Joe F. and Nick have a few additions to that list. Let's get the questions out in the open again, and move from there.

---

--
Chris Morrell
Director of Information Technology
http://www.nachi.org/


[system]

Originally Posted By: Nick Gromicko
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.

---

Joe Kelly:


You can say whatever you want on this message board but...

I have an on-topic question for you. Your web-site at http://www.phic.info/links.htm says that ASHI & NAHI are organizations recognized by Pennsylvania. Yet the State of PA doesn't recognize any inspection associations. Why do you continue to deceive the public and new inspectors? Is it so you and PHIC can snooker them into indentured servitude...or worse...paying you to work for free?

Why did you use NACHI's web-site to mass email our members and other companies we have a business relationship with, saying NACHI does not comply with PA law when PA law doesn't even regulate associations? The law regulates inspectors and merely defines what a national association is.

Why did you mail a list of untruths about NACHI and me to my boss, my partners, the President of PAR which I belong to, my fellow NACHI members, my fellow REALTORs, my local politicians, my employees, my clients, my family members, people I do business with, new inspectors, and on and on...?

I have decided Joe Farsetta is right. You and PHIC have to be stopped for the good of our industry. By this time next week I will post a copy of a libel complaint. ASHI attorneys have informed me that you acted on your own personally and without their approval.. so I am suing you personally and PHIC. I'm done on this thread but not with you.

Nick

---

[system]

Originally Posted By: rwills
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.

---

Mr Kelly.


Does the old saying “People who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones” mean anything to you. Could it be that by diverting attention toward NACHI you keep your own little secrets covered? I for one think you’re “barking up the wrong tree” here in Pa. and personally, I would get out while the gettin’ is good! “The bigger they come…” Here’s a new saying we have at NACHI - "If it ain’t broke, don’t PHIC’s it!Bob W

---

[system]

Originally Posted By: Nick Gromicko
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.

---

We have another saying: PHUCK PHIC.


Chris's bad word filter appears to have permitted me this slight indiscretion.

Nick

---

[system]

Originally Posted By: rwills
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.

---

Nick,


I wanted to use that sooo bad, but already got in trouble playing with words here! but then it’s not like your gonna’ get thrown off of THIS board!!! Bob W.

---

[system]

Originally Posted By: Chris Morrell
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.

---

Don’t worry Bob, no post is ever deleted or edited (space permitting), and no user will ever be banned.

---

–
Chris Morrell


Director of Information Technology


http://www.nachi.org/


[system]

Originally Posted By: rwills
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.

---

Thanks Chris,


I’ll keep a copy of your post for future reference! Bob

---

[system]

Originally Posted By: jfarsetta
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.

---

Bravo.


Mr Kelly's "inquiries" are a lightly veiled attempt at diverting attention from facts in evidence. To Nick's point, we are dealing with the here and now. If Mr. Kelly was genuine in his alleged due-dilligence whether to join NACHI as a compliant organization, he should concentrate SOLELY on the facts in evidence as of PA's decision as to whether or not NACHI exists as a home inspection organization. As to the member list in 1999, that data doesn't amount to a hill of beans. So, tell me Joe Kelly, has NACHI pissed you off for THAT long? Dude, get a life and a new hobby!

Folks, if Mr. Kelly was genuinely concerned as to the validity of the ride-along program as it pertains to the "supervision" question, he would be speaking with Nick privately. The discussion should revolve around helping NACHI ensure that its members are in compliance. Instead, we have just the opposite, in words and action by Mr. Kelly and PHIC, I suppose.

So, here we have it... It's time to turn the tables on Kelly and the PHIC, if indeed they condone his actions. Complicity is an important thing, especially, if the accomplice is a recognized entity in a position of legitimacy, acting in a harassing manner. Its time to turn the lights out at PHIC, for the good of the industry and for the good of the legit inspectors in PA who simply want to stay in business. I suspect that the vast majority of these inspectors want nothing to do with these shenanigans. It's too bad really.

Go get 'em, Nick... And to Joe Kelly, be careful what you wish for. You wanted legal action, and it looks like you're about to get it.

---

[system]

Originally Posted By: jmyers
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.

---

Joe Kelly,


If you are a full member of NACHI or a member working toward full membership you can legally perform home inspections in PA. If that case were any different and NACHI members were not obeying the law we certainly would not be here on this BB discussing it with you, we would be in court defending ourselves. The law does not differentiate between full and working members and neither does NACHI.

One thing is certain. You are misguided on how the judicial system works here in PA. You stated,

?There are many ways things can be interpreted, and only the author can give the intended meaning.?

Here in PA our laws are interpreted by the courts, without any consideration for the meaning intended by the author of the law. The laws here in PA have always worked in that manner and will continue to do so. As ongoing evidence of our inspector?s compliance I don?t know of a single case of anyone being prosecuted for breaking the law. While we can concede what we are doing is not what you intended, it certainly is not the way it was written and we are following the law.

The words ?direct supervision? all on its own is a deceiving term indeed. Interns are directly supervised but that does not mean the entire time they are practicing medicine there is a doctor standing there to watch them every minute. In reality those interns are under the direct supervision of a doctor who is responsible for their actions, or lack of. This is a profession where lives are often at risk. If this is good enough for the medical profession certainly it is good enough for the home inspection profession. You do concede that the medical profession is just a little more important than a home inspector, don?t you?

I can attest to the fact that many of the inspectors that have ridden along with me are good inspectors. Some of those inspectors are even smarter than I am and I would not have any doubts at all asking them to perform an inspection on a property that I was purchasing. Our inspectors are humble and smart enough to ask questions when they need to and NACHI provides them with a network of inspectors that can give them the correct answer. That is a level of comfort no license number or association with any organization can provide.

You have often laid the claim of ?consumer protection? in your arguments. If you are claiming that you are ?saving? the consumer by providing them with a ?seasoned veteran? versus the ?novice supervised? you can fill everyone here in on the facts and tell us how many people were saved. How many consumers have filed legitimate complaints against inspectors? How many of those inspectors were ?seasoned veterans?? How many of those inspectors were ?novice supervised?? I do not have any personal knowledge of this law saving any consumer(s) from an ?uneducated, novice or incompetent? inspector. Since you claim you are saving the consumer surely you can provide evidence that would back up that statement.

What I can say is that you can tell from day one if that guy you took on a ride along is going to be a good inspector. Neither they, nor I had to take the ASHI exam (or the EBPHI exam if you prefer) in order to determine if they will be a good inspector. I also happen to think that most inspectors are not qualified to teach other home inspectors. If you want an education you should be seeking a teacher, not another home inspector but as you say, this is the law and we have to live with it.

I personally know many inspectors from many of the associations that are good people, good inspectors and well educated. They are joining NACHI because of the broken promises from the members of their own associations which never really helped them at the level they needed to become successful. I think that after all your claims of making inspectors better you would understand they are joining NACHI because they are finding value with what NACHI has to offer. We certainly are not bashing them because they are members of another association and we certainly don?t require them to quit their current association after they become a member of NACHI. NACHI is leaving it up to the individual inspector how and where they want to spend their money on dues.

Right up until the time when I was kicked off the Inspection new BB many of the inspectors seemed to think that if they talked poorly about NACHI we would some how die or go away. They were wrong, just as Paul Edwards and you are wrong when you talk poorly about our membership to others and realtors. For every one bad thing you, or he, said about our organization I send them three good things and I will continue to do so without prejudice. Most realtors in my area are now well informed that in order to legally perform inspections they only have to belong to one qualifying association and NACHI is on that list. They are also now aware that none of us are obligated to answer to the PHIC since you have no jurisdiction over us, or anyone else for that matter. Sooner or later they will learn that all those titles, like the PHIC and PAHI, at the bottom of your resume really don?t mean anything and the legitimacy of those titles is nothing more than a self proclaimed attempt to make yourselves ?look? better.

A while back, someone here posted a message on the board about a buyer that had an inspection preformed and there ended up being major problems with the home. They purchased this home which they could barely afford only to find out they needed to spend thousands of dollars to make repairs. I personally took time out of my day to contact them and offered to help those people in any way I could by donating time or money. I offered to find them contractors and companies to volunteer time and materials which would be needed to make the repairs so they could live in their newly inspected home safely. When I made that offer I did so knowing that this inspector was a member of another association but what I did not know was it happened about 10 years earlier and they no longer needed assistance because they lost contact with this home owner. My point is that while you are crying consumer protection, neither you nor your group, that state you offer consumer protection, are really doing anything at all to help the consumer. When was the last time you are any of your followers offered that kind of help to people that were in need, since it was directly caused by a member of our profession. I didn?t think so!

NACHI is filled with people just like me that care about other people, we don?t just so we do we actually do and act on it. People like you just so they do and don?t do a DA** thing about it. As ongoing evidence of the caring attitude of our members toward others you can take a look at our library that our members have graciously donated to help other members. While you stand there and laugh at the quality of our library you have failed to realize the true value behind it, the caring and concern of others that it stands for. I for have taken on personal goals of increasing the quality of our library to include such names as Mike Holt and Carson Dunlop. You may be laughing now but in the end I promise I will be doing all the laughing! 

Joe Myers

---

[system]

Originally Posted By: Joe Kelly
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.

---

Cheeze Nick,


I thought you would have thrown that card a long time ago. Maybe Joe is right, we need a Judge to define the law. In the mean time nothing I have read here changes any of my opinions. I?ll keep an eye on this thread. Thanks

Joe Kelly

---

[system]

Originally Posted By: Chris Morrell
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.

---

In response to the issue of whether a member must be directly supervised before attaining ‘full member’ status:


This issue changes depending on how you define a 'working' or 'candidate' or whatever member. When all it takes to become a sub-full member is a check, then there should be a system that ensures the qualifications of those members. When no member, working or full can join without passing an exam (an exam which, as of this date, only 52.29% pass), these systems need not be so strict. We are sure that every NACHI member, working or full, is qualified to do an inspection. We make sure of these qualifications before they pay their membership dues.

http://www.ashi.org/inspectors/join/joininfo.htm wrote:

How do I join ASHI... ? Easy, send in an application. (Print the linked page from your browser.)

http://www.nachi.org/join.htm wrote:

All applicants must first pass NACHI's Online Inspector Examination. You can take it from the comfort of your own home now for free. NACHI keeps all results on file and will verify your exam upon receipt of application.

---

--
Chris Morrell
Director of Information Technology
http://www.nachi.org/


[system]

Originally Posted By: jmyers
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.

---

Chris,


Good post. It just adds to that pay now, broken promises later theory that I had mentioned earlier in my post.

Joe Kelly,

Why is it you always run away when you feel like you are losing ground. Just because we don't agree with you does not mean that you have to leave. Speaking for myself, I truly believe that our members can gain from your experience along with the experience of those following you, big difference between our associations. We don't run and hide or remain silent about issues that affect us whether it involves you or anyone else that crosses our path.

I personally feel like you are trying to cross the road without ever seeing the other side. When you really listen to people and talk with them you can certainly work out something that is beneficial to everyone, no matter what the differences. One thing is certain, we can not work out something without the other side.

The PHIC has tried on several occasion to work out what is best without ever getting most of the inspectors opinions and using the little following that it currently has. If you would like to stick around you would gain valuable insight on how we see things and of course we would also gain valuable insight into your way of thinking. In the end if we still don't agree no one has lost anything, we are not agreeing now so the worst case is that were just could not come to a mutual understanding. NO HARM, NO FOUL.

Invite your following over here to explain to our membership what your goals are and what you are doing to achieve those goals. Ask for opinions and listen, I mean really listen to the answers. Maybe you could change your course of action to agree with the membership of all the associations while still maintaining your objectives. At this point in time you certainly have nothing to lose, everything to gain. True?

Joe Myers

---