Reasonable Apprehension of Bias and Vexatious Actions of OAHI

(Raymond E. Wand) #21

If you are using this designation you are putting the OAHI in a compromising situation with ASTTBC, so we must discipline you under the by-laws as well as report you to ASTTBC who may exert their rights under Canadian law to seek legal action against you. This information was distributed after PACHI and OAHI amalgamated and is being reprinted now as a courtesy reminder to the members.”

Okay I'll play along ... where in the by-law does it specifically spell out this is an infraction or a matter that is contrary to COE?

(Claude Lawrenson) #22

Got me....but it probably starts with "A number of complaints have been launched against some members for using the term Certified Home Inspector or the CHI designation." and it mushrooms from there!

(Raymond E. Wand) #23

If it ain't in the by-laws it has no force or effect in law. The by-laws are created for a reason to prevent abuse of office and to ensure there are legal guidelines.

Its nothing but vexatious with malice.

(Christopher P. Steele) #24

Just curious.... Who is going to go after them for this? The law? The government? They are a self regulated association - is there some real legal ramifications against them in a court of law if they break their own bylaws? Can this be compared to say a private golf club that has its own laws. Say they change them to better suit a unforeseen situation - whats stopping them? The law or government? Can they not just do what they want anyway?

Don't get me wrong I still think it is wrong to break the by laws but we talk about it as though they could be arrested and charged with something.

(Raymond E. Wand) #25

Chris good question.

I have looked into this more then once. As far as the Ont. Government is concerned if the act is enacted through a private members bill, the government does not care what happens as in the case with OAHI. It is upto the members to either call for a Special Meeting to discuss the matter and vote on the matter, or if the members do not care then it is upto either a member or members to take the association to court. However if there is reasonable proof to suspect financial irregularities the police (OPP) could be called in. Any member who is found guilty as per the by-laws can appeal to the Divisional Court of Justice or seek Judicial Review if he believes there is an error in law or due process/natural justice or breaking of the by-laws. You have to understand short of cooking the books the matters are actionable in court through summary conviction. If it is accounting issue that most likely would be tried in criminal court.

If OAHI is concerned about activities or actions of members or changing market place or change because of governance issues then the by-laws should be ammended to deal with the particulars of the situation. This is not necessarily the case at present. A perfect example is the by-law not stipulating conduct unbecoming, misuse of CHI, or retired members inspecting while retired, and belonging to another association, or Student inspecting under similar circumstances. The by-law is vague on these matter and must be one of reasonableness. If it ain't in the by-laws thats too bad, because the action has no force and is not legal. Otherwise anything goes. The association must also show a standard of care, act dilligently, and has a fiduciary duty to act accordingly with membership money, and to ensure there are no conflicts at the BOD level.

(cbarrows) #26

In other words... we feel threatened by the fact that NACHI has so many members in Ontario, so we will try to find any way to frustrate their Canadian membership. One of these tactics will be to try to copyright (or find existing copyright) words and letters of the english alphabet and "discipline" dual members for using these words or letters. Because we have no real power and we are just a voluntary association we have to rely on these underhanded tactics to survive.


(Raymond E. Wand) #27

How about Misfeasance?

As an adjunct, causes of action, how about injurious falsehood, intimidation and intentional interference with economic relations?

270] The plaintiffs have alleged that the defendant has committed the tort of abuse of public office, also known as the tort of misfeasance in public office. This tort is recognized in law, however its precise ambit is still being defined. Professor Hogg in Liability of the Crown, 2nd ed. (Toronto: Carswell, 1989) discusses the tort of misfeasance in public office, and notes at p. 111:

Since a harmful, invalid decision is actionable if made negligently, it seems obvious that a harmful, invalid decision should also be actionable if made deliberately. This is the function of the tort of “misfeasance in a public office”, which is committed when a public officer (a person exercising a statutory or prerogative power) abuses his or her office. . .


That OAHI has wrongfully and in bad faith advised members and third parties that NACHI and CHI were harmful to it's members businesses.

That OAHI improperly used Pr 158 and the by-laws to intimidate members into removing other association’s credentials from their websites.

That OAHI has wrongfully used the power to discipline certain members, particularly relating to the use of CHI and/or Certified Home Inspector.

That the OAHI has wrongfully and improperly interfered in the democratic processes of freedom of association.

That OAHI has wrongfully interfered with the right of members to gain entry and examination and entrance process of another association through threats of discipline.

That OAHI intentionally has interfered with economic relations with membership in a competing association and students rights to work under another voluntary association.

Just my opinions. You may have more to add to the list.