Of course they say that. All lead brokers say that; however, even vendors who tell you such things have no control over your customers’ data when they sell their businesses to the next guy who bought it in order to obtain all that data.
Try to think of why a major insurance company like American Family would buy a home inspector software company for reasons other than the information the reports have about the homes, by address.
Not to feed the paranoia but it seems to me that if they can know if a report was created from a template by reading the contents of the report file then they can also read all of the sensitive personal customer data too, no?
In the end, Joe, the real kicker is how these vendors can harvest and sell (and resell) all the information contained in these reports while convincing home inspectors to PAY THE VENDOR while providing the data to them. Imagine a gas station paying you for allowing them to store gas in your tank.
I would think that a home inspection association would work hard to protect its members and their customers from such things, unless … nah. NACHI and ASHI wouldn’t be getting kickbacks or having any part in that. That’s silly. Right?
I made that distinction years ago on this message board when American Family bought one of these vendors out. Was it HomeGuage? How many home inspectors and clients know that their reports are available for screening by at least one insurance company and can be used to (sometimes improperly) deny insurance claims when they use the software program American Family now owns? Do you tell them that? Shouldn’t homebuyers that hire inspectors using that program be informed of this and how their choice to hire such an inspector might affect their insurance coverage?
I would be interested, professionally, if you can share with me how you know for a fact that AmFam does not sell or otherwise provide the same data to other insurance providers.
A couple of weeks ago, I received a call to do a four-point inspection. In 15 years, this is the first time I have had this request as I am located in Iowa. Her insurance company was requesting the inspection before they would extend/rewrite her policy for another year. I let her know that this seemed odd and asked her to call them for clarification. She called back a couple of hours later and said that they are requiring her to have a full home inspection. So, I performed a normal home inspection.
This is where it gets really odd. They told her that she does not need to send them the inspection report. They just needed to know when the inspection would take place and they would let her know if they were able to rewrite her policy within 2 weeks of the inspection. It really makes you think. How are they are making their decision if they are not getting the information from her?
A bit off topic, but relevant to the conversation.
My best friend is a VP of analytics for one of the moderate sized insurance companies. It seems like every time we talk, he mentions which companies are no longer writing new policies in Iowa and other states as well. I asked him if the companies in Iowa, or the Midwest will ever require something comparable to four-points. He does believe that it is in the very near future. This would eliminate the low dollar drive by condition checks and give a substantial amount of work to actual home inspectors. Maybe if they implement this, it will eliminate the selling of information.
I still say RH took their course of action specifically to avoid you.
IF RH claims are true, then hundreds (thousands?) of InterNACHI members and every single reporting software company should be sued.
But RH only chose to sue Spectora because they lacked the bandwidth to go after everyone and they knew only going after Spectora would keep you on the sidelines.
Personally, I think RH is playing you like a violin. RH found a way to keep you on the sidelines.
I know there are inspection companies considering it.
An issue for someone like me is a basic lack of understanding of how to sue someone in a different state. I mean I know attorneys here for California matters when I need defense. I’ve never gone down the path of suing someone.
And of course, I hope it’s all resolved without having to sue.
I like Kevin and Mike, we’re friends, we hang out at times. But I will do what I have to do to protect my company. My legal obligation is to my clients.
I’m talking with HIP sales right now and they’re telling me the deal is only $150 off the one time license purchase and 50% off the first three months, not 50% for the first year
The issue is not creating a new template, it is Spectora removing our ability to access past reports without contacting them. This does not comply with Record Keeping Requirements.