Revised Vendor COE

Okay … I will post my complaint and I want you to watch what happens. Do I post it here in the public domain on this thread?

Huh? I don’t get it. How are we no better off working on a draft COE that we haven’t adopted yet if we haven’t first decided on where violations are reported? I’m lost. Do you mean the work is worthless unless we do it in reverse order? Explain why Michael?

Just send your complaint to fastreply@internachi.org and it will be routed to the correct place.

CM

I really have no dog in a fight here, but…

“compensate” is a lot of things, if I am reading a “review” of a product and two or three people chime in… how am I to know if they are being disingenuous or not? Wouldn’t disclosing whether a product is received freely or discounted by the member providing review be relevant?

You never know for sure. That’s why there is strength in numbers. A vendor with a crappy product and lousy service will find difficulty in using compensated flattery to offset real complaints.

It appears that Vendor/Members will continue to be allowed to run ad campaigns which paint some NACHI members (the ones who purchase their products) as superior while painting those NACHI Members who refuse to purchase as inferior…

In that regard, what steps can concerned NACHI members take (beyond breaking down and becoming a customer) to prevent their business from being the subject of ridicule for simply refusing to purchase the products of the vendor who is claiming those who refuse to use his products are inferior home inspectors.

I suggest that vendors be required to put up a performance bond which is available to the membership for legal defense should the need arise.

Here’s the relevant portion of the COE:

The InterNACHI vendor shall not engage in any practices that could be damaging to the public or bring discredit to InterNACHI, its members or the home inspection industry.

I don’t think InterNACHI will ever abuse that, though, or else vendors would be concerned that anything they do or say could be considered damaging to someone. The point is to bring vendors into the organization so that they can help our members.

Did you get it?

No vendor is going to run an ad campaign against InterNACHI members. What would be the purpose of doing that? It’s a hypothetical that would never happen.

It’s disingenuous if you never used the product, or never used it in a way that the testimonial suggests, or previously stated that you didn’t like the product and then changed course once paid.

Not if he forbids members who purchase from him to sign a contract that forbids them from publishing negative comments about his products on your message board - at any time during or even after the period of time in which they are contracted with him - such as is the case with Thornberry’s RWS Inc. agreement.

Do you consider this practice as being in the best interest of the members under your new vendors’ ethic code?

How can anyone prove that the vendor had anything to do with what a shill says about his product to another member?

There is nothing preventing me from sharing any negative opinions I might have about products offered by ISG.

If you don’t agree to TOS, don’t sign them. That’s why there’s competition. Choose a different recall checking service, or a different warranty service, or a different alarm leads service. If enough people choose NOT to use Nathan’s products because of the terms, he’ll change them. We can’t go around picking and choosing what clauses we’ll allow in vendor contracts.

Yes there is. You may choose to violate it … but your agreement with Thornberry prohibits you from publicly saying anything negative about his products … unless he is compensating you under a different agreement.

You know damned well that’s NOT what Joe asked!

I believe that practice does Nathan more harm than good. Imagine the incredible goodwill he’d earn if he came on this message board one day and announced that he has removed that contractual prohibition and that all his customers are free to post both complaints and praise. WOW!!! It would be the PR move of the century for his companies. Every potential customer could then rely on the comments of his existing customer base. And I predict most of those comments would be full of praise.

Jim,

So as not to derail this discussion, can you email me where that statement is? I’ve heard a few people say that, but don’t see it in the RecallChek agreement posted online.

I know you wish to perpetuate this blatant lie. That is your choice.

As far as I know it is happening right now… Nate’s threat to all NACHI members is that we had better make up our minds to buy his stuff or suffer being exposed as an inferior inspector to 80,000 Realtors through an email campaign he is conducting.

I do not know if it is actually being carried out, all I know for sure is that Nate threatened to do this against NACHI Members right here this on the message board.

That is why we are here. You claim you want the best for NACHI Members, how can that happen if one of its select vendors is attempting to damage the business of NACHI Members with lies.