George, do you have some statistical data to back up your point? I recall how Bill Mullen had tried to use such data to prove the need for licensing and failed.
With this statement I have to agree. It puzzles me what they have to do with anything, especially in the GTA where there is no such thing as the BBB.
Gerry, GTA is part of the Better Business Bureau of Mid-Western and Central Ontario http://www.gta.bbb.org/ However the statement that they do not have teeth is very much true.
Yuri
Thanks for the info.
My understanding Toronto was closed down a few years back for corruption and mismanagement???
So mid west and central took over. I don’t think I know anyone in this area who belongs to BBB and I sure as heck don’t see it advertised on any of the businesses anywhere.
Hi James. I think that this is the data to which you referred;
On another message board, Mr. Bill Mullen provided the following data and illustrated how it is being misrepresented to anyone in government who will listen in an attempt to demonstrate a need for licensing. Our correspondence follows -
IN PART;
“At the Symposium last week, several people argued that our industry has few problems, and the ‘it ain’t broke, so why try to fix it.?’
I contend that it is in trouble on several levels, and the more investigating I do, the more troubles I uncover.
This morning, I was reviewing a study commissioned by CMHC and CAHPI in 2004 on insurance claims by and about our industry. I know some will argue it’s old data, but I contend the percentages are likely still similar today.
The study suggested that there were 1,037 active CAHPI members in 2003 and about 1,265 other unaffiliated home inspectors practicing in the country, for a total of around 2,302 Canadian inspectors.
The data collected indicates there were 321 insurance claims in 2003 against Canadian Home Inspectors, and that a total of $ 719,835 was paid out on settled claims.”
In the interests of accuracy, my response;
Very interesting data Bill. But I and I think many statisticians would argue that the interpretation is wrong or based on incomplete information.
Let’s assume that the quoted 2302 inspectors completed an average of 200 inspections a year ( I know, I know! Low number for some and high for others) that means that there were a total of 460,400 inspections completed that year. Of that number of inspections 321 generated insurance claims. That means that there was a staggering .06972% 'failure rate.
We can argue over whether or not all of these 321 claims were genuine claims, or whether some were nuisance cases given up by the inspectors to avoid numerous trips to the court room, legal costs etc. We can argue about whether the 200 inspections / year is a fair number and if you want we can cut that down to 100 inspections / year giving us .13944% failure rate.
While the figure of 719,835 is impressive it is also misleading. It represents 1.56 / inspection completed that year ( using the above figures) or $312.70 / inspectors, which could be used to justify the establishment of an inspector insurance fund rather than a useless licensing scheme.
However you look at it the numbers are minuscule and certainly do not justify the establishment of a huge bureaucracy to solve a problem that does not exist.
An Independent Home Inspector.
Typical mole hill.
It really makes you wonder … with so much effort expended in creating the illusion of a problem where no problem really exists…what the real motive behind these licensing laws are.
Certainly, you have no persons who make a living by selling education to home inspectors trying to convince legislators of the need to mandate students in their classrooms, do you?
Claude:
Your assessment of the situation is bang on!
B.C licencing did not just happen, in part it was consumer driven by purchasers of a home inspector’s report who hung their shingle, did little to perfect their reporting, gave (often) erroneous information to their clients, claimed to be fair in their reporting, did little to upgrade their reporting technique and generally “rode the wave” to some easy money.
All that changed with our provincial mandated licence. We are now seen in the public’s eye as a credible force in the real estate market. Some inspectors fell by the wayside but most plied their trade, made an effort to become part of the growing trend, attained the provincial designation of a licenced inspector and now the phone is ringing off the hip.
I am proud to be called a ‘Certified House Inspector’ by ASTTBC/BCIPI.
I ENCOURAGE ALL HOME INSPECTORS to think long and hard about licencing.
Let your thoughts and actions guide your future for the benifit of your clients.
T.Neyedli CHI
BPCPA #47827
ASTTBC/BCIPI # PI 0297
www.alphahomeinspections.ca
That is your perception, today.
Inspectors in Arizona and North Carolina felt the same way after eliminating some of their market, too. They waived their licenses in the air as a phallic symbol in the same manner…until…twenty three year olds who graduated from “inspector school” started waiving his license, too.
Then came the need to re-educate the public that a license did NOT represent competence…but merely “entry level” skill. New criteria needed to be introduced to distinguish the reason why you could get a licensed inspection for $129 from a newby but you’re wiser to pay me more.
Before that struggle could be fully addressed, though…came the changes in the laws introduced by other special interests that dictated what an inspector could/could not put in his report, etc.
You are drawing conclusions while you are still in the embryonic stage. You are still Sean Penn and Madonna on their love-filled honeymoon.
Pay attention, Canada.
There is already a track record of where this leads. You do not have to re-invent a wheel. It has already been developed and evolved here.
In the USA, we are now at the point with some licensing laws that the inspector who wishes to ethically serve his client must choose to disobey a law in order to do so. Others, through ASHI and other organizations, have to buy media space to inform the public that licensing means nothing…it is entry level…not an indication of skill or competence.
Licensed fishermen are not guaranteed to win a tournament. Licensed marriages do not always make it to the sixth month. Licensed home inspectors do not always write accurate, unbiased and complete inspection reports.
Licensing solves nothing.
Thanks James. All licensing accomplishes is to place the inspector with 20 years of hard earned experience on the same level as the newly minted graduate inspector with the approved papers. It removes, in the eyes of the public, any reason to use the experienced inspector because 'they are now all certified to a new (minimum) standard." leaving price as the only point of competition. And that is the reason that years of experience in the field are being virtually ignored by those who wish to institute licensing in Ontario / Canada.
Then George:
You will have to learn to sell yourself.
What makes you stand out from the crowd?
What do you have to offer that the others do not?
Why would the client choose you from all the other inspectors?
I have no fear of any newly minted inspector competing with me anywhere.
Those who cannot compete on quality, service or indepth knowledge will
compete on price alone. They will fall by the wayside soon enough.
Just mho.
T.NeyedliCHI
BCIPI #PI 0297
BPCPA #47827
www.alphahomeinspections.ca
Terry, you miss the point.
Nobody choses his G.P. because he has been in the medical field longer than the doctor down the hall. Nobody sends their kids to a particular teacher because he has been teaching for 25 years while the newly minted teacher has not in fact just the opposite can be the case. Nobody asks the plumber how many toilets he has plunged before he . . . . . never mind :shock: .
The public perception is that every home inspector will be licensed and that license represents the standard acceptable inspection. All home inspectors will be on the same level playing field. Additional training, experience, years in the field etc will not matter as the public will have been trained to accept the license as the industry standard. The question that every consumer will ask is why pay more for inspector ‘A’ just because he has more years of experience or more training in plumbing when all inspectors will supply the recognized, government backed, standard, acceptable inspection? Marketing will have little to do with it. The only choice will be value for dollar. Why pay inspector ‘A’ more for the same regulated inspection that can be had from inspector ‘B’ for less ( including a movie pass, Tim Bits and a car wash 
)
And let’s not forget that licensing does not guarantee a better inspection and there are no data to support that false assumption.
Good points, George.
A reality check is in order here.
Your insurance company gives you a list of doctors to choose from. All of them, in the eyes of your insurance company, are equally qualified and competent.
What effort do you put into selecting which Ear, Nose and Throat Specialist to see to take care of your earache?
Do you visit, call or research each doctor…his age…his years in business…his credentials? No. If they were not qualified, you conclude, they would not be in this book to choose from.
Because they are in the book, you already know that the price is right. Your insurance company is recommending them.
What’s left?
Whose office is the most convenient to get to.
As Nick points out, licensing becomes an equalizer that increases the need for marketing.
The meeting of the granfatherd!!!
John,
Grandfatherd’s have there says :p:p:p…
-
So putting the talk of licensing - what can home inspectors offer that provides independent review, and no weasel clauses, and assure a highly accurate home inspection for consumers?
-
Does certification and education have any significance?
-
Does belonging to a home inspection association have any significance?
-
Does grandfathering have any merit? Or is that just another rumour used to perpetuate more disturbing misconceptions about the real background of those you point fingers at?
-
What is your suggestion on how the home inspection industry should be regulated? Or is there no need for regulation?
Thanks in advance…
Herein lies the fallacy that the rest of your arguments are based upon.
Where are the consumers clamoring for independent reviews of home inspectors?
What piece of legislation ever proposed or passed has ever “assured a highly accurate home inspection for consumers”?
There are no such things.
In that there are no such things, the efforts behind addressing them are disingenuous.
**1) So putting the talk of licensing - what can home inspectors offer that provides independent review, and no weasel clauses, and assure a highly accurate home inspection for consumers? **
Are you implying that licensing will provide any of these? It seems that with the present low failure rate the accuracy of a home inspection exceeds most industrial standards and therefore negates the need for an independent review unless a ruling in the courts is needed. Independent review is the courts job after all.
**2) Does certification and education have any significance? **
Education certainly does. As far as certification is concerned who do you propose to grant it; a self appointed body of ‘industry leaders, Realtors and politicians’?
3) Does belonging to a home inspection association have any significance?
The significance of home inspection associations can only be measured in terms of the resources that that are made available to the membership.
4) Does grandfathering have any merit? Or is that just another rumour used to perpetuate more disturbing misconceptions about the real background of those you point fingers at?
Your meaning is unclear. Perhaps you would like to ask the question without trying to frame it in your own perspectives? Although it is apparent that you fear ‘grandfathering’ and are intent upon reducing the years of experience of some inspectors to the level of ’ newbees’ who have attained the minimum qualifying license.
5) What is your suggestion on how the home inspection industry should be regulated? Or is there no need for regulation?
There is no proof that the industry needs regulation. There is no popular demand in the market, although PHPIO is trying to make it appear otherwise. There are no data supporting anything but a minuscule failure rate which would be the envy of most industries. We do not need a system of licensure that provides no benefit to either inspector or client.
Thanks in advance…
You’re welcome! 
PHPIO regrets that it has been forced to postpone the Licensing Symposium in Peterborough. Unfortunately, some of the key participants have scheduling conflicts that are impossible to overcome.
PHPIO thanks those who have registered and those who have expressed interest. We will reschedule this event for some future date.