The course ASHI doesn't want you to attend. Angela turns our attorney down.

LOL, Frank do you know what NAMBLA is? :smiley:

I agree
With the over priced dues ashi charges with no benefits and now wants there membership to pay more for education they are shooting them selfs in the foot.

Henry,
the issue is not with “duel membership”. The matter at hand is dealing with ASHI who does not recognize and refuses to accept NACHI as a legitimate educational provider.

For too many years ASHI has had literally a “one-way street” and now we are requiring that they follow the same rules and regulations that they have imposed on us for many, many years.

You must also be aware that many of ASHI’s so-called “officers” have continuously slandered and attempted to discredit NACHI as an association and Nick Gromicko as an individual.

Scott Patterson has been on a unrelenting attack against NACHI and Nick for many, many years.

In spite of this “NACHI” has continued to recognize ASHI seminars while they repeatedly refused to recognize ours.
It is time to “level the playing field”!

I am sick and tired of hearing “can’t we all just get along” while seeing that ASHI has not changed one iota and they continue to slander an attempt to discredit NACHI at each and every opportunity.

No but … it sounds like something :|.)Scott Patterson/ASHI :|.)came up with.
**Is it a “New” ASHI requirement?:shock: **

I agree fully with you Frank
I just said the wording needed to be careful because of the other associations that are needed.

Like Henry says, if they want to shoot themselves in the foot, let them.

We can stand back and watch them fail even more quickly and it will be a free show.

Well, this one sticks out like a sore thumb.

Care to explain?

Perhaps a wee bit of a stretch to compare ashi to a racist organization that has murdered people, a terrorist organization that has murdered and wants to murder many more people, or a gay man boy love group.

Ashi is in it for ashi, nor our industry, but I don’t think their intent has been to murder anyone. Nick might be on their list though…:mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:

In my never to be humble opinion, our COE should deal with how we treat the public and our industry. No one, including Joe has been able to convince me that we need to have an already stated rule of membership in our ethical code that deals with a communication device.

If someone breaks the message board rules, are they not already able to be disciplined in some fashion.

I don’t like 3.3 either, and I darn near wrote that one years ago. But, as Albert Einstein said, “When I’m wrong, I change my mind, what do you do?”

**I like 3.3:p **

Then in your instance, we are allowing all of those nonmembers to post in a fashion that you would possible vote to discipline a member for because it is in the COE? Am I understanding that correctly?

By the way, Nick loves the posts from all of them. :wink:

Blaine, a mini-association like ASHI that actually REQUIRES its unqualified, come-only-with-cash Candidates or Associates to go out and peform actual fee-paid inspections for poor, unsuspecting consumers as part of their requirements certainly leads to many missed safety issues which likely leads to untold injuries and deaths of our fellow Americans.

I agree, NAMBLA isn’t in the same category, they don’t kill people. Let’ keep the NAMBLA guys and dump ASHI.

I agree with all of that Nick. We then need to be agressive in our association marketing and glue why we are better to head of every Realtor in business, as ashi has for the past 30 years. Barry Stoned and Robert Bruss should have that clue handed to them as well.

bump!!!

Now I would ask, why has ASHI not turned themselves in to their ethics committee for discipline, since they don’t follow their own COE as an association when dealing with the public? Seems to me that if the following is good for the inspector, it should be good for the association…

3. Inspectors shall avoid activities that may harm the public, discredit themselves,
or reduce public confidence in the profession.

A. Advertising, marketing, and promotion of inspectors’ services or qualifications shall not be fraudulent, false, deceptive, or misleading.
B. Inspectors shall report substantive and willful violations of this Code to the Society.

This coming from someone who will go off on a 40 page rant if someone posts “Jesus is a Democrat”:D:D

Seriously…ASHI is a highly unethical organization and is in desperate need of money to stay alive.

One example is its continuous lies to the public touting that inspectors who pay dues to ASHI are the only inspectors qualified to inspect a house. This, we all know, is a lie. A bold, uninhibited lie…being made to the public through their branding campaign to real estate salesmen…on a daily basis.

To pay dues to ASHI is assisting in keeping ASHI alive…an unethical act in itself, since the money provided to ASHI assists them in lying to the public.

This is a question of “what is right” and “what is wrong”…which puts it directly in the arena of ethics.

Is it right…is it ethical…for me to give money to “Planned Parenthood”? Abortions are legal and it is not me who is getting or giving the abortion. So…that means it’s okay, right, Mr. Larson.

Is it right…is it ethical…for me to pay dues to ASHI so that they can publish flyers, web pages, and editorials throughout the United States misleading and lying to the public regarding the quality of inspectors in another association that I belong to…simply becaue these other inspectors choose not to join their association?

My continuous refusals to the St. Louis ASHI Chapter to become a member is, for me, an ethical decision. It comes as a great sacrifice since membership in their association will probably triple my current rate of real estate salesmen referrals. But, as a matter of principle, I cannot sit at their table knowing what I know…

Uhh…lemme think…:roll::wink:

With all due respect … Since when do you speak for Nick?

Then you have everything you need already to charge all of our dual members with an ethics violation. If your vision is felt by the majority of the committe, it’s already there, no need to change the COE.

“The InterNACHI member shall not engage in any practices that could be damaging to the public or bring discredit to the home inspection industry.”