Tidbits from the ASHI Message Board

[jbushart (James H. Bushart)]

This is somewhat enlightening…two past ASHI Presidents were real estate salesmen…hhhmmmmmmm

Subject: Realtor Membership?

---

I know this post is old but some of you may still see it and be able to self educate yourself. I sent my app in to ASHI in December of 1983. One of the questions had to do with being a real estate agent. I had 3 college degrees and one was a major in RE. As a past builder and appraiser I carried a RE license at that time. I also bought and sold real estate for myself. ASHI asked me for an explanation regarding the RE license. I told them basically what I’ve said here.

That was no problem to ASHI, because it was not pertinent to anything. Since that time I’ve known quite a few ASHI inspectors including probably 2 past NAtional Presidents and a lot of others that have RE licenses because they own, manage or invest in property.

I wonder if any of the other guy groups would think ASHI seedy because of this. I wonder if the other groups members could fall into the same type of non-pertinent situation as our have.

---

Posted: 25 Nov 2006 09:50 PM

…and no one has responded to this since it was posted.

[jbushart (James H. Bushart)]

ASHI…on the preferred vendor list.

Total Messages 50

Subject: vendor lists

---

>There is no problem with being on a list with other home
>inspectors, other professionals, or whatever. There’s
>also nothing wrong if the list is filtered by requiring
>everyone on it to be licensed, insured, or whatever.
>These are not “preferred vendor” lists as they have been
>discussed by the Ethics Committee.
>It is unethical to pay for referrals, and by that rule, it
>is also unethical to pay to be on a list of preferred
>vendors. They are one and the same. It’s not
>being on the list that is unethical, it is paying to be
>there. Even if the list is bundled with a bunch of
>advertising products which are ethical, the list would still
>be unethical if only those who advertise are listed.
>The ethics problem could be eliminated if the list has some
>indication that it is a paid advertisement, or that those
>listed have paid to be there. Then the potential
>clients will know that you are being recommended not because
>you are necessarily good, but because you paid for the
>recommendation. Then the list is no more than an
>advertisement in the office magazine.
>The ethics problem is not really in the list itself.
>It is in the potential that a client will take the listing
>recommendation as an indication of quality when in fact, it
>is simply an indication of the size of your pocketbook.
>Pete Engle, Chair, CEPP

Quite frankly, I disagree with ASHI’s stance on this issue. If a Real Estate Company offers a list of 10 home inspectors who paid to be put on that list, what is the harm? A man has to eat and pay the bills. Not being on a list will not make a man more ethical.

While we are on the subject of preferred vendors, ASHI should play by the same rules. They list a company as a preferred vendor for medical insurance. It states this on the ASHI website:

“ASHI’s newest member benefit program…health insurance through Marsh. This program offers you the opportunity to select the health insurance program you want from a variety of providers. Visit the Web site and complete the form…you’ll get the best quote available from the eight providers linked through the ASHI program.”

We sheep would think that ASHI has worked out a deal for us on medical insurance. Not true! I went through the link and applied. I then went through e-health insurance and applied. The rates and plans were identical. I voiced my concern but I was told they pay to be a preferred vendor and “it pays the bills”. Talk about misleading!

---

Posted: 16 Sep 2006 11:36 AM
Originally Posted: 16 Sep 2006 11:19 AM

email profile
quote reply

Peter Engle

Total Messages 11

Subject: vendor lists

---

ASHI doesn’t make any secret out of their standards for the Preferred Vendor program, and that’s the difference. If you go and ask ASHI how somebody gets to be a preferred vendor, they’ll tell you that there’s a selection process, and as a part of it, the vendors bid for the opportunity to be on the list.

If the RE lists were up-front, they would be less of a problem, and if the list is not directly tied to referrals, then it wouldn’t be a problem at all. Advertising is OK. Paying for referrals is not.

If you really don’t get the difference, come to Chapter leadership Day in October. There’s going to be a really good workshop session on ethics. It’s funny, that with all the really good education we do in ASHI on technical and business issues, we don’t do anything on ethics. We got this whole Ethics SoP, and pretty much nobody knows what it really says or why.

Everyone thinks that their own internal moral compass is correct, and yet everybody’s compass is slightly different than everybody else’s. Jeffrey Dahmer and Adolf Hitler thought that their moral compasses were correct, too. But in fact, professional ethics can be very specific, and not at all subject to personal feelings. Just like everything else in life, ethics takes training. ASHI is starting to move down that road, and I hope to see some solid ethics training opportunities in the very near future.

---

Posted: 16 Sep 2006 11:43 AM

email profile
quote reply

Ken Melton

Total Messages 50

Subject: vendor lists

---

Peter,

This statement by ASHI is misleading and false: you’ll get the best quote available from the eight providers linked through the ASHI program. I have proven it. You can not deny that it implies that ASHI members will be getting a discount.

ASHI is losing members because they are trying to dictate how an inspector markets his business. My old boss pulled out last year and took 5 of his people with him. He went with NAHI and if you will look their standards of practice closely mirrors ASHI so the quality of the inspection is not compromised. NAHI has changed their position on referrals and I believe ASHI should as well. I agree that directly paying an agent for referrals is an ethics issue. Being on a list is not. I joined ASHI by choice because of their Standards and Ethics and I uphold those with my inspections and my devotion to my clients. I can just as easily continue to provide that same quality service if I move on because ASHI’s overly restrictive policies. See attached NAHI Position Statement.

---

NAHI Position Statement.pdf
NAHI Position Statement

---

Posted: 16 Sep 2006 12:21 PM
Originally Posted: 16 Sep 2006 11:56 AM

email profile
quote reply

Charles Bellefontaine

Total Messages 102

Subject: vendor lists

---

Your comments about ASHI preferred programs is somewhat correct.

I don’t remember an RFP for, Prudential Auto & HomeOwners Insurance, Journal of Light Construction (JLC), Moneris Solutions, health insurance through Marsh, DHL Express, or Business Risk Partners E&O Insurance. If it was done, it was done by staff. I hope that they would have our best interest in deciding who gets to be a preferred vendor. I must concede that I didn’t really look into these programs to determine if it was worth wild. I put my faith in staff. I personally do not participate in any of these programs except for the JLC. I like the articles.

Charles M. Bellefontaine
If they only knew

---

Posted: 16 Sep 2006 12:40 PM

email profile
quote reply

Walter Jowers

Total Messages 825

Subject: vendor lists

---

>This statement by ASHI is misleading and false: “you’ll get the best quote available from the eight providers linked through the ASHI program.” I have proven it. You can not deny that it implies that ASHI members will be getting a discount.

Pardon me for jumping in, but that statement is neither false nor misleading. Sure, the providers will give you their best quote. Their best quote is whatever they say it is. It’s advertising talk, like the mouthwash that promises to kill “up to 99% of all bacteria.”

Of course, advertisers rely on consumers having a little deficiency in logic and comprehension.

This is all real simple: Any ASHIite who wants to be a realtor’s “preferred provider” can skip the cash payments and get on the office “we love 'em” list the usual way. Just go down to the RE office, wink, nod, and promise to be “thorough, professional, objective and fair to the house.” Then make sure all the RE agents who call get what they expect, which is help selling the house.

Nothing to it. If an inspecting boy doesn’t mind being a toady.

WJ

---

Posted: 16 Sep 2006 02:18 PM

profile
quote reply

Peter Engle

Total Messages 11

Subject: vendor lists

---

I agree that the ASHI preferred vendor program is kinda dumb, and that the title sure seems silly considering that we prohibit our own members from taking part in Preferred Vendor Programs. I have yet to take part in any of them (except JLC, like Chuck), because I’ve found that they don’t really provide much benefit. Still, it’s always been clear to me that these companies were paying for the use of our logos. How did I know that? Beats me, butI really don’t care all that much.

I was trying to explain that ASHI’s program is really nothing like the Realtor lists, but I guess I did it badly. Oh, well. Let’s try this:

As long as you depend on Realtors for business, you will be in a position of conflict. The more you rely on them, the greater the conflict is. Sure, that’s how HI business is done. And in the 70’s and 80’s defense contractors routinely bribed colonels and generals to give them big, fat, juicy contracts. That’s how things were done. Still doesn’t make it right.

As THE professional organization for HIs, we have to decide: do we want to head for the bottom, allowing every bottom-feeding ne’er do-well to happily join and feel good about their shoddy practices, or do we want to be able to hold up our heads and say we’re doing the right thing? Are we professionals or used car salesmen?

So far, the answer has been that we are professionals. NAHI took a step back when they allowed preferred vendor participation, but that was their choice. It’s also part of the reason that I chose ASHI 10 years ago, and that I’m still pretty happy with my choice.

---

Posted: 16 Sep 2006 08:55 PM

email profile
quote reply

Peter Engle

Total Messages 11

Subject: vendor lists

---

And one more thing. Again, professional ethics can be rather strict and unforgiving. It has nothing to do with how an individual “feels” about his or her own business practices.

Professional ethics rules are much more like Laws. They are drafted by organizations, reviewd by the membership, massaged, argued, and eventually ratified. They define a set of standards that the community as a whole is comfortable with. Just as you don’t get to decide if a given law “feels” fair or appropriate, you don’t get to decide if an ethical standard applies to you or not.

And ASHI is not the one that’s eventually going to judge whether the practice is fair or not. A jury will. If you’ve never been involved in a suit that alleges you were too cozy with a Realtor, consider yourself blessed. I’ve defended plenty of HIs who were very happy to not be on one of those lists, when everything hit the fan. And I can tell you that defending your sorry butt would be one helluva lot tougher if you’re on one of those lists than if you’re off of it.

---

Posted: 16 Sep 2006 09:00 PM

email profile
quote reply

Ken Melton

Total Messages 50

Subject: vendor lists

---

It is well established why ASHI does not approve of Preferred Partnerships with realty firms if you pay to be added to a list. Allow me to suggest another scenario for review. Assuming one belonged to their local realtors association as an affiliate member, would it be considered a violation to pay to advertise in their monthly newsletter? This newsletter goes to over 6000 realtors.

---

Posted: 17 Sep 2006 11:36 AM

[gromicko (Nick Gromicko, CMI)]

ASHI is correct on prohibiting preferred vendor lists which has nothing to do with advertising and everything to do with bribing. I tip my hat to ASHI on this issue. They are 100% correct.

[jmckenna1 (John McKenna, CMI)]

Thank you James for going through the boring process of finding
something on the ASHI forum that is interesting to read.

[gromicko (Nick Gromicko, CMI)]

Like looking for a needle in a haystack.

[jmckenna1 (John McKenna, CMI)]

http://www.texas-inspection.com/helpashi.jpg

[jbowman (John Bowman, Executive Director)]

To begin, I abhor and disapprove of this thread. I find it unbecoming, unprofessional, unethical, and inexcusable. It is disrespectful to the many members of this organization who hold dual status and to the profession.

Its a self inflicted “slap in the face” when members stoop to the point of stretching or violating ethical codes to disparage or discredit other professionals. I believed NACHI members to be above this dispicable unethical behavior and implore all to take a step back, look at themselves and decide if you want to be involved or associated with such vehement disregard for ethical standards.

I for one choose not too, and extend my personal apologies to anyone who has had their personal privacy violated by this over the line indiscretional behavior.

I understand and appreciate concerns when it comes to past attacks and indiscretions by non-NACHI members. I agree with you that it was not within the best interest of NACHI or the profession. But we have prevailed and succumbed the controversy and nay-sayers. (Our membership numbers speak for themselves in this respect).

I also believe that two wrongs don’t make a right.

Of serious consequence is the apparant disregard and total lack of respect for our own national and personal ethical standards. Standards that are used in the arduous task of upholding the honor of this association and our members. A task courageously upheld by a hard working ESOP committee.

Blatant disregard of those standards reeks of malcontent and total disrespect to this association, our ESOP, membership, and profession. The hacking or unethical entry into another website/bulletin board for no other purpose then to perpetuate or dig up “dirt” or unfavorable comment is beyond unethical. It’s treachery to the profession and something I will never condone, endorse, or support.

I sincerely hope that others will see this for what it is and move into the next step of professional courtesy amongst and within the home inspection profession.

[clawrenson (Claude Lawrenson)]

Thank you John. I agree 100% (plus). Finally a voice of reason and common “ethical” sense. Now, if this same logic and rationale could only carry over to other parts of the forums such as the Canadian contingent.

[lewens (Larry Ewens, C.M.R.I.C.)]

Claude
Don’t paint us all with the same brush.
Larry

[gbell (Greg Bell, Sr CMI)]

Hell our friends from the north are so good at creating discontent that us Yankees decided to be nice to each other and just watch you guys.

[wdecker (William Decker, CMI, IL. Lic. 450.002240)]

@jbowman

To begin, I abhor and disapprove of this thread. I find it unbecoming, unprofessional, unethical, and inexcusable. It is disrespectful to the many members of this organization who hold dual status and to the profession.

Its a self inflicted “slap in the face” when members stoop to the point of stretching or violating ethical codes to disparage or discredit other professionals. I believed NACHI members to be above this dispicable unethical behavior and implore all to take a step back, look at themselves and decide if you want to be involved or associated with such vehement disregard for ethical standards.

I for one choose not too, and extend my personal apologies to anyone who has had their personal privacy violated by this over the line indiscretional behavior.

I understand and appreciate concerns when it comes to past attacks and indiscretions by non-NACHI members. I agree with you that it was not within the best interest of NACHI or the profession. But we have prevailed and succumbed the controversy and nay-sayers. (Our membership numbers speak for themselves in this respect).

I also believe that two wrongs don’t make a right.

Of serious consequence is the apparant disregard and total lack of respect for our own national and personal ethical standards. Standards that are used in the arduous task of upholding the honor of this association and our members. A task courageously upheld by a hard working ESOP committee.

Blatant disregard of those standards reeks of malcontent and total disrespect to this association, our ESOP, membership, and profession. The hacking or unethical entry into another website/bulletin board for no other purpose then to perpetuate or dig up “dirt” or unfavorable comment is beyond unethical. It’s treachery to the profession and something I will never condone, endorse, or support.

I sincerely hope that others will see this for what it is and move into the next step of professional courtesy amongst and within the home inspection profession.

Well and eloquently said, sir.

[jbushart (James H. Bushart)]

I’ll try to find something interesting to post from the ASHI board later on today. Right now, it’s pretty quiet over there.

[rcooke (Roy D. Cooke, Sr)]

@clawrenson

Thank you John. I agree 100% (plus). Finally a voice of reason and common “ethical” sense. Now, if this same logic and rationale could only carry over to other parts of the forums such as the Canadian contingent.

Claude you make this sound so nice .
Well I have letter from you that you asked it to be kept confidential and I respect what you said and I do ,.

I wish you had treated me the same way . see below.

To: Claude Lawrenson
Sent: Monday, March 26, 2007 3:39 PM
Subject: Proof to be kept confidential

This is for your eyes only Claude Copnfidential.
Roy Cooke

Yes some how I got the letter The letter P in the Word Confidential.

Roy Cooke

[bkelly1 (Ben D. Kelly)]

@jbowman

To begin, I abhor and disapprove of this thread. I find it unbecoming, unprofessional, unethical, and inexcusable. It is disrespectful to the many members of this organization who hold dual status and to the profession.

Its a self inflicted “slap in the face” when members stoop to the point of stretching or violating ethical codes to disparage or discredit other professionals. I believed NACHI members to be above this dispicable unethical behavior and implore all to take a step back, look at themselves and decide if you want to be involved or associated with such vehement disregard for ethical standards.

I for one choose not too, and extend my personal apologies to anyone who has had their personal privacy violated by this over the line indiscretional behavior.

I understand and appreciate concerns when it comes to past attacks and indiscretions by non-NACHI members. I agree with you that it was not within the best interest of NACHI or the profession. But we have prevailed and succumbed the controversy and nay-sayers. (Our membership numbers speak for themselves in this respect).

I also believe that two wrongs don’t make a right.

Of serious consequence is the apparant disregard and total lack of respect for our own national and personal ethical standards. Standards that are used in the arduous task of upholding the honor of this association and our members. A task courageously upheld by a hard working ESOP committee.

Blatant disregard of those standards reeks of malcontent and total disrespect to this association, our ESOP, membership, and profession. The hacking or unethical entry into another website/bulletin board for no other purpose then to perpetuate or dig up “dirt” or unfavorable comment is beyond unethical. It’s treachery to the profession and something I will never condone, endorse, or support.

I sincerely hope that others will see this for what it is and move into the next step of professional courtesy amongst and within the home inspection profession.

Very nicely said, maybe some people should read it more than once. Finally a voice of reason and professionalism. Maybe we should have a poll:mrgreen:

[kswift (Keith Swift, PhD.)]

Well said, John. Reminds me of an ancient aphorism: “Thread has to go where the needle went.”

[jbushart (James H. Bushart)]

@gromicko

ASHI is correct on prohibiting preferred vendor lists which has nothing to do with advertising and everything to do with bribing. I tip my hat to ASHI on this issue. They are 100% correct.

While ASHI came in a close second to us in implementing this change to their COE, it is (I agree with you) great that they did.

In St. Louis, Columbia and Kansas City, however, they are still so closely interdependent that if you were to cut a real estate salesman an ASHI chapter president will bleed. Each one has his hand in the pocket of the other.

[clawrenson (Claude Lawrenson)]

Thanks Roy and so do I - so is it really worth the unethical pissing match? So I suggest its time to move on.

I suggest that many heed the words from John Bowman. When is enough, enough? Who will be the first one to take a stand to do the right thing?

To me, John sets a the perfect role as a leader and hopefully others see the wisdom in acting professionally. I am far from perfect, and we all have some faults, but it is past high time to start acting professionally.

Some may ask why? It starts with abiding by the code of ethics, that every home inspection states in acting professionally and abiding by those standards. Again, I am not here on a soap box to “preach”. But I think one of the biggest attributes of this forum, looses its significance when just about any person can read the “trash” that has very little value in presenting the best image.

Two wrongs do not make a right. Posting information that hurts people and associations serves no purpose other than to exhibit a lack of ethics. Putting even ethics aside - is it morally the right thing to do? Besides its like a rumour - can you really believe everything that you hear? How much really is true, and how much may be wishful thining or deathwish?

I say it needs to stop - the sooner the better - so I commend John for his comments and sincerity to start the ball rolling (almost) right from the top. He has set the example, lets see what we can do with it.

[gromicko (Nick Gromicko, CMI)]

I think there are 2 reasonable exceptions:

1. If it has something to do with the health of our industry, like Scumbag NAHI’s preferred vendor schemes, I think you can take the gloves off.

or

2. If you are being funny, like John McKenna’s post #85 which has me ROTFLMAO!

[jbushart (James H. Bushart)]

I have not seen the ASHI board this dead since I have been hanging out there. I mean, it is dead…it makes TIJ look like the Wall Street trading floor.

If anything of NACHI interest pops up, I’ll bring it over. Until then, on this thread, we will have to settle for the pontifications of our ED as he condemns these actions (with the aid of his new thesaurus).

[rcooke (Roy D. Cooke, Sr)]

@clawrenson

Thanks Roy and so do I - so is it really worth the unethical pissing match? So I suggest its time to move on.
Two wrongs do not make a right. Posting information that hurts people and associations serves no purpose other than to exhibit a lack of ethics. Putting even ethics aside - is it morally the right thing to do? Besides its like a rumour - can you really believe everything that you hear? How much really is true, and how much may be wishful thining or deathwish?
.

NACHI as far as I am concerned does more for all Home Inspectors and I will stand up for our rights and the rights of the Canadian Home Inspector .
Unfortunately you seem to have tunnel vision and do not stand up for NACHI against those who do try and destroy us .
You have only shown you do not like us who defend NACHI and choose to ignore those who complain about NACHI .
For you to try and tell me to stop and ignore others shows your favoritism and bigoted ways. .

Roy Cooke ,RHI,National Certification , CMI, CHI, CAHPI-ON