To all Canadian Inspectors

Claude and Bill should be made to publicly address "all NHICC card holding members " including PHPIC & ENIEB and by issuing a press release with a full formal apology.
A public section of their website should directly address any miss stated representation so there is no misunderstanding of what has been less than truthful promotion from a body promoting itself as a quasi public authority with high standards.
Since they play fast and loose with facts it calls into question other aspects of NHICC and PHPIC.
NHICC/PHPIC were not and are not compliant with SSC standards - CAN P9.

This has been confirmed by Standards Council Canada who have issued formal requests to have the erroneous statements removed.

Formerly NHICC stated openly and from day one on their website the following, which since has been updated recently due to complaints to Standards Council of Canada, and ICE - Institute for Credentialing Excellence.

http://nationalhomeinspector.org/aboutus.htm](http://nationalhomeinspector.org/aboutus.htm)

In addition, all roles and responsibilities related to the NCP explicitly
aligned to CAN-P-9 criteria (ISO certification) /or alternatively ICE - NCCA accredited.
The status of all former “certificate holders” (Now National Home
Inspectors™), Candidates, and accredited course providers would revert to
that existing model prior to abolition, thus reducing the hardship on
certificants.

The NHICC has established that its By-Laws, Policies and Procedures that mirror CAN-P-9/ICE compliance.
It also seeks additional accreditation with organizational ties that align with ISO Accreditation.

However the recruitment arm of PHPIC continues to be in breach by continuance of promoting false facts.
Standards Council of Canada has informed them to remove the erroneous statements as well.
But at this point in time PHPIC is not in abeyance.

http://www.phpic.ca/qualification.php

No other Canadian professional home inspection association can match the credentials of a PHPIC inspector.
PHPIC’s, PHPI™ inspectors are the only Canadian Home Inspectors who have received accreditation through an independent certification body.
PHPIC is the only Canadian Home and Property Inspection Association that is in reasonable compliance with the Standards
Council of Canada, CAN-P-9 criteria.

NHICC also misrepresented talks with CSA, this too created a storm of controversy and again NHICC was taken to task for embellishments which upon further investigation and discussions with CSA turned out to be a continuance of exaggerations.
Ditto statements about NHICC and the Institute for Credentialing Excellence - ICE.

Many of us are fed up with NHICC/PHPIC setting rules they themselves don’t abide by will continue to monitor NHICC/PHPIC for inappropriate misleading statements, and will continue to inform the appropriate overseeing bodies should NHICC/PHPIC fall short of quality characteristics of their professional commitment and to ensure its credibility are sound and reliable.

Thank you Roy, you and your buds are entitled to your “opinion”.

The NCP/NCA was found to be in "reasonable compliance’ with CAN-P-9 and we have never stated otherwise. This fact was issues in reports that date back to National Certification Programs acceptance even with other external stakeholders.

[FONT=Tahoma]As far as any mis-statements made by us, at the time every statement was issued, our facts were correct.[/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma][/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma][FONT=Calibri]Simply put, perhaps some people cannot read, understand or comprehend the word “reasonable” coupled with the word “compliance”. This is from the CHIBO 2 report from Griffiths-Sheppard - The governance and structural elements of the models are based on criteria defined in the CAN-P-9 Standard ‘Criteria for Accreditation of Personnel Certification Bodies’.
**
Defined - Reasonable:being in accordance with reason <a reasonable theory>

Defined - Compliance: the act or process of complying to a desire, demand, proposal, or regimen
[/FONT][/FONT]

The SCC and ICE have a completely different objective review of your statements Claude.
This is why you or your cohorts have already deleted and re written that which was in contravention of SCC on the NHICC site.
The NHICC recruitment arm PHPIC still remains in breach and SCC is well aware as is CSA and ICE of these outrageous breaches!

Again your repeated need to distort calls into question the NHICC legitimacy.

Playing fast and loose with facts to suit your agenda is not working and your replies do not sit well with the bodies you keep stating you are in compliance with, ergo you are not in compliance.

The optics are what you want them to be!

Nice try…Your interpretations are also open to question. Again you are entitled to your “opinion” of course if those are really your posts, or just copies from your buddy.

Again for clarification PHPIC is not our recruitment arm. Now who is misleading whom?

The immediate directors of the NHICC do not hold any official capacity with PHPIC. PHPIC simply believes in supporting the National Certification Program, just like several other associations and franchises.

If you have issues with PHPIC, I suggest that you direct your questions and focus or complaints to them. It’s simply like me trying to tell iNACHI or OntACHI how to run their association and pointing out their faults. It’s really none of my business! So how is it yours?

Harassment is any improper and unwelcome conduct or comment by a person which offends, humiliates, or degrades another person.

There are two elements involved in harassment, one invloves behaviour that is “improper” or “abusive”, the other with behaviour that is “unwelcome” or “unwanted”.

“Unwelcome” in this context means any actions which a reasonable person knows or ought reasonably to know are not desired by the subject of harassment. The behaviour is considered unwelcome if it is perceived as such by the person being harassed. The law views harassment in terms of the effect on the victim, not the intent of the harasser.

Harassment is a form of discrimination and is illlegal. All jurisdictions in Canada have human rights laws prohibiting discrimination on grounds, such as ancestry; race; ethnic or national origin; nationality; political belief, association or activity; religion or creed; marital or family status; sex, including pregnancy; age; physical or mental disability; and sexual orientation.

ote:Originally Posted by clawrenson http://nachi.cachefly.net/forum/images/2006/buttons/viewpost.gif
.
Nice try…Your interpretations are also open to question. Again you are entitled to your “opinion” of course if those are really your posts, or just copies from your buddy.

Again for clarification PHPIC is not our recruitment arm. Now who is misleading whom?

The immediate directors of the NHICC do not hold any official capacity with PHPIC. PHPIC simply believes in supporting the National Certification Program, just like several other associations and franchises.

If you have issues with PHPIC, I suggest that you direct your questions and focus or complaints to them. It’s simply like me trying to tell iNACHI or OntACHI how to run their association and pointing out their faults. It’s really none of my business! So how is it yours?

Oh that’s right - you seem to love nothing better than to be ***** disturber. You seem to have a real bias that shows time and time again that dates back years. Do I need to drag up the old posts to show how others feel about your truthfullness?

How’s that for optics from those sitting on the other side of the fence? Two and even more can play that silly game.

Get over it - move on - life’s too short!

[FONT=Calibri]These are not my interpretations Claude they are the interpretations from the bodies you say you comply with.
Will you deny that SCC and ICE have been in contact with you?

Unfortunately inquires made of PHPIC and NHICC have gone unanswered.
Not very professional of a national body to ignore the simplest ability to acknowledge emails.

Claude I am not the one sending out press releases with repeated abuses of the truth, your camp has a history of it and has been repeatedly documented.
There have been many opportunities for your camp to nip the problems when they were first brought to light. Instead its been denial, denial, denial.

The problems have mushroomed and no actions have ever been attempted to correct what you know and others know to be an abuse of office.

Yes get over it because the facts of truth have taken a back seat for quite awhile, and now they are taking a front seat.

Do you mind if I send your denials back to SCC and ICE because they should know just how NHICC and the recruitment arm operate.

When will NHICC and PHPIC issue a joint press release clearing up the misunderstandings.
I know that the licencing folks have been made aware of the gross oversights.

[/FONT]

Nice try…Your interpretations are also open to question. Again you are entitled to your “opinion” of course if those are really your posts, or just copies from your buddy.

Again for clarification PHPIC is not our recruitment arm. Now who is misleading whom?

The immediate directors of the NHICC do not hold any official capacity with PHPIC. PHPIC simply believes in supporting the National Certification Program, just like several other associations and franchises.

If you have issues with PHPIC, I suggest that you direct your questions and focus or complaints to them. It’s simply like me trying to tell iNACHI or OntACHI how to run their association and pointing out their faults. It’s really none of my business! So how is it yours?

Oh that’s right - you seem to love nothing better than to be ***** disturber. You seem to have a real bias that shows time and time again that dates back years. Do I need to drag up the old posts to show how others feel about your truthfullness?

How’s that for optics from those sitting on the other side of the fence? Two and even more can play that silly game.

Get over it - move on - life’s too short!

Claude for your Information

[FONT=Calibri]From the SCC
[/FONT]**"1.2 Program-specific accreditation requirements **[FONT=Times New Roman]as per CAN P9 for CB - Certifying Bodies.[/FONT]
***9.0 Publicity Guidelines ***
A significant benefit of SCC accreditation is that an accredited CB may publicize its competence based on a nationally and internationally recognized accreditation program.
SCC encourages such activities; however, restrictions apply to prevent misunderstanding about the significance of accreditation.
[FONT=Times New Roman]2. [/FONT]b) Only make claims of accreditation in respect of activities for which it has been granted accreditation;
[FONT=Times New Roman]2. [/FONT]c) Not use its accreditation in a manner as to bring SCC into disrepute;
[FONT=Times New Roman]3. [/FONT]d) Not make any statement regarding accreditation that the SCC may consider misleading and unauthorized;
[FONT=Times New Roman]4. [/FONT]e) Not allow the fact of its accreditation to be used to imply that a product, process, system or person is approved by SCC. "
[FONT=Calibri] [/FONT]

Roy you do and say whatever you please regardless of whether it’s true or not. Again opinion…a view or judgment formed about something, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge.

Again it is not my responsibilty to speak for PHPIC. I suggest - address your concerns to them. I cannot and will not speak for them, so don’t expect me to. There contacts are noted on their website.

The NHICC has always followed strict adherence to the governance and structural elements of the models based on criteria defined in Can-P-9. For you or others to suggest otherwise is another obvious smear campaign.

Hey - we can also pull some old skeltons out of the closet too, on the antics and false claims by others and their associations. Or their claimed representation or academics. But is that any more professional to join in continuing this nonsense!

We have also indicated that we are a member of ICE. There’s nothing illegal about stating such and pursuing their formal recognition. In fact the mere focus on this obviously seems to scare or threaten some people.

Regarding CSA, unless you have ALL the facts, again it’s mere speculation. We have documents and meeting notes that can easily prove otherwise. However, we respect CSA and will not jeopardize that relationship after the last unfortunate fiasco caused by guess who? Time and time again it’s - the same old, same old!

Here’s another example - how many time have you claimed that you follow the CAHPI or ASHI or OAHI SOP in reports when you were no longer a member?

Need a few reminders - I will gladly send it. A lot like somebody who believes anybody can claim to use the RHI, even after they were no longer fee paying members.

Yeah- albeit, some may view it as minor, or - oh I forgot to remove it! Certainly theirs loads more from my friends from down your way that I can offer about you and your antics.

I mean let’s not get ridiculous about this. You can have your guys versus my guys post all the dirty laundry. But in reality does that make you or the other posters any more professional?

Claude please do be careful you might be jumping out of the pot into the fire .
It is you who has and still is making errors.

I am ready from you but I would prefer you to do things properly .

The past can not harm me .

Remember when you tried to float the National Cert. with CAHPI, well at that time CAHPI stated, "CAHPI has always made it clear that the Certification Model does not comply with CAN-P-9, but is designed to be ‘reasonably compliant.’ That just means that we didn’t merely make up the rules and the procedures. We referenced patterns that were already in place and tested.

The NCP has not and will not be promoted as ‘meeting CAN-P-9’. Any accusations that it is being promoted as such by CAHPI National or the National Certification Authority are untrue and intentionally misleading."

As far as PHPIC one only has to go to their site to see the NHICC mentioned repeatedly and its rather interesting some of the same people on the NHICC cert. council and advisors also serve on the PHPIC BOD.

The learning objective seems to be a downward spiral with NHICC.

Claude I think you need a new rainmaker!

We still grow …and sometimes your plugs here help. Not everyone believes what you think they should believe.

So thanks for your free advertising …our numbers still grow; besides every organization has their pros and cons, none are perfect or free from fault!

Regarding CAHPI, CAHPI is not my friend…some in that organization cannot be trusted. CAHPI’s spin doctors make up a lot of stuff like owning the NCP, etc. They have fought the NHICC almost every step of the way. They continually say one thing, make empty promises and do something else. Afterall who tried to kill the NCP? Who controlled the NCP funds? Whose bright idea was it to charge outsiders more, just to name a few.

I know the real reason why - and so do others that fought them - for the National Program - it was a threat to the RHI. Many of the exact points you raised before of why they cannot see past their own self interest.

Again, I was not the only one involved with the National Program, there were 2 other chairs before me. If anything perhaps you should question their motives, and the mess I inherited including the demands set by a clandestine group to control the NCP. At least I and a hard working team of supporters tried to turn it around for the good of the industry, not the selfish back stabbers!

BTW: that quote you posted above is not from me - you preficed it indicating CAHPI stated…that’s correct because CAHPI fought with NCA board constantly over their (CAHPI’s) interference and breaches in compliance. But that’s past history…the best thing that happened was the opportunity to change that through the true seperation with the NHICC.

Like the criminal who pleads he is innocent only to be found guilty because the facts tell another story.
The facts from SCC/ICE have shown NHICC under your leadership and that of your board have been found not to comply and have directed NHICC and PHPIC to correct the repeated oversights. End of story.

I suggest you take your pleadings to those you and your group have insulted - SCC and ICE and the government that now has all the facts before them.

NHICC and PHPIC can’t put the Genie back in the bottle, and all the Kings men couldn’t put Humpty Dumpty together again!

Like the criminal who pleads he is innocent only to be found guilty because the facts tell another story.
The facts from SCC/ICE have shown NHICC under your leadership and that of your board have been found not to comply and have directed NHICC and PHPIC to correct the repeated oversights. End of story.

I suggest you take your pleadings to those you and your group have insulted - SCC and ICE and the government that now has all the facts before them.

NHICC and PHPIC can’t put the Genie back in the bottle, and all the Kings men couldn’t put Humpty Dumpty together again!

Like the criminal who pleads he is innocent only to be found guilty because the facts tell another story.
The facts from SCC/ICE have shown NHICC under your leadership and that of your board have been found not to comply and have directed NHICC and PHPIC to correct the repeated oversights. End of story.

I suggest you take your pleadings to those you and your group have insulted - SCC and ICE and the government that now has all the facts before them.

NHICC and PHPIC can’t put the Genie back in the bottle, and all the Kings men couldn’t put Humpty Dumpty together again!

How long has this claim been in existence? Talking about facts it`s been well over 2 months and no notices, other than the constant nonsense from the same old claim to be know-it-alls!

Its kinda like those that have a habit of filing complaints and do not like the response because it does not have substantive merit. As they say theres always another side to the story.

Again there was no reason since there was no infringement. Its all in one`s interpretation or perception, the NHICC never claimed it was compliant. Read again the plain english defintion of being reasonably compliant and the CHIBO 2 Report published by the Consultants. (The source of the statement - The governance and structural elements of the models are based on criteria defined in the CAN-P-9 Standard ‘Criteria for Accreditation of Personnel Certification Bodies’.)

Its too bad some stoop to creating another crisis, where one never exist. Its also too bad you continue to show your personal bias and disdain, along with harrassing charcteristics to those you targeted in your first post.

Now as I stated eralier - get ready for some push back.



Gee Claude not nice to threaten** Black mail .**
You have said this more then once .
As I said before you might be jumping from the frying pan into the fire .

Might it not be smarter to just fix your wrong doing .

Roy - Not nice to do a lot of thing you do either, or claims that you make. What makes you the gatekeeper and Mr. Never Wrong! There’s no blackmail involved - its a simple response to your actions.

Why fix it when it was legally vetted. Again your beliefs and assumptions are not always right. It’s the old story of someone making a mountain out of a mole hill.

Again if you have issues with the other organization - why not contact them? Or are you afraid to hear their response. You see crying wolf too many times over nonsense diminishes your credibility with others that see through your stirring the pot and trouble causing behaviours.

Just because “we” may have two people in common on our board, for clarification - both are not directors or a voting member of our Board. Both are advisors. One representing inter-communication, the other represent First Nation inspectors.

Did you notice none our our directors hold any official office with PHPIC? That speaks for itself. We are not and never will be one in the same as you claim. Example - I have not held membership in PHPIC for several years, I have not been a director for several years. When PHPIC was formed three of the directors resigned their position. That being Bill, George and myself.

I suggest - get your facts straight from a reliable source before you make false accusations, because most of this discussion is about “what you and your buddy” think. Perhaps consider looking at it from the other side from those that see it differently.

We can also agree to disagree and move on like gentle men!