Ontario Assoc. of Home Inspectors Newsletter 3 rd quarter

[Raymond Wand]

http://www.oahi.com/goto.php?mt=2434...php%3Fid%3D509

Similar Threads:

• OREA Letter to Realtors and Agents regarding Ontario Licencing of Inspectors
• Ontario MCS/SEG Home Inspection Survey
• How's Your 4th Quarter? U.S. pending home sales jump to nearly a 6-year high!
• Another Inspection Assoc. for Ontario

[Claude Lawrenson]

Thanks Raymond. It's interesting to see their take on who should be the "go to" entity for licensing.

[Raymond Wand]

... well it makes sense to me. I would rather have them hold sway than OACHI who is a very questionable outfit. Heck I'd even go with NHICC over OACHI.

We still don't know if this whole licencing thing will actually happen. KW rule is a mess as is the budget. It just might get shelved. Time will be the indicator.

Best,

[ROBERT YOUNG]

I hope neither/any of the associations will hold sway.

Grandfathering would stop the infighting.

[Claude Lawrenson]

I hope neither/any of the associations will hold sway.

Grandfathering would stop the infighting.

Robert - can you please explain how you see "grandfathering" stop the infighting?

I simply see it as giving every home inspector from a certain point a "free" pass. What about those left out of that process?

How would grandfathering - really "protect consumers" any differently other than that select group are the first cohort being "licensed"?

The only thing as pointed out in the OAHI piece, is raise the bar to a fair and equitable level, rather than lowering it!

[Raymond Wand]

Hi Claude

How can approximately 1500 inspectors be reviewed to meet certain criteria, without some form of grandfathering? Who is going to review the 1500 inspectors, the government, each association?

We know not all associations are what they say they are, and it seems everyone is vying for position.

The other problem is that some associations state that their members are 'certified' when we know for a fact the only association which can credibly state they certify inspectors is ASHI.

Best,

[Claude Lawrenson]

Hi Claude

How can approximately 1500 inspectors be reviewed to meet certain criteria, without some form of grandfathering? Who is going to review the 1500 inspectors, the government, each association?

We know not all associations are what they say they are, and it seems everyone is vying for position.

The other problem is that some associations state that their members are 'certified' when we know for a fact the only association which can credibly state they certify inspectors is ASHI.

Best,

Thanks Raymond - good point. Is 1500 the actual number? Nonetheless, even 1000 is a large number, let alone even 750 to process. The actual numbers dropped that initially applied for licensing in BC and Alberta. Although the numbers have since risen.

On the other hand I would have to believe that the DAA (Designated Administrative Authority) would set a "benchmark", requiring documentation and other specific conditions (proof) required to assure that inspectors are really meeting "that" benchmark. To me that is not "grandfathering" but rather what we referred to in the college education system as PLAR (Prior Learning Assessment Review). It's simply not a "free" pass that "grandfathering" tends to imply.

It's also interesting to see you raise the point about ASHI and their certification process to achieve "ACI". To me as you indicated they have raised the bar, and meet with acceptance as an accredited certification body. Something that no other home inspection association has achieved to date.

[ROBERT YOUNG]

Thanks Raymond - good point. Is 1500 the actual number? Nonetheless, even 1000 is a large number, let alone even 750 to process. The actual numbers dropped that initially applied for licensing in BC and Alberta. Although the numbers have since risen.

On the other hand I would have to believe that the DAA (Designated Administrative Authority) would set a "benchmark", requiring documentation and other specific conditions (proof) required to assure that inspectors are really meeting "that" benchmark. To me that is not "grandfathering" but rather what we referred to in the college education system as PLAR (Prior Learning Assessment Review). It's simply not a "free" pass that "grandfathering" tends to imply.

It's also interesting to see you raise the point about ASHI and their certification process to achieve "ACI". To me as you indicated they have raised the bar, and meet with acceptance as an accredited certification body. Something that no other home inspection association has achieved to date.

I recent case in point. Quebec grandfathered REA to become brokers. 2013 if my memory serves me well.
As well please indicate to me one trade required yearly CEU's.
We inspect what has been built non-destructively.

I understand a bar being set but the minimum assessment bar is SOP no matter what you suggest.

Working for two masters appears to be just one of many issues.

[Claude Lawrenson]

I recent case in point. Quebec grandfathered REA to become brokers. 2013 if my memory serves me well.
As well please indicate to me one trade required yearly CEU's.
We inspect what has been built non-destructively.

I understand a bar being set but the minimum assessment bar is SOP no matter what you suggest.

Working for two masters appears to be just one of many issues.

Realtors are a breed of their own.

Sorry but for clarification of your comment the SOP does not define "qualifications" for licensing. It only provides a minimum "standard" for performance of a home inspection.

As Raymond stated the use of the term "certified" is misleading.

A body that is not at arms length in certifying members is open to question with respect to claiming members are certified. One common example is mandating that members complete their "mandatory" courses in order to gain their certification.

Under ISO Standards - Certification – the provision by an "independent body" of written assurance (a certificate) that the product, service or system in question meets specific requirements.

Regardless, in Ontario the DAA will be handling home inspector licensing to meet the established "regulations" set by a yet to be established Home Inspector Act.

For a large part "realtors" in most all of Canada already had an established regulation that provided the benchmark measure for qualifications.

[ROBERT YOUNG]

Realtors are a breed of their own.

Realtors were grandfather Claude in 2013.
You can say the same about everyone vying for recognition before the shoe drops but grandfather by RE is very meaningful in this discussion.

Sorry but for clarification of your comment the SOP does not define "qualifications" for licensing. It only provides a minimum "standard" for performance of a home inspection.

I am not saying it did.
I am pointing out that a minimum standard for inspection performance has been accepted. SOP
So should home inspectors and their associations certifications.
No difference.

As to furthering, continuing, yearly, audited education... Home Buyers left with big bills when home inspectors miss defects. Could you indicate how much more education or the use of implementing provincial licensing would have prevented this from occurring, Claude.
From my understanding, Christopher Stockdale use to be the president of CAPHI in B.C.
I am sure he meet all the prerequisites many are talking about that should be introduced into Ontario's regulations.

As Raymond stated the use of the term "certified" is misleading.

A body that is not at arms length in certifying members is open to question with respect to claiming members are certified. One common example is mandating that members complete their "mandatory" courses in order to gain their certification.

Good point.
And it should remain the same untouched.

Under ISO Standards - Certification – the provision by an "independent body" of written assurance (a certificate) that the product, service or system in question meets specific requirements.

Regardless, in Ontario the DAA will be handling home inspector licensing to meet the established "regulations" set by a yet to be established Home Inspector Act.

For a large part "realtors" in most all of Canada already had an established regulation that provided the benchmark measure for qualifications.

I like what you are saying, Claude. The R word is how I think Ontario should go.

Feel free to drop me any information on DAA and the process.

Best regards.

NOTE: Joe Ferry home inspection lawyer has quashed 99.7 percent of his 1,200 meritless claims and everyone wants insurance numbers. Interesting!

[Claude Lawrenson]

Robert what happens or happened in Quebec, is not the whole picture.

What happens in the BC for licensing is not the same as Alberta or perhaps what may happen in Ontario. Vive la difference.

I can only offer what I see from having been involved with the NHICC in 2 provinces with licensing, and having served as a representative in Ontario on the MGCS panel.

As I stated earlier about grandfathering and licensing so far in Canada, respecting home inspectors was not about grandfathering. Please let us know who was grandfathered. It certainly was not the person you named earlier as President of the former CAHPI-BC. Nobody that I know was given a "free pass" to a license, and I know a good number of inspectors in both BC and Alberta. The regulations by the government set a benchmark for qualification.

Inspectors either met it, or did not and had to upgrade or complete the gaps of their shortfall.

[ROBERT YOUNG]

It certainly was not the person you named earlier as President of the former CAHPI-BC. Nobody that I know was given a "free pass" to a license, and I know a good number of inspectors in both BC and Alberta. The regulations by the government set a benchmark for qualification.

Inspectors either met it, or did not and had to upgrade or complete the gaps of their shortfall.

You missed my point.
I am certain the below mentioned had all the credentials and then some.
Are you telling me more and continued education would have prevented what occurred?
Bunk.

Grandfathering is a mechanism to count and follow all certified home inspectors in that province.
I know of NO one trade or profession where you are required continued yearly education.

I love how this misinformation, yearly education will protect the largest investment individuals may likely make in their lifetimes.
Joe ferry has quashed 99.7 percent of meritless claims.
I am sure that statistic was avoided as everyone vied for special position$$$
Mike Holmes comes to mind.
Hmmm.

[Claude Lawrenson]

I guess we can at least agree to disagree.

However you have not answered my question regarding "how many home inspectors have been grandfathered under licensing" in Canada.

BTW: Continuing education is required in BC with home inspector licensing.

[ROBERT YOUNG]

I guess we can at least agree to disagree.

However you have not answered my question regarding "how many home inspectors have been grandfathered under licensing" in Canada.

BTW: Continuing education is required in BC with home inspector licensing.

So sorry. I was not paying attention.
Excuse me, please.

As to your question, how many licensed provinces grandfathered certified home inspectors?
One: Alberta. Home inspectors with the designation, CMI were grandfathered.

Talking to Vern opened my eyes to how certain individual/associations affected InterNACHI members Claude. I think he said they where trying to keep InterNACHI out of the discussion.

I even heard a term used, "after InterNACHI hijacked the decision.....
Hmmm.

A bad thing, Clude? NO! They could work and eat!
Even now you agree with Lenard "Closing the loop hole.."

It's not that we disagree to agree, you and your idea of the home inspection utopia run my by the Nation Card Holders Program.

Look at what occurred after licensing, amendments, amendments, amendments, Claude.
Scottsdale get it write?

They will never get it right at the expense of the taxpayer and the good old wild cards, "the consumer and refered home inspectors."

It appears no one is talking/listening to homies on the ground and what they go through at times.
Too bad.
So sad.
I got a round of applause discussing the mind field I walk through the first years in front of a commision.
I am sure others that followed had something to say to insure they looked and talked better.
Give me a break!

At lest Ontario gave the home inspector globe a real good shake. That I applaud unconditionally. Bravo!!

home inspection water globe.JPG

Let's see what happens when all the flakes fall and settle out and what Santa left for our Western Neighbour.
Best regards Claude.

[ROBERT YOUNG]

Robert - can you please explain how you see "grandfathering" stop the infighting?

We all go through the gates.

I simply see it as giving every home inspector from a certain point a "free" pass. What about those left out of that process?

They are grandfathered. Everyone that has passed a recognised course successfully keeps on working.

How would grandfathering - really "protect consumers" any differently other than that select group are the first cohort being "licensed"?

Grandfathering allows everyone to be heard. Not just the select group.
Thank you for using that term, "select group"

The only thing as pointed out in the OAHI piece, is raise the bar to a fair and equitable level, rather than lowering it!

You forget there is a bar set. The only government bar not set are business regulations.
Identification, vehicle signage, vehicle Commercial Plates, Insurance, CSST, etc...

[Claude Lawrenson]

Thanks for your opinion.

Here's another POV:
The grandfather clause is a statement that an organization makes to declare that, before a specific date, certain individuals or processes do not comply with company rules or regulations.

Some people wonder whether using the grandfather clause is a free pass to forgo records. The answer is no. You still need the records. Granted, those records may lack certain objective evidence, but that’s exactly where the grandfather clause comes in.

Reference: What Is the Grandfather Clause and When Should I Use It? | Quality Digest

In the above I emphasize "do not comply" and evidence such as "records" are required, and may lack "objective" evidence. Thus in your suggested system - everyone currently practicing or claiming to practice home inspections in the province would be licensed. I don't believe that is the intent of really protecting "consumers".

But more to the point - making any specific home inspection association in charge of licensing would only appear to be an unacceptable means to grant licensing. Again both BC and Alberta did not favor the one association over the others. Again consider the value of setting a reasonable rigorous benchmark, and the opportunity to assure "fairness" in the licensing process.

From the Panel Report: "Qualifications to become a licensed home inspector should include passing a written exam, a field test and experience requirements. Only licensed home inspectors should be allowed to conduct home inspections. Ongoing professional development should be required so home inspectors stay up to date."
http://www.ontariocanada.com/registr...chmentId=22811

[ROBERT YOUNG]

Thanks for your opinion.

Ongoing professional development should be required so home inspectors stay up to date."
http://www.ontariocanada.com/registr...chmentId=22811

Then I guess the same holds true for the trades and technicians that build what we inspect.
Funny when you think of it realistically.

Nothing changes at their end so why ours?

As for proof.
I fully concur. No proof, regulations keeps you out of the industry.

See, grandfathering was here already. No one wants to admit it.

Funny how many avoid the truth.

[Raymond Wand]

Why grandfathering What Is the Grandfather Clause and When Should I Use It? | Quality Digest

The grandfather clause helps us to recognize that things were done differently before ISO requirements were instituted. It is a way for the organization to approve those people and processes, based on historical performance, to continue being part of the organization.

Page 35 - Panel Recommendation on Transition Issues
http://www.ontariocanada.com/registr...chmentId=22811

Good article Claude.

[Claude Lawrenson]

Thanks Raymond

Ontario Report - Page 53

The government should establish transition provision for persons currently practicing as home inspectors.
a) There should be an 18 month notice period before licensing requirements come into effect.
b) Home inspectors with designations from existing organizations that reflect the licensing requirements of the DAA and are approved by the DAA may become licensed without further review.
c) A process should be put in place for submissions from organizations to demonstrate how their designations reflect the licensing requirements of the DAA.
d) Home inspectors without an approved designation should undergo an individual assessment of their education and experience by the home inspector regulatory body who would determine if additional training, experience, examination, or test inspection is required before a license is issued.

The BIGGER question is which designations will meet the benchmark?

Of course "may" does not guarantee this will be the case.

[ROBERT YOUNG]

Could I see some statistical data first showing why this is necessary.

[Claude Lawrenson]

Robert, I have no data to release. I can only offer from my own personal view what seems to be the trend.

It was interesting to sit on the "Ontario" panel and get the concerns about protecting consumers from other representatives outside of the home inspection business.

Licensing of the home inspection sector is being considered in several other provinces. So I see it as being based on the "domino theory". Once one falls to regulation, particularly the larger provinces, and being key pieces, it's simply a matter of time until the rest follow.

From another perspective I first got involved in this "service" about 30 years ago. At the turn of the century there was a movement to "unify" this "service sector", that failed for a number of reasons. Mostly caused by association politics. More splintering, more false illusions, and bit of smoke and mirrors.

A simple look at several forums indicates the politics and other stuff has done nothing to change public perception. Public perception of what home inspectors do, and publicly display on open forums along with the news about a lousy inspection in the headlines has drawn the attention of people with political connections.

No data, but simply my take, now connect the dots!

[ROBERT YOUNG]

Robert, I have no data to release. I can only offer from my own personal view what seems to be the trend.

Thank you for your answers, Claude.

It was interesting to sit on the "Ontario" panel and get the concerns about protecting consumers from other representatives outside of the home inspection business.

I would have loved to sit and watch any panel.
Using representatives outside of the home inspection business skews the affect we are all after.
Consumer protection!
Unfortunately, it always reverts to, "save me from my competitor."
Too bad.
So sad.
Much time wasted I feel.

Licensing of the home inspection sector is being considered in several other provinces. So I see it as being based on the "domino theory". Once one falls to regulation, particularly the larger provinces, and being key pieces, it's simply a matter of time until the rest follow.

Clude, it has been considered for many years. Unfortunately the same voices keep lifting their heads and running off to commissions and panel decisions with the same old same old.

From another perspective I first got involved in this "service" about 30 years ago. At the turn of the century there was a movement to "unify" this "service sector", that failed for a number of reasons. Mostly caused by association politics. More splintering, more false illusions, and bit of smoke and mirrors.

I know you have been at this a long time Claude. My hat is off to you. I wish I had that many years left and the energy to get in front of some of these panels.
Hucksters are in every service industry. Buyer beware.

A simple look at several forums indicates the politics and other stuff has done nothing to change public perception. Public perception of what home inspectors do, and publicly display on open forums along with the news about a lousy inspection in the headlines has drawn the attention of people with political connections.

No data, but simply my take, now connect the dots!

Thank you for your take and honesty on this.
As expressed, my hat is off to you and always has been.
You are a man of convictions and stern beliefs. Wish their were more!

Claude, I think you made a good point about public perception.
It is a paramount point the way I see it.
I have little faith in surveys of public perception.
What the public say and do are likely two different things.

Kindest regards as always.
Robert

[ROBERT YOUNG]

Thanks Raymond

Ontario Report - Page 53

The government should establish transition provision for persons currently practicing as home inspectors.
a) There should be an 18 month notice period before licensing requirements come into effect.
b) Home inspectors with designations from existing organizations that reflect the licensing requirements of the DAA and are approved by the DAA may become licensed without further review.
c) A process should be put in place for submissions from organizations to demonstrate how their designations reflect the licensing requirements of the DAA.
d) Home inspectors without an approved designation should undergo an individual assessment of their education and experience by the home inspector regulatory body who would determine if additional training, experience, examination, or test inspection is required before a license is issued.

The BIGGER question is which designations will meet the benchmark?

Of course "may" does not guarantee this will be the case.

Thanks for this, Claude.
Everything looks in order to allow a smooth transition period.

Could you include:
1: How many parties create the DAA.
2: What sectors do they represent.

Looking forward to your reply.
Regards.

[Raymond Wand]

For you interest.

Delegated Administrative Authorities Act, 2012, S.O. 2012, c. 8, Sched. 1
https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/12d08#BK12

https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/96s19#BK9

Board

8. (1) The Minister may appoint at pleasure one or more members to the board of directors of a designated administrative authority as long as the members appointed by the Minister do not constitute a majority of the board. 1996, c. 19, s. 8 (1).
Composition

(2) The members appointed by the Minister may include representatives of consumer groups, business, government organizations or such other interests as the Minister determines. 1996, c. 19, s. 8 (2).

Duties

(5) The board of a designated administrative authority shall,

(a) suggest to the Minister amendments to Acts and regulations made under Acts that it considers would contribute to the purpose of this Act or designated legislation;

(b) inform and advise the Minister with respect to matters that are of an urgent or critical nature and that are likely to require action by the administrative authority or Minister to ensure that the administration of designated legislation delegated to the administrative authority is carried out properly; and

(c) advise or report to the Minister on any matter that the Minister may refer to the board relating to this Act or to the administration of designated legislation delegated to the administrative authority. 1996, c. 19, s. 8 (5).
Members

(6) If the administration of designated legislation is delegated to a designated administrative authority, the administrative authority may, by by-law, require that all persons who, in order to carry out an activity governed by the legislation, are required to register or obtain a licence, permit, certificate or any other authorization become members of the administrative authority on the terms that it specifies. 1996, c. 19, s. 8 (6).

Also Power Point
https://www.eiseverywhere.com/file_u...thorities3.pdf

[Claude Lawrenson]

Thanks Raymond.....

Did you notice the caveat at the beginning regarding its' status. Just one more hurdle in the path to regulation.

[ROBERT YOUNG]

Much appreciated.
The both of you.

[Raymond Wand]

Claude,

No didn't see status part, will check it out.

But I did read that the minister may create two overseeing bodies under one DAA. One body would be regulatory and the other administrative. Regulatory body could be OAHI or NHICC, and the administrative made up of public and industry types. Theoretically speaking of course.

Best,

[ROBERT YOUNG]

Claude,

No didn't see status part, will check it out.

But I did read that the minister may create two overseeing bodies under one DAA. One body would be regulatory and the other administrative. Regulatory body could be OAHI or NHICC, and the administrative made up of public and industry types. Theoretically speaking of course.

Best,

I think any licensing regulatory body should be governed by the provincial government.
All prerequisites are meet yearly. Like going to a license bureau.
Bring in what is required, it is audited, and your license mailed out to you.
Government tracks everything.

[Raymond Wand]

Claude and Robert,

Who do you feels should do the auditing of inspectors to ensure qualifications are up to snuff? My own personal opinion is that it should not be left up to associations since its a conflict.

I do know that both OAHI and NHICC are more than committed to ensure their members are fully assessed based on sound principals and not necessarily on the honour system. Since we have learned that one title is not actually audited contrary to what was promoted.

Best,

[ROBERT YOUNG]

Thank you for your confidence in my thoughts on this matter, Raymond.
Much appreciated and respected.

I concur with your thoughts on this matter.
Association's can deal with their member's education, accreditation's/designations and CEU's.

If/when auditing is amended into a regulation under certain rules and conditions, a request can be put forth to the association as a formal request to have their members time served, education, and destinations for proof.

The association notifies their member what is occurring at the request of the auditor, all are cc'ed any communications.

That way everything is transparent and above board.

Their should also be a mention of privacy and the right to refusal by the member or association if the request appear to be disingenuous.

The auditor must have strict guidelines to follow to insure no overreaching powers are granted them for a witch hunt.

An independent third party can act as a monitor to insure the auditing PROCESS, not the information, is done transparently and without malus or abuse of power/s.

Excuse me if I worded my thoughts on this incorrectly.
I am trying to be genuine and sincere on the matter.
Having never attended a committee or been formally educated as you have, Ray and Claude, I am sorry if my remarks seem out of place and please excuse me if they are.
Any correction will be noted.

[Raymond Wand]

Thanks Robert, that was pretty much along the lines of my thinking. Auditing has to be at arms length, and an independent process.

Btw I didn't know I was formerly educated. Just experience and somewhat of an unrelated education. I have forgotten more than I know!

I am sorry if my remarks seem out of place and please excuse me if they are.
Any correction will be noted.

Nope you said it succinctly. No corrections and no need to apologize, its overused word these days, and that's why you never hear me apologize.

Best,

[ROBERT YOUNG]

Thanks Robert, that was pretty much along the lines of my thinking. Auditing has to be at arms length, and an independent process.

Btw I didn't know I was formerly educated. Just experience and somewhat of an unrelated education. I have forgotten more than I know!

I guess the old adage is true, "You can't judge a book by its cover."
Thankfully having the grace of God to steer my direction I have forgotten what many tried to teach me as their methods but always knew better.

Nope you said it succinctly. No corrections and no need to apologize, its overused word these days, and that's why you never hear me apologize.

Best,

Must be a Canadian thing.
Much thanks.
Best to you as well.

[Claude Lawrenson]

Claude and Robert,

Who do you feels should do the auditing of inspectors to ensure qualifications are up to snuff? My own personal opinion is that it should not be left up to associations since its a conflict.

I do know that both OAHI and NHICC are more than committed to ensure their members are fully assessed based on sound principals and not necessarily on the honour system. Since we have learned that one title is not actually audited contrary to what was promoted.

Best,

Thank you for acknowledging that difference. As you likely know the NHICC follows rigorously established "national certification" standards. We believe that our standard is one at a higher level, and accountability scale than most others. You might say our motto to some degree when it comes to our background review process is "show us the proof".

To further back this up we have maintained membership in the Institute of Credentialing Excellence, follow their "standards" and have gone further to achieve recognition with a "Credentialing Specialist".

[Raymond Wand]

An American view on licencing
Can Licensing Be Fixed? | Pro Remodeler

Meanwhile in Ontario renovators and contractors remain unlicenced. More horror stories about lack of oversite for contractors/renovators than home inspection horror stories.

[Claude Lawrenson]

An American view on licencing
Can Licensing Be Fixed? | Pro Remodeler

Meanwhile in Ontario renovators and contractors remain unlicenced. More horror stories about lack of oversite for contractors/renovators than home inspection horror stories.

Thanks Raymond, it's interesting to see that "others" remain unlicensed that equally do as much harm to consumers than most home inspectors. As you well know even a basic search of complaints filed with the BBB indicates who they should be pursuing.

http://www.bbb.org/globalassets/loca...statistics.pdf

[Raymond Wand]

Claude

That link tells a compelling story and opposite to what the government entities imparted that complaints where through the roof. Pity that it the true stats appear to have been distorted for poltical gain. But given the history of the current regime at Queens park its not surprising. They have quite a history of distortion and lies.

Best,

[ROBERT YOUNG]

Claude

That link tells a compelling story and opposite to what the government entities imparted that complaints where through the roof. Pity that it the true stats appear to have been distorted for political gain.

It appears many use distorted anything instead of selective evidence.
Where are the individuals who's purpose it is to insure evidence is used to act as checks and balances against distorted rhetoric some bring to the table?

But given the history of the current regime at Queens park its not surprising. They have quite a history of distortion and lies.

Best,

Shame if that is the case.

[Raymond Wand]

Where's the evidence? Good question. I stand to be corrected, but to my recollection only verbal evidence was presented.

I believe there were something around 150 complaints the ministry claims it based its decisions on.

Did anyone ever see these complaints, were they asked for or provide to back up the claims? We know what the BBB stats say, and we know given the number of transactions per year the ratio of court claims is small.

Which leads me to ask further did the insurer sitting on the panel provide anecdotal or hard copies of claims/loss?

[Claude Lawrenson]

I heard a similar number too! However, I have seen no hard evidence to verify that stat or exactly where or how that number was derived from. Certainly there are a number of possible sources, but BBB stats portrays a national statistic.

The other part is exactly how many are legitimate claims versus simple complaints that are beyond the scope of work?

Earlier insurance studies when some stats were available included many claims against inspectors that typically included code related issues, and items beyond the SOP. Having sat on a few Professional Practices Committees I have seen claims where simply home inspectors are viewed as a form of consumer protection against just about anything that goes wrong in a home.

[ROBERT YOUNG]

Claude, Raymond, as always, thank your thoughts on the subject.
Raymond, thank you for the number/s. 150 claims.
Attempting to post my thoughts on this subject was not fruitful. PC Errors.
I will do my best to follow through now.

Evidence; First off, insurance claim information is privy for more reasons than I can think of. Any other statistical data would have to be relevant.

Claims and successful claims are two different issues.
As I see it, there are alleged or pending claims, and successful claims.
Apples and oranges comparisons IMO.

Evidence appears to be the mater at hand.
If the number is correct, 150 claims, and I highly doubt it, Ontario news services would have ran any successful claims as head line articles for the past 3 years.
I have not seen any.

There is only one lawyer I know that specifically deals with/in home inspectors' claims. That would be Joe Ferry.
Joe has distinguished himself throughout North America with:
Work Without Worry with ClaimIntercept
A strategic response that squashes meritless claims!
The first-line-of-defense tool for every home inspector

I am flabbergasted at times how association bias intercepts logic. Especially in cases such as possible provincial regulations and licensing.
Evidence should be subject to scrutiny for the best available information possible.
I have heard so much bias it is troubling, truly.

Back on topic.
I have retained Joe Ferry and Claims Intercept for going on 2 or 3 years.
I forget how many years at the moment.
It is one of those business expenses you do not measure by time until you need it.
Joe ferry sent me a memo recently stating that he has had over 1,200 cases. 99.7 were proven to be merit-less.
May I recommend going to a credible source that would be capable of offering such numbers to a committee?
Ops. Foolish thing. He now is retained by InterNACHI.

[Claude Lawrenson]

Robert I do not under value what Joe Ferry provides, however insurers typically utilize their own legal beagles and method to handle claims. I do know from first hand experience by conducting after the claim inspections to provide a second opinion for the insurer, the importance of an outside opinion. This is often the format used to help the insurer decide the best approach, to either defend or settle a claim.

The first and foremost principle is - did the inspector follow the SOP as a minimum? Are there conditions that should have been fairly obvious to the original inspector to report? What is missing in the inspection report? I've seen far too many poorly written and missed conditions on what we call the Test Inspection with Peer Review process. One indisputable facts we established that some of best failed home inspectors to meet a minimum 80% find rate, on their test inspection. Even since that benchmark, that number remains fairly close. So what does that indicate about the accuracy rate?

Hence "report writing" is a skill that every home inspector needs to master.

I do not doubt there are clients that will look to blame the home inspector, but nothing should be taken for granted.

[ROBERT YOUNG]

Robert I do not under value what Joe Ferry provides, however insurers typically utilize their own legal beagles and method to handle claims. I do know from first hand experience by conducting after the claim inspections to provide a second opinion for the insurer, the importance of an outside opinion. This is often the format used to help the insurer decide the best approach, to either defend or settle a claim.

The first and foremost principle is - did the inspector follow the SOP as a minimum? Are there conditions that should have been fairly obvious to the original inspector to report? What is missing in the inspection report? I've seen far too many poorly written and missed conditions on what we call the Test Inspection with Peer Review process. One indisputable facts we established that some of best failed home inspectors to meet a minimum 80% find rate, on their test inspection. Even since that benchmark, that number remains fairly close. So what does that indicate about the accuracy rate?

Hence "report writing" is a skill that every home inspector needs to master.

I do not doubt there are clients that will look to blame the home inspector, but nothing should be taken for granted.

Master?
Checklist dispel that theory.

Claude, I agree the basics are required.
Wanting to become more astute should be a goal but never forced.
Set a basic bar and move on.
There are many educators geared to help inquiring minds.

The obvious as left out of the equation as usual.
Whom intimidates inspectors out of the gate?
As to your maters theory. A well known inspector that "Mastered as you say" narratives and observations among other things, made headlines in BC.

So mastering has nothing to do with intimidation to which I suspect well over 50%, or higher, of inspectors go through for countless years. Countless.
IHINA ring a bell?

IMO, by being being intimated continuously to do less home inspectors look the other way trying to gain referrals.
When REA is regulated from reffing home inspectors, or anything, like the leagues/teams/gangs of cash working renovators illegally and breaking civic business laws, is the day the government will have done something beneficial to our industry.

Can everyone's head go in the sand much further to avoid the elephant in the room?
What is wrong with everyone? Does the real estate GDP have that much sway?

[Claude Lawrenson]

Meanwhile back to the original thread.....if you consider what happened with licensing in BC, and who was recognized, we might take something away from that model. Four groups were recognized, and the recognition at that time still left some inequities.

The latest "reg" version has tightened up the requirements and a home inspector does not necessarily need to belong to an association. However some of the requirements, such as recognition of education, exams, work on one SOP, and changes required in contracts have put more control under the roof of Consumer Protection BC.

Regarding my earlier comment about the 20% failure rate, that provides enough of an indicator to consider that not only did the inspector fail to recognize 20% of the significant defects, but furthermore that could also lead to a higher claim rate against those inspectors.

It was agreed in principle that no "association" should be considered as the DAA in Ontario. I still view any association that trains and claims to certify home inspectors, other than ASHI is in a position of conflict of interest. If you read ISO Personnel Certification Standards it clearly requires the separation of the two. To date ASHI is the only home inspection association to be independently recognized and accredited to meet that "standard".

"Show that the structure safeguards impartiality". Training and certification need to be at arm's length.

[ROBERT YOUNG]

Sorry for the previous post.
Tight sorts or ingrown toenail.
Ops...

Claude, what we can all take out of BC and Alberta's licensing scheme/arrangements, and state-sides as well, it is not what everyone expects. But I am sure over time someone will fix it. I am certain others will suggest, "I know how!"
Just look at the A770 and who went running to tell everyone how smarter they where than everyone else.
Dodged a bullet you think?

But when you look at what really happened, unbiased and objectively, the old foxes are watching us chickens real good.
Insure consumer confidence starts with business regulations.
Lets stop insuring the like minded gather to get the best seats in the house when herd culling starts.

I can name some foxes if you wish?
fox and hens.JPG

[ROBERT YOUNG]

Meanwhile back to the original thread.....if you consider what happened with licensing in BC, and who was recognized, we might take something away from that model. Four groups were recognized, and the recognition at that time still left some inequities.

They have been at it how many years now?

The latest "reg" version has tightened up the requirements and a home inspector does not necessarily need to belong to an association. However some of the requirements, such as recognition of education, exams, work on one SOP, and changes required in contracts have put more control under the roof of Consumer Protection BC.

They have been at it how many years now?

Regarding my earlier comment about the 20% failure rate, that provides enough of an indicator to consider that not only did the inspector fail to recognize 20% of the significant defects, but furthermore that could also lead to a higher claim rate against those inspectors.

Claude, let the associations test their members.
If you are not with an association, then what and who's test do you use?

It was agreed in principle that no "association" should be considered as the DAA in Ontario. I still view any association that trains and claims to certify home inspectors, other than ASHI is in a position of conflict of interest. If you read ISO Personnel Certification Standards it clearly requires the separation of the two. To date ASHI is the only home inspection association to be independently recognized and accredited to meet that "standard".

"Show that the structure safeguards impartiality". Training and certification need to be at arm's length.

Explain the structure part.


I an open to understanding a DAA committee.
Let me review the proposal.
When I do I will be able to reply thoughtfully and leave my smart axx comments in the drawer with my ingrown toes and tight shorts.

Thanks Claude.