A Chicago H.I. Takes Offense to Term "Certified"

[hausdok]

In this Chicago Daily Herald opinion piece, a Chicago Area inspector clarifies inspector qualifications in the State of Illinois.

To read the entire piece click here.

[Richard Moore]

Mike...

with all due respect, the piece hardly seems newsworthy for this forum's average member. I think we are well aware that various "certified" labels are absolutely no indication of competence and, especially, ethics.

I like to think that everyone is welcome here and that, whenever possible, we post NEWS and don't deliberately try to piss off the members of any HI org, even if we don't agree with the antics of the leadership.

I just don't see the value of your post. Don't we have enough flaming in here without tossing on this particular bit of gasoline?

[StevenT]

Well said.

[hausdok]

Richard,

I never try to deliberately piss off anyone. I didn't make the article. I get emails all day every day from a variety of news feeds with lots of stuff that refers to home inspections. Most of it is consumer oriented. I sort through it and I post what I think might be of interest to home inspectors, regardless of whether it's going to piss someone off or not.

I'm getting a little weary of all of the harping about how we're picking on folks. All are welcome here except a few select folks who agreed to our terms of use and then persisted in constantly breaking those rules.

I'm not going to refuse to publish something just because it's unflattering to one group or another. There will always be some folks who agree with one point of view and others who disagree. If I tip-toe around an issue to placate one group, then another group will accuse me of favoring the other side.

I'm sure that you don't agree with everything published in your local paper, but you read it anyway. Right?

OT - OF!!!

M.

[Richard Moore]

Mike...it's not that I agree or disagree with this particular piece. I thought I was asked to be a moderator here (not this particular forum) because I have tried to discourage "cheap shots" at ANY org. Hey...I left NACHI a long time ago because I was disenchanted (putting it mildly) with what I considered to be an emphasis on marketing over quality. And, I sure as hell don't like the constant Barnum and Bailey promotions of its owner or the chest thumping of some of the louder "gentlemen" who seem to be close to the leadership. But...there are some good people there, as there are in all orgs.

Language like... "Does anyone at the paper know exactly what a certified home inspector is? Is it someone who takes an online test that a 12-year-old can pass and submits the appropriate fees to an association or organization such as the National Association of Certified Home Inspectors to become "certified"? without further explanation is clearly biased. (No...I don't care if some of us know it has some merit). I find the article, as written (poorly), to be just an anti-ORG spin piece (no better than some of Nick's) and, at risk of repeating myself, I'm disappointed to see a link to garbage like it here. I'd expect it of some but not you.

Hell...while I'm on the subject, let me shoot my other foot.

I had no problem with Chad's posting about the lawsuit. Anyone taking the time to read the documents should have seen the clear facts. I also had no problem with the "ejection" that subsequently took place. The title of the thread did bother me a little though. I would have preferred something along the lines of "NACHI loses again in court" or "NAHI prevails over NAHI". I thought the current title was a little too "gleeful". Maybe it was the 3 !!! at the end. I let it go but, as I now see it is the main news on the TIJ title page, its bugging me again. Am I wrong that the intention of TIJ is to promote excellence in home inspections for ALL? I can see someone who just happens to be a NACHI member, finding this site for the first time, seeing that as a "Go Away" mat rather than "Welcome".

"I'm sure that you don't agree with everything published in your local paper, but you read it anyway. Right?"

Mike, I like this "paper"...much more than any other, largely because we discourage bashing for bashing's sake. Consider this a letter to the editor!

[hausdok]

Noted and accepted, Richard.

The purpose for posting links to these articles is not to bash, it's to lead inspectors to what's going on around the country.

That guy posted an opinion piece to the Editor of that Chicago paper. By posting a link to it, other inspectors - those who agree or disagree with the premise of his argument - will know about it and can, if they wish, write to that paper with their own arguments in support of his position or opposed to his position.

I think that if inspectors take the time to make these arguments where those not in the profession will see them, I believe that the public will gradually become more attuned to what home inspectors are and what a home inspection is. We do a great job of keeping each other informed, but the public still only has a vague idea of who we are and what we do. Instead of reading all of the propaganda posted on all of the HIs' websites and those of the various associations, maybe it's time they learned that there's a whole lot more to this business than meets the eye. Take a look at how effective the grass roots campaign by inspectors was in North Carolina last month. Prior to that little brouhaha, I bet half of the state had no idea who or what home inspector are. Bet most of them do now.

I agree with you; I think there are a whole lot of interNACHI guys who're very good people and very competent - far more than the few thimbleheads who spend their days patting each other on the ass on their forum - and I also think they're intelligent enough to see TIJ for what it is - a neutral entity that's not burdened with any association baggage.

Remember, we don't go out and make this stuff up - it just happens that there have been 3 or 4 incidents related to interNACHI lately and there haven't been others with the other associations to balance those out. That doesn't mean that there won't be - there've been times in the past when there has been plenty of stuff to post about other associations and I'm sure that there will be in the future.

No, you aren't wrong with believing that the intent of TIJ is to promote excellence, but one of the other reasons I started this was to get news about the profession out to everyone because the associations and franchises were keeping a lot of things to themselves on private forums. News Around the Net is exactly that - stuff that's coming off of the internet about home inspectors. Some of it's good and some of it's bad, but we don't create it.

ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!!

Mike

[Chad Fabry]

It seems as though it never ends but it remains necessary to expose things for what they are lest new folks become entangled in a less than reputable pit of peers.

There were 3 exclamation points because any more would have carried it to the next line.

Everyone be nice now... be politically correct... don't rock the boat.

That's what made America great. That's what coined the phrase "Happy Holidays".

I hope folks don't ever spare my feelings. Diplomacy is wasted on me.

[pete moss]

the writer of the response article [rick] should get over himself. the writer of this thread agreeing because consumers are ignorant. another day at tij

[StevenT]

Up until now, I have stayed out of the organization fray. I would still like to.

I found this particular article offensive because I felt it was directed against the membership of an organization. It was more of an advertisement than factual commentary.

In my life, I have owned a number of businesses and I have always relied upon my abilities and referrals to promote myself, rather than putting others down. "Use me because I'm good" rather than "Use me because everyone else is bad."

There is no doubt in my mind whatsoever, that Chad's post of the court results was simply reporting factual newsworthy current events. I know Chad, and from all of the inspectors that I have ever met, he impressed me the most... in a very positive way. He is not the type of person, nor does he need to stand on somebody's head to make himself taller.

The person that wrote this article seems to be a very angry and jealous man, who appearently has to do something to drum up some business.

In my state there is licensing. Being licensed is no gaurentee that someone is a good inspector and neither is being a member of a particular organization.

I have inspected homes that were previously inpected by inspectors that were members of "various" organizations. There were times that I was very suprised about items that were not covered or reported. I have been challanged by inspectors that were members of "various" organizations and never felt for a moment that they had anything on me... anything.

I cherish my participation at TIJ and am prouder of my involvement here than in any organization that I may or may not belong to. The reason for this is that TIJ to me is a no BS, simply straight shooting, no retoric allowed place to interact with other inspectors.

The article in this link is polluted.

[Jim Morrison]

Mike,

When a significant chunk of your subscribers complain, then you'll know it's time to take the link down. Right now it looks like about three out of a couple thousand members found it objectionable. No offense fellas, but no editor I know would even take notice of numbers like that.

[StevenT]

Jim,

The posting of this article does not bother me and I am not requesting that it be taken down. It is the article that I find offensive. What is the term? "don't kill the messenger"

What I would like to see is something that says " ... there are good and bad inspectors in any organization. Just because someone is a member of xxx organization, it does not mean they are bad."

[kurt]

It's an article in a newspaper, referenced as source material for those wishing to develop informed opinions.

No spin in here; only reference. The spin, in both directions, is from readership, not editors.

If there are objections to the accuracy or truth of the matter, let them be laid out for community review. Any side of the matter, if not based in reality, will be quickly dismantled and shown for what it is. Chest thumping or lies don't have a life w/an open discussion.

Leave it up.

[ozofprev]

I thought the article was boring, as it appears to be no more than an opportunity for inspector Rick to get some cheap local advertising (not a bad idea).

[pete moss]

Originally posted by ozofprev

I thought the article was boring, as it appears to be no more than an opportunity for inspector Rick to get some cheap local advertising (not a bad idea).

maybe the editor here was lookin for cheap advertizing alzo

[Jim Morrison]

Originally posted by StevenT

Jim,

What I would like to see is something that says " ... there are good and bad inspectors in any organization. Just because someone is a member of xxx organization, it does not mean they are bad."

Then write the words and get them published.

[ozofprev]

All are welcome here except a few select folks who agreed to our terms of use and then persisted in constantly breaking those rules.

You should tell your membership that fact

But isn't that exactly what Mike did? I must have missed something.

On another note...

Mosses commonly grow close together in clumps or mats in damp or shady locations. They do not have flowers or seeds, and their simple leaves cover the thin wiry stems.

[Brian G]

If I were in Mike's position, I would see this strictly as a question of what is and is not "news". The court battle between NAHI and NACHI is news. It would be news between any two HI orgs.

This isn't news. It isn't even an article. It's one HI's response to an article. It tells us nothing we didn't already know.

I'm no fan of PC, but I really don't want to see TIJ turn into the alternate-ASHI club, with a thin scattering of independents. I value the input of good inspectors from any organization. If posting meaningful news that reflects poorly on one's org causes them to walk away, so be it. If they're worn down by posting pointless stuff like this, I think we're all losing something.

Brian G.

[ozofprev]

Brian,

I have always loved reading your posts. You stated that perfectly.

Any ideas to reduce the association agony? Perhaps the association strings could be filtered so no post is accepted if it contains nachi, ashi, nahi, etc. Not perfect, but it's a start.

[hausdok]

Hi,

I'm sorry that this piece seems to have upset so many folks, but what some folks seem to be missing is that I don't pick and choose these things on whether I think they'll be of interest to me or any particular members of the board. If I think that some home inspector somewhere will want to know about it - say, in this case, an inspector from the Chicago area who might want to respond to the Chicago Herald about the guy's rant, I post it.

What some are saying is that they'd rather that TIJ not get involved in anything controversial - that we just stay quiet. It doesn't work that way. Advocating that is like the readership of the Seattle P.I. demanding that the Editor of the PI not run a piece about Idaho Sen Larry Craig because doing so might tick off some republicans, or refuse to run a story about Obama's recent admissions to school kids that he used to experiment with drugs, because it might tick off some democrats.

It's the reader who decides whether it's newsworthy. To some of you this piece isn't, to others it is. For all this fuming, folks have lost sight of the fact that the Editor of the Chicago Daily Herald did think it was newsworthy because he allowed to to run. Do you have any idea how many such letters to the editor and soapbox pieces get tossed in the trash at papers every day? One of my clients works at the PI and sorts those all day every day and she told me that they toss fully 99% of them.

My thought is that if a publication like the Chicago Daily Herald thinks that it is worth running, the least I can do is post a link to it for those who might be interested.

That's about all I have to say on the subject.

ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!!

Mike

[ozofprev]

It is a rock and hard place sort of thing, Mike.

I haven't had a problem with anything you've posted. Yeah, the title of the nachi v. nahi thread could have been better but nobody's perfect.

The problems come from the responding zealots on all sides.

What to do???[:-weepn]

[kurt]

Originally posted by ozofprev

It is a rock and hard place sort of thing, Mike.

I haven't had a problem with anything you've posted. Yeah, the title of the nachi v. nahi thread could have been better but nobody's perfect.

The problems come from the responding zealots on all sides.

What to do???[:-weepn]

There's no rock or a hard place to be between, is there?

And yes, the problems (spin) come from zealots on all sides, including those that are afraid of opinion pieces, even if they are 7 sentences long and written @ a 3rd grade level.

Personally, I wouldn't mind an in depth description, discussion, and analysis of the "boards" that do the certifying. I don't care who provides it, pro, con, or indifferent. Is this outside the realm of what effects us and our business's?

There's lots of folks that read this stuff beyond the few that post; providing information is what the gig is about. The professed open minds sound like they want to shut that down.

"What we didn't already know" is a strange way to describe something that, quite simply, lots of folks reading this board don't know. Last time I checked, there were a few thousand more folks reading this stuff than those that post & comment. Providing information is what a news organization does; having a few codgers editorializing on what should and shouldn't be reported is, well, it's,........

Small. Very, very small.

[ozofprev]

The professed open minds sound like they want to shut that down.

I don't think that's the case. It's more a matter of experience. The Pete Moss and Bushfart types always seem to lurk around any discussions that mention associations and drag the discussions into the gutter.

I would love to discuss associations and their failures/successes/impact wrt the inspection biz, but people invariably speak from their hearts, and not their brains. Then they get all hurt and whiney, and illogical, and stuff like that there!

[kurt]

Originally posted by ozofprev

The professed open minds sound like they want to shut that down.

I don't think that's the case. It's more a matter of experience. The Pete Moss and Bushfart types always seem to lurk around any discussions that mention associations and drag the discussions into the gutter.

I would love to discuss associations and their failures/successes/impact wrt the inspection biz, but people invariably speak from their hearts, and not their brains. Then they get all hurt and whiney, and illogical, and stuff like that there!

True enough.

Hoooooooo, Bears over Denver in OT!!!!

..'scuse me, they just kicked the field goal....

[randynavarro]

Enough with ***** footin' around the issue. I'm sick of all the pandering, defensiveness and hurt feelings.

It doesn't matter who or what. If there's a home inspection operation out there that's acting stupid, unethical, immoral or fattening, they need to be called out.

What Gromicko and whoever else particpates in his dirtiness has done and seems to continue to do is bad business. Its not opinion, its fact.

[Brian G]

Originally posted by hausdok

What some are saying is that they'd rather that TIJ not get involved in anything controversial - that we just stay quiet.

Speaking only for myself, that's not what I'm saying at all. I'm saying if you're going to post something that's sure to cause an uproar and offend some people, it should be worth the fallout. By now no one could possibly have any illusions about what's going to happen when anti-org opinion piece gets posted, whatever org it is. These things go round and round, nothing is resolved, and useful people walk away.

Hey, it's no skin off my nose either way. I don't own TIJ and I'm not going anywhere, even if there were a new piece every week kicking my personal org. As long as it was true and worthwhile, I'd put my boots on and join in.

Brian G.