MESSAGE BOARD: Make a Comment! Speak Your Mind!

Thank you for stopping by!  Before you leave, please make a 'Comment' below and tell us what you think.  Feel free to come back and make as many 'Comments' as you want.  It's a good way to speak your mind and make your opinion heard!  It's also a great way to interact with other Home Inspectors, and the many other good people who visit this site.  Please keep it clean and respect our Comment Rules!  NOTE: The most recent comments are displayed first.

Some of the best reading on blogs often comes from comments, so be sure to read through the comments below, as well as the comments on the following posts:

• MESSAGE BOARD comments, 2nd page
• MESSAGE BOARD comments, 1st page
• Arizona BTR: Fees by Occupation
• Arizona BTR: Board Members by Occupation
• BTR Disciplinary Actions & Enforcement Staff by Occupation
• Arizona BTR: Workload vs. Staff Size
• Incompetent Gov't Agency Increases Cost of AZ Home Inspections
• Terms of Use - IMPORTANT: Please Read!
• History of AZ Home Inspector Licensing
• Send a Message to BTR Board Members & AZ Lawmakers
• MESSAGE BOARD: Speak Your Mind!

REMEMBER TO TAKE ACTION,
so your voice will be heard by BTR Board Members and AZ lawmakers.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT!

Comments

[AZ Inspector]

Arizona home inspectors have known all of this for a long time now. FINALLY SOMEONE HAD THE GUTS TO SAY IT. Now maybe someone will do something about it ya think?

[Irony]

Only in America would the government put unethical, incompetent people in charge of making sure Home Inspectors act in an ethical and competent manner.

[Don]

The good old boys like to keep those licensing fees really high, not only does it bring in cash to help them gain more power. But it keeps competition out of the industry. It's already hard enough to become a home inspector in AZ, they don't need to rape us on costs too. They're just too greedy.

[its about time]

Awesome website. Justice is long overdue for AZ home inspectors. Keep up the good work.

[Jim - Phoenix AZ Home Inspector]

You guys remember how good ASHI used to be before the ASHI experience? I think it was a really bad experience myself and ASHI has been pretty worthless every since. Do u agree?

[Inspector Bob]

What did home inspectors ever do to the BTR to make them hate us so much?

[jerry]

well at least somebodys finally stickin up for az home inspectors. ashi isnt

[Jim]

We used to actualy get something from ASHI for our money but now all we get is the ASHI Reporter and use of the logo. the logo means nothing now that we're licensed and none of my clients or realtors seem to know or care what ASHI means anymore. I can get my continuing education in a bunch of other places now, so I don't need them for that. and besides, you don't have to be a member to go to ASHI classes and meetings anyway. so what are we getting from them now? I get emails from NACHI at least once a month giving me marketing ideas and dozens of websites to go to, and I'm not even a NACHI member. And now it looks like ASHI is in bed with the BTR. unbelievable. no wonder home inspectors are being treated so unfairly. nobody is looking out for us. The ROC is starting to sound better all the time.

[michael the home inspector]

are you kidding. the roc is just as bad or worse. I had a contractors license. the roc is not good either. so i guess you could say az home inspectors are between a "roc" and a hard place, huh. the btr being the hard place. ha ha cmon have a sense of humor at least ;)

[the almighty dollar]

this home inspector licesning thing is all about money always has been

[Dave- Surprise]

does anybody know if the pool and spa standards are in effect yet? i do wish the btr and associations would communication better about stuff thats importnat to inspectors like when they decide to start interpreting the standards differently

[Randall]

I dunno. I'm not an inspector but this even makes me mad. government regulation shouldn't have to cost so much. Arizona real estate and home inspections are expensive compared to other states.

[Mesa, AZ Home Inspector]

The BTR is too expensive, too corrupt, or both. I let my license expire since I was working on another project and not using it. So I submitted the necessary paperwork to the BTR to put my licesne in inactive status. When I decided to re-activate my license, they said I didn't put it in inactive status and then charged me roughly $725 to 'renew' my license for 7 months. According to the form on the BTR website, I should have only paid about $450. I think they're a bunch of crooks.

[Git-R-Done]

FINALLY somebody who's not afraid to tell it like it is. Someone in this industry needs to stand up to the BTR gestapo.

[Allen Blaker]

Hi All! I have never posted anything to a blog before, but I feel compelled to speak my peace (piece) here. As backround for myself, I have trained approximately half the inspection community in AZ. I wrote the first version of the AZ Home Inspectors "Law", which was quickly discarded because it necessitated a two year apprentice program and AZ. doesn't embrace anything that resenbles "apprenticeship". I am a huge supporter of education and knowledge within our profession. We, as home inspectors, get paid for our knowledge. Charge a low fee and be known for your low level of knowledge. Some of that knowledge comes from others within our profession. I have always said that I learn as much at the lunch table talking with other inspectors as I do sitting for hours in the seminars... One of the things the BTR offers all of us is an opportunity to talk, interact and learn from other inspectors... and from others who are in the same room. The BTR Rules and Standards Committee consists of five people, of which three are home inspectors. All are chosen by the state Govenor to serve. Two Committee members are members of the "Board" and three are home inspectors. One of the home inspectors must be "unaffiliated" and not connected with any outside organization. Serving on the Rules and Standards Committee is a huge responsibility and requires many many hours of time at absolutely no compensation. I applaud and take my hat off to anyone willing to serve our profession without any recognition other than a plaque from the Governer. Say what you want about conflict of interest, but those who give of themselves, their time away from their loved ones and own profession (this costs them money) has my heart felt thanks. I see no conflict in their actions and I hold them all in high reguard. Others who choose to critisize, without getting involved...don't take the time, interest and energy to know the rules of their profession and get dinged by the BTR because of their lack of knowledge don't get much of my respect.
Sincerely yours in education and inspecting,
Allen Blaker

[Paul Staron]

Hello To All,
I've been involved with the BTR for approx. 6 years and serve on the Enforcement Advisory Committee. Much of the information on this site is mis-information.

As state agencies go, the BTR is very well run with a professional director and staff. Yes they occaisionally make a mistake or don't communicate properly. There is no evidence of corruption and the BTR is never swayed by any ASHI influence. The ROC would be a terrible place for us.

You cannot compare complaint numbers between home inspectors and other professions - it's not apples to apples. We are in the middle of an emotional transaction with thousands of variables.

The BTR continues to look at pool standards for the future jurisdiction.

Anyone who wants to have a say can come to one of the open meetings, have their say, get involved before they develop an opinion from someone who is un-informed and has an ax to grind.

Sincerely,

Paul Staron
Chairman of the Arizona Home Inspection Coalition

[Shannon]

AZ-ASHI leadership (and former leadership) to the BTR's rescue... Thank you all for proving my point!

I say again... perhaps you noticed that of the thousands of visitors to this site and of the dozens of comments that have been posted, the very few people who have defended the BTR ALL HAVE CLOSE TIES TO AZ-ASHI LEADERSHIP. Again, I can't help but find that very curious. But I hope you all keep coming. That way Arizona home inspectors and ASHI members can see which members of AZ-ASHI leadership are truly standing up for AZ home inspectors, and which ones are defending the BTR’s unfair treatment of AZ home inspectors.

This is all good stuff...so come out, come out wherever you are ....and keep those defensive comments coming. Because it’s NOT ALL THOSE TIED TO AZ-ASHI leadership that are defending the BTR, just a few and it’s important that we know who they are. ASHI members, especially deserve to know because they pay money under the pretense that these people are looking out for the home inspector.

So far, Dan, Allen and Paul have rushed to the defense of the BTR without even having an open enough mind to consider the possibility the BTR could have done something wrong. You didn’t ask any questions... you didn’t address the fact that the BTR has admitted to not following the steps required under AAC R4-30-120 through R4-30-126, and has violated the rights of home inspectors in the process. You simply say the BTR is great and we should all believe you.

You may not all currently hold positions in AZ ASHI leadership, but you all have some connection to the BTR. Therefore, your obvious and unconditional defense of the BTR is a perfect example of why those who are currently in AZ-ASHI leadership should NOT be working on BTR committees. Because once you work with the BTR for awhile, your loyalty becomes clouded and defending the BTR becomes instinctive. Instead of representing what's good for home inspectors, you may feel obligated to turn your back on other home inspectors and begin sticking up for the BTR, even when they are WRONG. Again, that's why it's called a 'conflict of interest'. And that’s why not one of you has bothered to ask Ronald Dalrymple or Manuel Maltos this simple question:

Why is the BTR claiming they do not have to follow the steps required under AAC R4-30-120 through R4-30-126 when they are processing certain home inspector complaints?

These are the steps that ensure home inspectors receive due process of law when they are accused of violating the Standards. Don’t you think your fellow home inspectors deserve to have their Constitutional right to due process respected by the BTR? But rather than saying, ‘maybe I should find out what’s going on’, you automatically assumed the BTR couldn’t have done anything wrong because you work on a BTR committee and are probably friends with the BTR staff. And isn’t this precisely the type of issue AZ-ASHI should be getting involved in? Members of ASHI pay money under the pretense that their leadership is promoting what’s best for home inspectors. If AZ-ASHI leadership is also working on BTR committees, you can easily see from the above rush to defend the BTR, that home inspectors’ interests can easily get thrown under the bus. In fact, many AZ home inspectors, ASHI and NACHI alike, think it's this very conflict of interest that has kept AZ-ASHI leadership from confronting the BTR about the unfair treatment of AZ home inspectors over the past several years, and thus allowed it to continue. Because while some of AZ-ASHI's leadership were having a lovefest at the BTR, AZ home inspectors were being screwed and nobody has said a thing.

Again, Rule #1 of ASHI's Code of Ethics says, "Inspectors shall avoid conflicts of interest or activities that compromise, or APPEAR TO COMPROMISE, professional independence, objectivity, or inspection integrity."

When someone in AZ-ASHI leadership also works on the BTR's committees, at a minimum it APPEARS that objectivity may be compromised. And like it or not, perception is reality. So far, I don’t think one person in AZ-ASHI leadership has had the courage to question the BTR about allegations that they are denying basic rights to home inspectors. Manuel Maltos was caught red-handed skipping all the required steps in the BTR’s complaint resolution process, except the part where he called the home inspector on the phone and left a message with the Inspector's wife saying 'come sign your consent agreement TODAY or TOMORROW'. Is that really acceptable to you as a home inspector? The parts he skipped were little things like:
- notifying the home inspector there was an open case against him
- letting him know what he was accused of
- allowing him the opportunity to appear in front of an enforcement advisory committee
- giving 15 days written notice for the informal compliance conference
- allowing time to consult an attorney and have the consent agreement reviewed

... just little things the legal world likes to refer to as 'due process' (which is guaranteed by both the US Constitution as well as the AZ Constitution). It’s very easy to find someone guilty of something when you don’t even let them know what they are accused of, or ask for their side of the story. It’s easy, but not fair. Why would the BTR deny someone the right to due process, and prevent the person from consulting an attorney? And you’re really okay with that? Would you be okay with it if they did it to you, or is it just okay when they do it to other home inspectors?

Manuel Maltos even admitted/almost bragged that he did this to others too. As a home inspector, doesn’t that bother you just a little bit? Since the BTR knew they had been recorded and they couldn't lie, they didn't deny Manuel Maltos skipped the required steps. Instead, they claimed they did NOT have to follow the law in this case. Of course, they could give NO explanation as to why. The BTR’s lawyer doesn't even seem to know the answer.

Where I come from, to be exempted from a statute or rule requires another statute or rule. So does any of this bother you enough to ask a simple question of your friends at the BTR? If so and you really care about truth and reality, just ask Ronald Dalrymple or Manuel Maltos this SIMPLE question, and let us know the answer:

"Why is the BTR claiming they do not have to follow the steps required under AAC R4-30-120 through R4-30-126 when they are processing certain home inspector complaints?” and please be sure to get the rule or statute number that allows said exemption.

Allen -

I too feel “compelled” to correct a few of your points so as not to have mis-information on this website:
1. According to ARS 32-111, members of the Home Inspector Rules and Standards Committee are NOT “chosen by the state Govenor to serve” as you stated. They are appointed by the Board. I believe Board members are appointed by the Governor, and the architect or engineer Board member on the committee is appointed by the Board Chairman. Perhaps you should look it up.

2. You stated that ‘One of the home inspectors must be "unaffiliated" and not connected with any outside organization.’ While there may currently be one unaffiliated member on the committee, ARS 32-111 has no such requirement. Perhaps you’re aware of some other statute or rule that requires this? If so, please post it.

3. You stated that members of this committee get “absolutely no compensation”. But according to ARS 32-111, “Members of the home inspectors rules and standards committee are eligible to receive compensation pursuant to Title 38, Chapter 4, Article 1". I didn’t do the legal research to find out exactly what pay they’re entitled to - maybe it is indeed $0... or maybe members of this committee should look into that.

4. You’re the guy who called my company a couple years ago claiming we were breaking the law by not having our license# on our trucks. You were asked to provide the statute we were violating so we could look it up and get into compliance. You said you’d call back with it, but we never heard back from you. Have you found it yet? I hope you don’t teach this stuff at your school.

5. And isn't your school the reason they had to pass a law limiting the number of inspectors you can take into a client's house for a parallel inspection? Apparently, homeowners don’t like it when a dozen or so inspectors show up to use their home as a classroom. That’s what I heard from some of your students anyway.

6. You stated, “Charge a low fee and be known for your low level of knowledge”. I’m not quite sure what your trying to say there, but if you’re trying to insinuate that Scott has a low level of knowledge...1) you should have the guts to come out and say it, and 2) I would beg to differ. He may not go around calling up other home inspectors and misquoting the law to them - he’s way too busy doing inspections to do that. And he may not take classes at your school, but Scott is among the most educated and certified Inspectors in Arizona... from having roughly a decade of experience doing home inspections FULL-TIME with several THOUSAND inspections under his belt... to having formal training as a contractor and many years of experience doing total renovations... to being educated and certified in thermography, as well as being educated/certified in radon, mold, IAQ, lead-based paint, water testing, etc... In addition to his home inspection license, he’s been an ASHI member for many years and he’s also licensed to inspect for termites... and since we invest in real estate ourselves, he has a real estate license as well. He also takes dozens of hours of continuing education each year to satisfy the various requirements of all his licenses, certifications and memberships. And that doesn’t even cover his college degrees, military training or other non-industry related education. So I’ll admit, we could charge a lot more for our high quality services based on his credentials alone, but we don’t need to. And why gank the customer for every penny you can? Just so you can brag that you don’t get out of your truck for under X amount of dollars? I know a few of those home inspectors are out there, but that’s not us. We care about our customers, so we treat them fairly. And yes, we try our best to keep prices low for our customers, that way more people can afford to have the benefit of our services. I also know MANY of your students have called my company trying to find someone with enough business to give them their parallel inspections since your school was unable to provide them. So I would correct your statement by saying, “Charge a low fee and be known for your HIGH VOLUME OF INSPECTIONS”.

Paul -

Since you are on the BTR's Enforcement Advisory Committee, of course you think they do a good job - nothing personal but seriously, what else would you think? And you are also the former President of AZ-ASHI, correct? Again, it seems a little odd to me that the ONLY people who have defended the BTR are all tied into AZ-ASHI leadership somehow. Yet, as you rush to the BTR’s defense, not one of you has willingly disclosed your close ties to AZ-ASHI leadership. At least you admitted you are on the BTR’s committee and the AZ Home Inspector Coalition. Dan tried to play it off like he had nothing to do with the BTR - as if he was just another inspector who thought the BTR was doing a good job. He said things like “from the little that I understand , the BTR staff, only enforces laws”. Why did he do that? Probably because he KNOWS he has a conflict of interest and he was trying to hide it so people would give credibility to an opinion they would have otherwise likely dismissed as biased.

If there's mis-information on this site as you claim, please tell me what information is wrong. All the data came straight from the BTR. I beg you to dispute the overwhelming facts that show AZ home inspectors are getting the short end of the stick from the BTR. But do not just say, “the BTR is doing a great job” - provide me with some evidence, because there’s an abundance of evidence they’re NOT doing a great job. Dan asked for facts, but this website is full of facts and rather than disputing the facts, the only response he can come up with is “screw Nick”. What’s that about? Nick has nothing to do with this.

I don't know why you think I want the BTR to go away - I actually spoke to many legislators against SB1171. I didn't lie and say the BTR is a well run agency, or that they handle complaints efficiently, or that their fees are among the lowest in the country...because none of that is true and there’s overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Those are the talking points some in AZ-ASHI recommended using, but our lawmakers are not stupid and the SPCC is evidence of that. In fact, those are the same lame arguments that failed the SPCC.

Literally THOUSANDS of people visited this website and many sent emails AGAINST SB1171 (or attempted to) at my request. In fact, I’m pretty sure I recruited WAY more people to speak out against SB1171 than AZ-ASHI did. Most home inspectors were apparently afraid to email the Board members from this website, however, MANY people emailed their lawmakers. In fact, the 'call-to-action' page received so much traffic the server errored out on alot of people, and I eventually disabled it so as not to anger the legislators who had already received PLENTY of emails due to this website. And many of those emails probably helped keep SB1171 from going to committee, which means unless there's a striker amendment, the BTR should be safe for now... You’re welcome.

However, I'm also realistic enough to know that without some change, the BTR will be eliminated eventually - if not this year, then next year or the year after. If you and others at the BTR continue denying there are problems, the problems will not be resolved and people will continue to complain to their lawmakers. And eventually the legislators will eliminate the BTR. That's what's happening to the SPCC, and for the exact same reasons whether you’re willing to admit it or not. Certainly you realize problems that are ignored don’t just go away, they get worse.

When a government agency disobeys the law, that's called corruption. And when they try to cover it up, that's even worse. If the BTR is not following AAC R4-30-120 through R4-30-126 as it processes complaints against home inspectors, I believe they are breaking the law. In at least one case I know of, they were caught and admitted they did not follow AAC R4-30-120 through R4-30-126. They claim to have some reason they didn't have to follow the law in that case, but they won't tell anyone what it is. You do the math.

Or better yet, you're on the Enforcement Advisory Committee - so like I said before, just ask them for the rule or statute number that exempts them from following their OWN rules (aka “the law”) in certain cases against certain home inspectors. In fact, if the BTR can provide a statute or rule which actually exempted the BTR from following AAC R4-30-120 through R4-30-126 in Scott’s case, I will publicly admit I’m wrong about it. I will pursue changing the law so they cannot do the same thing in the future because it’s not fair to deny due process to home inspectors - but I will admit I’m wrong. So you have the ability to end that dispute right now, by asking the BTR one simple question. Dan couldn't, or wouldn't ask this question...will you? And of course, I welcome you to come back and post the answer if you can get one. I’m waiting... but not holding my breath....

[another dan]

Dan tried to play it off like he had nothing to do with the BTR - as if he was just another inspector who thought the BTR was doing a good job. He said things like “from the little that I understand , the BTR staff, only enforces laws”. Why did he do that? Probably because he KNOWS he has a conflict of interest and he was trying to hide it so people would give credibility to an opinion they would have otherwise likely dismissed as biased.

Shannon I don't have a bone to pick with you or Scott, I have met Scott and spoke to him on a couple occasions at ASHI seminars, and respect him like all the other AZ inspectors I've met.

I said that because that is true.
The little that I know about the BTR, other than the rules and policys of the enforcement and advisory committee, came from me attending open BTR meetings to the public, and HIs ,and attending seminars presented by BTR staff and other inspectors.

If there's mis-information on this site as you claim, please tell me what information is wrong. All the data came straight from the BTR. I beg you to dispute the overwhelming facts that show AZ home inspectors are getting the short end of the stick from the BTR. But do not just say, “the BTR is doing a great job” - provide me with some evidence, because there’s an abundance of evidence they’re NOT doing a great job. Dan asked for facts, but this website is full of facts and rather than disputing the facts,

I asked for facts, more info, the same way I do in any dispute.
One thing I got out of being on the E&A committee, reading just one side, is not often the full story.
Countless times I have revieved a complaint to review, and thought this one is a slam dunk, the customer is just complaining , or the inspector really screwed up. Only After hearing the inspectors side, and the customers side, was I better qualified to make a decision.
Most of the replys to your issue have been bash ASHI, and the BTR.
I sure don't see how my replys, information that I am aware of makes me biased when there is not any posts stating both sides of the issue.

The only replys, by first name,or nameless people, I saw in your favor were emotional bashing, and rah rahs, with nothing to back up their comments.
This topic is posted on the nachi BB, how are we to know if some of the posts are not from nick or from some of his anti licensing, and anti ASHI, wack jobs from the midwest, and back east.

I have no reason to dought what you are saying.
As an AZ inspector when asked to help you do away with the BTR, or get rid of certain BTR employees, those changes will affect me like all others.
I just don't have enough info to agree with, or support you.

the only response he can come up with is “screw Nick”. What’s that about? Nick has nothing to do with this.

What this is about, is you that brought up how nick is quick to help his members, and stated that maybe ASHI should follow him.
You can do what you want, I will never allow my self to be influnced by ASHI or the BTR, I will never permit him or ASHI to step in to help me if I have an issue with my business. And will fight to the end if he, or ASHI national intervens in AZ [ our ] HI licensing.

[Phx. Inspector]

All of this debate is just what is needed. However, if you do the count, over 50% of home inspectors are no longer licensed. They are either revoked, disolved, suspended, retired, or delinquent. In other words they are no longer in business. Or are they? I suspect that most are still doing home inspections on the side and no one is the wiser. This is with out a doubt caused by the well documented high costs, the abuse from the BTR and of course the rotten real estate market. 50+% is a MASSIVE number. However, it is also realistic. After Allen Blaker's cattle calls to run incompetent people through his so called school, bloated the numbers of inspectors beyond what the market could support. Realtors will use anyone, they don't care if the inspector is Ashi or Nahi or Nachi, licensed or Unlicensed. They just want to close the deal and dump the liability on the inspector. We will continue to see the numbers of "Active" inspectors plumet. We will also start to see dozens and dozens of home inspections performed by UnLicensed or Delinquent inspectors, just like the Hundreds if not thousands of UnLicensed Contractors. It is the Law of Unintended Consequences.

[Shannon]

Phx Inspector -

Thanks for stopping by, and well put. The schools have definitely flooded the industry with more inspectors than the market can bear. I think they did it by giving the impression that anybody, with or without technical ability, knowledge or experience can just go through the school and get rich by becoming a home inspector. Those schools did a HUGE disservice to the public and to the inspection industry, including their students. Many of those students have gone out of business and quit the industry before they've even finished paying for their school.

For Allen Blaker to come on and talk about 'low inspection prices' is just funny to me - especially considering the flood of inexperienced $150 inspectors brought into the industry by his school.

You are also right about the number of inspectors who are operating without a license. It would be nice to see the BTR utilize its resources more efficiently to eliminate those people.

[Phx. Inspector]

Shannon, I thank you for this web site and this great service to all home inspectors. Unfortunately, I know 2 people that are operating as Delinquent, which is "UnLicensed" home inspectors. I didn't want to be the snitch but my license renewal is coming up and I will have to pay, so I may take your advice and call the BTR on them. I just don't think it will do any good. The BTR is, as you have documented, corrupt and incompetent. What real authority do they have over those that operate without a License? It just seems ridiculous.
Keep up the good works.

[Shannon]

I'm sure the BTR would love to stick it to the delinquent/unlicensed home inspectors you're speaking of. They need something for their underworked staff to do just to justify their existence. I think that's why they've really started going after home inspectors in the recent past - the Executive Director, Ronald Dalrymple kept trying to get more employees - so they have to appear busy. That's also probably why they like to close one complaint and then admnistratively open a different complaint against the same home inspector for the same inspection. It doubles their numbers and helps to justify their continued existence.

[Shannon]

Dan-
I just noticed a bunch of comments you tried to post on 3/4/08 that were categorized by the blogging software as 'SPAM'. You noted in some of them that deleting of your comments shows guilt somehow. The truth is, nobody deleted those comments - Nobody even saw them until just now when I looked in the 'Comment Spam' folder. The reason they were not allowed is because the first comment you made on this blog was made under a bogus name and it contained foul language. For that reason, those 2 comments were deleted and your profile was banned from future commenting. Since you gave bogus info, I didn't even know who you were when I deleted those 2 comments. The others were automatically banned by the blogging software. But after trying different names/email addresses/etc, you finally got your other comments to post. Just thought I'd let you know I didn't delete your other comments, although I might have if I'd seen them before they went into the 'Spam' folder :)

[Phx. Inspector]

Shannon, Who is the "Dan" you refer to?

[Shannon]

I actually should have said 'another dan' as there is also a "Dan" who posted earlier with a very different viewpoint. 'another dan' is a home inspector who is involved in AZ ASHI leadership and is on one of the BTR committees. See this comment for more info:

http://www.homeinspectorsarepeopletoo.com/2008/01/arizona-btr-dis.html#comment-106042502

[Phx. Inspector]

Well, it looks like a meeting has mysteriously come up, ...???
Hmmmm??

Date: 04/12/2008
Event: Educational Seminar

All inspectors are invited to attend this comprehensive class detailing current legislative, compliance and procedural issues influencing the home inspection profession!
Registration begins at 8:00

The class will run from 8:30 - 4:00 w/ Lunch provided.

Speakers and topics include:

Manuel Maltos, the Home Inspector Program Coordinator for the BTR, conducts the investigations of complaints against home inspectors. He will explain the procedure the BTR follows when a complaint is filed against a home inspector.

Peter Leeds, Chairman of the Home Inspector Rules and Standards Committee, will give us an update on this committee and events affecting our profession.

Dave Swartz, Past President of AZ ASHI, founding member of the Arizona Home Inspector Coalition and the AHIC lobbyist, will give an update on recent and pending legislation affecting our profession.

Randy West, President of AZ ASHI, and Dave Swartz will give a presentation on making sure your inspection reports comply with the Standards of Professional Practice for Arizona Home Inspectors. This is an extremely important session for all home inspectors. An excellent inspector can produce an excellent report that still may not fully comply with the Standards.

And finally, several members of the BTR Enforcement Advisory Committee will lead a discussion and question and answer session regarding how and why the BTR interprets the Standards. This is your opportunity to make sure your reports comply with the Standards.

Location: SEVRAR 1363 S Vineyard Mesa, AZ 85210

[another dan]

Dan-
I just noticed a bunch of comments you tried to post on 3/4/08 that were categorized by the blogging software as 'SPAM'. You noted in some of them that deleting of your comments shows guilt somehow. The truth is, nobody deleted those comments - Nobody even saw them until just now when I looked in the 'Comment Spam' folder. The reason they were not allowed is because the first comment you made on this blog was made under a bogus name and it contained foul language. For that reason, those 2 comments were deleted and your profile was banned from future commenting. Since you gave bogus info, I didn't even know who you were when I deleted those 2 comments. The others were automatically banned by the blogging software. But after trying different names/email addresses/etc, you finally got your other comments to post. Just thought I'd let you know I didn't delete your other comments, although I might have if I'd seen them before they went into the 'Spam' folder :)

I honestly do not have a clue what your talking about, if your refering to me. Never once did I say anything about deleting anything in any post, and I would never post profanity.
Truth is, despite the fact that you accused me of being biased, dishonest, due to my comminment to our profession. I only have 2 email address's one linked to my web site, and one linked to earthlink, and honestly have no clue on how to get any others.

The only name I ever used was "another dan"
. The only reason I used that due to the fact that I noticed nobody else used their full name, and was only honestly trying to post another side.
I NEVER tried to make any posts other than the ones that are, or at least were, a couple days ago on this site.
I don't have a clue why you would accuse me of this.
It's becoming very clear if someone asks questions before jumping on your ship to destroy the BTR, or BTR members, you do not want to hear any other side, and you will do everything to discredit that person, the persons personnal opinions and experience with the BTR.

To accuse me of posting profanity, and trying to make posts with another email, or name is a lie, and totaly wrong.
I sure do not understand why you decided to make this a personal attact against me..

Dan Harris

[Shannon]

OK Dan, then someone tried to make comments and give you credit for them. And they did a good job - the comments sounded almost word for word like some of the stuff you've posted on NACHI.org.

I don't even know you, so I have no time or interest in personal attacks against you. I told you, I prefer to deal with facts. If it was not you, I apologize for thinking it was... then it was someone pretending to be you. Do you have an evil twin?

[another dan]

No I do not have an evil twin. If that was meant to be humor I saw none in it.

As far as you prefering with facts, what's wrong with hearing facts from others that have a different view of your topic?
To date every one that has stated a different view, has been bashed, and called biased.

Phx. inspector.
As far as the seminar just mystetialy comming up,truth is, doing this topic again, has been discussed since last fall.
It was just a matter of getting a date that all presenting would be aviable to do a full day, opposed, to doing it on Thur evening 2-3 hr.seminar as we have in the past.

[Shannon]

Phx Inspector - hmmmmmm..... indeed.

Dan -
For you to say I'm not tolerant of others' views is clearly not true. With one click of the mouse, I could ensure that only my viewpoint was heard on this blog. Yet I have deleted only 2 comments EVER and those were deleted due to foul language. I have allowed the ASHI establishment/BTR boys to come on and claim this site is full of mis-information when they will not offer anything but "the BTR is doing a great job" to back up their claims.

"The BTR is doing a great job" - that's an opinion.

"The BTR did not follow the process required by AAC R4-30-120 through 126 in one or more Home Inspector complaints" - that's a fact.

Do you see the difference?

The few people who came to the BTR's defense (without ever considering the BTR might have done something wrong) were all connected to AZ ASHI leadership and/or the BTR (most of them to both) - that's a fact. Do you wish to dispute that fact?

I did not bash those who came to the BTR's defense - I defended attacks on my credibility and Scott's competence. And I disputed them fact by fact, yet 'the boys' never came back to answer any of the questions I posed.
Again, with one click of the mouse, your 'rah rah team' comments can be a thing of the past in my world, yet I let you go on. Perhaps I just let you keep posting because you all are proving my point...?

Let's stick to the facts ...tell me if you think what the BTR did in Scott's case is wrong - assuming the BTR does not dispute his claim that he was not given the benefit of the process required by AAC R4-30-120 through 126. If that's the case, would you say the BTR is wrong?

[Phx. Inspector]

I suppose I'm just naive but Dan or any Phx. inspector is my competitor. As I am their competitor. We can all make nice at meetings but at the end of the meeting we are trying to get work and sometimes that brings the two into conflict.
I don't see how one of "My Competitors" can objectively "Judge" me or anyone of their "Other" competitors.
As for Allen Blaker, well his reputation of personal destruction goes far and wide.
Would "ANY" inspector want "Him" judging you??
As for Dan Harris,(not the mystery dan) I know him as a fair and overall good guy. However, the appearance of impropriety is always there.
I agree, No working Home inspector should judge, in the BTR sense, their own competitors.

[another dan]

Phx. Inspector.
I respect that opinion.

With all the hatred posted here against the BTR, BTR employees and unsubstaniated claims of other AZ inspectors that chose to get involved with our licensing, I honestly have not read all of the posts here in detail[ many of them are the same hatred repeated several times] I also do not know in detail all of ARS's posted.

I do know ARS, 32-129[B]
38-502-503, ARS 38-509 ARS 38-502[9] [10] [11], and others, address's your concern in detail.

I believe these conflict of interest laws/statues have been in force, long before HI's were licensed.

I am also very aware that as a member of the E@A committee, ANY of these laws/ statues that I break will not be tolerated.

[Phx. Inspector]

Another Dan,
Could you explain further what you mean by "conflict of interest laws".
I did read the statutes you referred to. However, it makes me very suspicious when (no matter the wording of the rule) one of my "peers"/"Competitors" are sitting on the very committee that will judge me and can fine me or put me out of biz.
A few years ago, I read on the disipline list of Valley inspector that was fined and suspended because of a pool inspection.
Pool are not now and were not them a part of the H.I. Standards.
I think that this ruling went over the line.
So how are the rest of us "Lowly" inspectors to know and to trust that this ruling wasn't just a hit job?
Answer is - We Don't!
I stand by my position, that NO actively working Home Inspector should be on ANY kind of E@A board or committee.
All it does is lead to this kind of mistrust.

[another dan]

I guess my question to you would be, who do you want reprensenting you?
Inspectors that know our profession, attorneys, the public.
If you attended any of Jim E seminars, I think you would agree that attorneys only, may not be the best option.
The public member present poses a lot of differnt questions and views, many of those questions are directed back at us home inspectors, asking how we do this or that, prior to stating how he/she feels about the complaint.

I assume this is public record.
All the times I've been on an E@A committee there have been all of the above.
I could be wrong about the attorney on all complaints, but I believe one of the BTR staff present is one, and on other occasions there have been other private or state attorneys present.

As a member of this committee I am one of 5 or more present, I can assure you there is a lot of discussion on every complant, for and against.

Quite frankley, if you think the committee is biased, anyone there will tell you I'm one of the members that will argue the most in favor of the inspector, by arguing, searching for the lowest possible standard of our professional standards, on the inspectors behalf.

If they continue calling me in, I assume they see that, and guess they appreciate that side, that often drags the prosess out for hours, other wise I assume they would not contine calling me.

The other fact is, the inspectors,the public member, on the committee do not have any final say on what happens after the process, thus the name, advisory committee.

As a member of this committe. I have never seen a BTR employee present step in the process,our discussions, and try to influence us one way or another, the only time they stepped in was to state that a position taken by one of us was not applicable to the issue at hand.

Never once when I was present, was there any comment about the inspectors relationship with or with out any HI org.or any attempt to side track any of the requiremnts to meet the committees pre-determined rules, that are monitered all the time during the process.

If you read the statues that I posted, never once did any inspector break any of those rules, before the committee process, during breaks, lunch,or after the process, when I was present.

[Phx. Inspector]

Thanks Dan.
I appreciate your well stated position.
I do have a natural suspition (most home inspectors do, or should have it as well).
So, please excuse me for viewing the BTR with similar eyes.
Holding every government agencies feet to the fire and to the rule of law should be all of our responsibilites.
As for this web site, it seems to have been born of frustrations with the BTR and our inspection leadership.
I think there is truths to be examined on both sides.
Hope it happens and discussions like this are good and necessary.
Thx.

[another dan]

Holding every government agencies feet to the fire and to the rule of law should be all of our responsibilites.

I agree with this statement.
Despite that the owner of this blog states all comments are welcome,it's very clear to others that information, process of sharing information other than supporting this vendictive action is not welcome on this site.
It's become very clear comments from inspectors that support this person in the vendective bashing of BTR employees are very welcome, comments made by others with a differnt side of the story are discredited, and those people also becomes a victom, by being called liers, biased, and are considered not creditable.

Your interesting comment repeated, by this blog owner about the seminar, after my comment to you is a good example.
Fact is, It was I that was talking to others, including Dave S, our Prez and VP, about doing this seminar again last fall.
To put this, or any seminar together takes a lot money to get the word out to all AZ HI's and an increditable amount of time, most of it by volunteers , to cordinate make phone calls, design the brochure do mailings, secure a location, food arrangments market it etc.

If AZ ASHI inspectors, apx 100 out of apx 600 total active AZ inspectors were out to get other inspectors, why would we even attempt to provide this information to All AZ inspectors, instead of just to ASHI members only, which can be done much cheaper in far less time?

[Randy West]

Scott,

I am very disappointed in your website. The Rules and Standards Committee has done many positive things, some of which are directly related to some of your concerns. If you had attended the meeting today, or any of them in the last 7 years, you would be aware of this. And you could have provided some feedback and contributed something to our profession, rather than spending so much energy making such a negative website.

I’m not aware of you participating in, or even attending, any of the Rules and Standards Committee meetings. All of these meetings are open to the public. There were members of the ‘public’ at the meeting today. The public is mostly home inspectors that are not actually on the committee but attend to stay aware of what is happening in their profession.

For years I attended these meetings as a member of the public. Why did I devote an entire day to drive to Phoenix to attend these meetings? Because as VP or President of AZASHI® I thought it was prudent to know what was happening in the profession. I gave up many days to attend these meetings so I could better inform the members of my chapter what was happening at the BTR and in our profession. You call this a conflict of interest! I call this doing the best job I can for my chapter.

If you had contacted your chapter leaders or the Rules and Standards Committee members with your concerns, they would have listened to you. In fact, the Rules and Standards Committee did several things today that will benefit the members of AZASHI and all home inspectors in Arizona. We will tell our members about these at the Chapter Updates at our next class. If you had contacted the Committee members or attended the meeting, you could brag that the Committee may have done this because of you.

Your website would have some credibility if you listed all the things you have done to try to better our profession. What task forces or committees have you served on? What leadership positions in professional organizations have you held? There have been several Arizona Senate and House Committee meetings that considered bills that directly affect our profession. How many of these have you attended? I don’t recall seeing you there.

You charge the members of the Rules and Standards Committee of having an obvious conflict of interest. I don’t see it. I see the opposite. These are the people that are giving up a whole day to look out for your interests. As I mentioned, all Rules and Standards Committee meetings are open to the public, and one of the first things on the agenda is to hear from the public. I assume that you have attended many of these meetings to be able to charge the members of a conflict of interest. I’ve attended almost every one for the last six or so years- but I don’t recall seeing you there. You accuse us of a conflict of interest, but how would you know having never attended a single meeting???

Your whole website is based on a complaint against you. It is my understanding (from what you’ve told others) that your report failed to comply with the Standards of Professional Practice for Arizona Home Inspectors. You were unhappy about this, and how the BTR handled it. I suggest that had you been attending some of these meetings you might not have had a substantiated complaint, since you would have been aware of the latest changes to our profession. You might also realize there is no conflict of interest for home inspectors to be on this committee. That’s why the rules require that some of the members are home inspectors. Who better to represent the home inspector’s interests than home inspectors? This whole ‘conflict of interest’ thing baffles me. You state on your website that I should ‘absolutely know better’ about this perceived conflict of interest. I submit that someone who has never attended a committee meeting should ‘absolutely know better’ than to pretend to know what goes on there.

I personally believe that your website is an embarrassment to you and to all Certified Home Inspectors. Page after page after page. If only you had devoted that time to doing constructive things, think of the good you could have accomplished! And not a positive word on your website anywhere. I’d rather go to the dentist or visit my mother-in-law than read through your entire website (well, maybe just go to the dentist). When inspectors that have attended BTR meetings post comments you criticize them and belittle them. Yet these are the inspectors that have been attending meetings for years and know what really goes on at the BTR. Who would better know how the BTR operates- a single inspector who is unhappy because he had a complaint filed against him, or the inspectors that have spent hundreds of hours working with the BTR staff? So instead of acknowledging that these inspectors are the ones in a position to know how the BTR operates, you accuse them of misplaced loyalty.

No matter what your profession or trade, I personally find it pretty silly to insult and slander the staff of the government agency that regulates you. Might as well insult the IRS and local police too. The good news is the Director and staff at the BTR are very professional. If you really believed they were so ‘incompetent’ and ‘corrupt’, you wouldn’t actually print such allegations. I’ve been working for changes to our profession at the local, state and national level for years. And one thing I’ve learned is that you don’t get very far if you start off by insulting and slandering the people you will have to work with to effect changes. Do you really think that anything positive can come from this website? The BTR has been around for decades, and in my opinion is not going anywhere, especially as a result of one aggrieved home inspector. If you are truly talking with legislators you should know this. And I certainly hope you’re not calling them inept, corrupt, ineffective, etc.

It’s almost 3:00 am, and I’m tired. This turned into a very long letter. Some suggested that I take the high road and not even acknowledge this website. I admit I got irate when I saw your condescending and derogatory comments to those that posted anything positive about the BTR. But even more important I want readers of this website to know there’s another opinion out there. You insulted me personally, which I don’t much care about. But some may infer (or be told) that I didn’t respond because you’re correct.

It seems to me that you don’t want to hear anything positive. I tried to be as negative as possible, but I’m not sure if I made it. Maybe you’ll actually post this. I’m quite sure that if you do you will accuse me of ignorance, misplaced loyalty, conflict of interest, carrying the plaque, voting for the wrong party, driving too slow in the left lane, unwanted facial hair, and global warming. If you do print this, I ask that all readers of this website do a little research before passing judgment on the BTR. Those of us that work closely with the BTR think they are doing a good job. This is not because we have a conflict of interest or misplaced loyalty. It’s because we know the staff at the BTR. Is the BTR perfect? No. But I feel they’re doing the best they can with the budget and constraints placed on them.

Randy West
Professional Building Consultants
President, Arizona ASHI®

[Phx. Inspector]

The BTR, IRS, Police, ... all of which I don't really want to have any contact with at all.
Let sleeping dogs alone.
Yes, Randy I agree with that one.
I do like this forum concept. Why doesn't AZashi have one or start one?

[another dan]

I do like this forum concept. Why doesn't AZashi have one or start one?
Posted by: Phx. Inspector

I have a feeling that you won't get an answer here from any AZ ASHI leaders for the simple fact they have been bashed here enough for simply going above what many other inspectors do, opposed to just agreeing with one angry person with out asking any questions.

Despite being accused of being one of them due to being a member that voluinteers on a committee, and not an AZ ASHI leader, as accused, I'll try to give you an answer to this.

AZ ASHI is always looking, and has been looking for new blood and ideas to help all AZ inspectors, this takes a lot of volunteers , dollars, and time to implement those new ideas.
We are aware there are many other AZ inspectors that would welcome your suggestion, and other suggestions that other non ASHI members may have.

The phrase " inspectors must stick together" seems to be the moto of this site.
AZ ASHI's moto has always been, AZ ASHI is committed to helping All AZ inspectors.
Together we can do that, divided AZ ASHI members,and other AZ inspectors will succed by attending BTR meetings, local CE and keeping up with what's happening on the state level,the others that choose to bitch, and expect the BRT or someone else to hold their hands will fall.

I'm sure there are many other AZ inspectors like your self that are capitable of thinking for your self, with you and those other inspectors joining us to help others, the end result can only help our profession.

I will forewarn you, getting involved, [ as demostrated by this site] will, on rare occasions,
subject you to being called, biased, unethicial, a lier and other unproven names,by members of your own HI org.

To earn those titles you will have to give up an average of 1-2 days a month.
Like volunteering on BTR committees, The pay is NOTHING, Not to mention that, once on those committees you will pretty much have to attend all CE seminars, and pay for them like all others,

If you have an ego, and think your going to change the way we do business by bitching, creating blogs with less than truthful comments commens about AZ BTR staff and their roles, or to bash other inspectors opinions, save your time and forgetabout it,it ain't gonna happen.

[Shannon]

Sorry to those who’ve been waiting that I wasn’t able to comment sooner. We’ve been really busy with work, Spring Break, Easter and all. Plus, my response discusses an ongoing legal issue, so it had to be legally reviewed before it could be posted and that took some time.

Scott is patient enough to give the BTR one last chance to acknowledge they made mistakes and assure him those mistakes will be corrected, rather than repeated. But if the BTR isn’t big enough to do that, a variety of legal actions will likely be filed. That’s why Scott hasn’t posted anything so far. And that’s why he won’t be posting anything, even when unnecessarily attacked by the BTR cheerleaders.

I also apologize in advance that the response below is so terribly long, but there’s just soooooo much that needs to be corrected in Randy & Dan’s comments (luckily most of my response was already documented elsewhere and just had to be edited -thank God for copy & paste!).

I can see by the website traffic that a response has been much anticipated, so without further hesitation, here’s a not-so-small dose of reality...