« Send a Message to BTR Board Members & AZ Lawmakers | Main | AZ BTR REPORT: Problems, Causes & Possible Solutions »


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

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?

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

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.

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

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?

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

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

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.

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 ;)

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

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

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.

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.

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

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

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.


Paul Staron
Chairman of the Arizona Home Inspection Coalition

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....

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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 :)

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

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:


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

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

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

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?

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.

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?

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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?


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®

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?

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.

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...

Sorry if you’re offended but sometimes the truth hurts... and the longer you fight reality, the more damage it will do and the worse it will hurt when you finally have to acknowledge it. In fact, think how bad AZ ASHI is going to look when the truth can no longer be hidden and it turns out the BTR really has been violating the rights of home inspectors ...and not only did you refuse to stand up to the BTR’s improper behavior, you defended it. Whether or not you have personally done anything wrong, you will look just as corrupt and/or incompetent as the BTR. With that being said, you now have even more of a vested interest in making sure the BTR looks good, even if they are violating the rights of home inspectors. Yet as AZ ASHI’s President, you should be first in line to confront the BTR about unfair treatment of home inspectors.

Are you really still not seeing why it’s a bad idea for you to be in AZ ASHI leadership AND working with the BTR? I have no problem with ASHI members being on any BTR committee - in fact, ASHI members should be on BTR committees. But those in AZ ASHI leadership positions are supposed to be representing the interests of home inspectors, not helping the BTR to screw home inspectors. So I stand by my position: those in AZ ASHI leadership positions should NOT be on BTR committees too.

Regarding your conflict of interest, apparently you misunderstood my point and took it personally. I’m not accusing you or anyone else in AZ ASHI leadership of doing anything illegal. Having a conflict of interest doesn’t mean you’ve done anything improper, it simply means you’re in a position where you have more than one interest, and therefore you cannot be objective. By displaying your unconditional defense of the BTR without ever considering the possibility that the BTR could have done anything wrong, you and other BTR groupies have proven my point better than I ever could have imagined - thank you.

And of the dozens of comments made on this website, the very few people that defended the BTR were all closely tied to the BTR and/or ASHI leadership. Of course you don’t think it’s a conflict of interest to be the President of AZ ASHI and work on a BTR committee. To acknowledge it would mean you would have to step down from one of the two positions. And yes, you should ‘absolutely know better’. Afterall, 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."

You stayed up until 3AM writing a long drawn out, emotional comment with many inaccuracies, yet you completely ignored the one relevant issue... why isn’t the BTR following the required steps as it processes complaints against home inspectors? Can you really be so blind by accident, or are you making a conscious effort to ignore this question? As President of AZ ASHI, even if you don’t like Scott and you’re offended by this website, don’t you think you still owe it to your members to look into what’s going on? If home inspectors are being treated unfairly, shouldn’t AZ ASHI be standing up to the BTR? In my experience, when someone refuses to answer a direct question, it’s either because they don’t have an answer or because they don’t want others to know the answer. Is that why you won’t address my simple, yet extremely important question? I’m pretty sure that’s why your friends at the BTR won’t answer it.

It may indeed be in YOUR best interest to hold positions both in AZ ASHI and at the BTR. I’m quite sure all those titles help to pad your resume, but how does it help AZ ASHI members? How can you honestly say that you represent both the best interest of home inspectors, and the best interest of the BTR at the same time when the two may often conflict? At some point, you have to pick sides and that isn’t fair to ASHI members or the BTR. Like in this situation, you should be asking the BTR why they’re claiming they don’t have to follow the process required by law in certain complaints against home inspectors. Instead, you do nothing but defend the BTR without asking any questions. Why? Because your relationship with the BTR has compromised your objectivity.

This is a perfect example of why you shouldn’t be in that position. Because you can’t bring yourself to question the BTR - would it interfere with some of your friendships at the BTR? Why else would you not be able to ask such an important question? If the BTR doesn’t have to follow its own rules as it processes complaints against home inspectors, why have rules at all? If the BTR can just skip the parts of the process where the inspector gets to know the allegations, gets to tell his side of the story and gets a chance at being found not guilty, then why have rules at all? The BTR doesn’t need them...apparently they can just call an inspector’s wife on demand, and leave a message for the inspector to come pay his fine in a case he didn’t even know was open. Standards really mean nothing coming from a regulatory agency that doesn’t even have the integrity to follow its own rules.

For the record, Scott hasn't posted anything on this website, with the exception of one comment. So it seems you may be ‘slandering’ Scott, not the other way around. But be sure to check with your attorney and find out what slander actually means before you accuse someone of it - if you’re talking about this blog, I think you meant to say libel, not slander. Also, ask your lawyer what this means: “truth is an affirmative defense to a libel or slander action”. I believe if something is backed up by facts, it’s not slander or libel at all. However, calling someone a “liar” (or “lier” as Dan would say) when you can’t name one lie they’ve told, that could be a problem. Then again, I’m not a lawyer so maybe you should check with yours.

While Scott did not post any of the comments that made you “irate”, I’m sure he would happily accept any blame you want to place on him for this website because he agrees with what's posted here. While you may not like what this website says, it could actually be much worse. In fact, Scott specifically did NOT want me to let certain embarrassing AZ ASHI skeletons out of the closet online, and I haven’t...yet. Just remember, he was man enough to call you and others in AZ ASHI leadership to give you a heads up about this blog. If it's all lies as you and your friends claim, why would he call you up and talk to you about it?

Scott won't be posting on this website for now because there are several legal actions that he could potentially file, and he was advised not to post at this time....plus he's way too busy. Of course I welcome you, as I have others from AZ ASHI leadership/BTR committees, to dispute anything I've posted - I assure you it can all be backed up. But if you think I’m wrong and you’d like to point out what facts are incorrect, I’d be happy to correct them. Just let me know and be sure to provide evidence to support your claim. I’m open-minded....it’s that easy.

You are wrong that this website is completely based on a complaint against Scott. This website is actually about how incompetent and/or corrupt the BTR is ...something we learned as a result of Scott’s complaint. In fact, Scott’s complaint was barely mentioned here except in the comments, and there was also very little mention of ASHI until Dan came along and drove that conversation. But since you brought up Scott’s complaint, we should talk about it. In fact, I understand you had a complaint against you recently too, so let’s contrast how your complaint was handled compared to Scott’s complaint.

Complaint #1: Randy, who serves on a BTR committee and is friends with BTR staff
According to the information released by the BTR, your financial assurance was cancelled on October 20, 2006. And although the BTR was notified by your bond/insurance company just 3 days later on October 23, the BTR let you continue doing inspections for more than 6 months without financial assurance, right? ARS 32-122.02(C) clearly requires that your registration be “automatically suspended” when you lose financial assurance, and then “automatically revoked” after 90 days. Yet the BTR did nothing and let you continue practicing for over 6 months? Amazing, and it gets worse. During that 6 months that you did home inspections with no financial assurance, your firm registration also expired - which means your company was illegally conducting inspections without a license for about 2 months, correct?

As unbelievable as it may be, the BTR still didn’t do anything. Certainly they knew you were still an inspector, right? You had friends/fellow ASHI leadership on the BTR’s Enforcement Advisory Committee during this time, correct? Yet it wasn’t until your individual registration also became delinquent that the BTR finally did something. But then how much more could they have overlooked, really? If your individual license hadn’t expired, how long do you think they would have let you do inspections with no firm registration and no financial assurance?

And isn’t this one of the most basic duties of a regulatory agency? They do have computers down at the BTR, don’t they? I’m quite sure even I could build a database to track these expiration dates. Yet the BTR, with all its resources, is unable to accomplish one of the most basic duties expected from a licensing agency? If they can’t even keep track of when someone’s license, firm registration or financial assurance expires in a competent manner, what good are they? How are they protecting the public by letting you do inspections without financial assurance for more than 6 months, and without a firm registration for more than 2 months? Obviously you think highly of the people down at the BTR. And you should - they’ve been very kind to you , haven’t they? And while you paid a hefty fine, it was relatively low considering the offense and the amount of time that it continued without being corrected. So if the BTR is neither incompetent nor corrupt, how do you explain the fact they let you go for more than 6 months with no financial assurance, and still let you go for 2 months with no firm registration? I think your case alone shows the BTR must either be:

1) INCOMPETENT -they can’t even efficiently track expirations dates for financial assurance and firm registration, OR
2) CORRUPT -they did you a favor and let you keep doing inspections when your registration clearly should have been suspended/revoked.

So which is it? Since your case was resolved so favorably, I’m guessing that you:
- were given notice when the case was opened against you
- were allowed to know the allegations against you
- had reasonable time to review and understand the allegations
- had reasonable time to consult an attorney, if desired
- had the required 15 days written notice for your informal compliance conference
- were allowed to tell your side of the story
- were given reasonable time to review your consent agreement before you signed it

Again, I don’t know for sure but I assume you had the benefit of the above steps which were completely skipped in Scott’s case. Collectively, these steps are referred to as ‘due process’, which is required by both the US Constitution and Arizona’s Constitution. While you may have even taken the ‘due process’ which you were given for granted, you should know that other inspectors are NOT treated quite so fairly by the BTR. Of course, if any of my information about your case is incorrect, please let me know. I’m just going by what was released on public records by the BTR - you know, that well run agency you speak of.

Complaint #2: Scott, an AZ home inspector who is NOT friends with BTR staff and does NOT suck up to the BTR
An unreasonable customer who was looking for someone to pay for his home maintenance made a complaint against Scott. He claimed the inspection ‘missed’ things that were all clearly addressed in the inspection report. The BTR agreed that his claims were unsubstantiated and closed the complaint at their very first opportunity. Then in SECRET, the BTR opened up its own separate complaint against Scott. But unlike in your complaint, the BTR wasn’t quite as friendly to Scott. In fact, in Scott’s case the BTR:
- did NOT let Scott know there was a case opened against him
- did NOT allow Scott to know the allegations against him
- did NOT give him reasonable time to review and understand the allegations
- did NOT give him reasonable time to consult an attorney
- did NOT allow him to appear before an Enforcement Advisory Committee, as required
- did NOT allow him to tell his side of the story
- did NOT give him the required 15 days written notice for his informal compliance conference
- did NOT give him reasonable time to review the consent agreement
- threatened Scott with a $14,000 fine instead of a $100 fine if he didn’t sign a consent agreement
- threatened Scott with a $14,000 fine instead of a $100 fine if he took additional time to talk to an attorney before signing a consent agreement

The BTR skipped almost every step required by AAC R4-30-120 through R4-30-126. Although the rules clearly state the steps that should have been followed, the BTR decided it would be easier to just blindside Scott with a consent agreement. So instead of mailing him notice and taking all the steps listed above that SHOULD HAVE BEEN TAKEN, Manuel just called me (not Scott) on the phone and asked me to tell Scott to come down to the BTR ‘today or tomorrow’ to sign his consent agreement in a case Scott didn’t even know was open. And Manuel wouldn’t even let Scott know what the allegations were until he got to the BTR. Once there, they proceeded to threaten him with “sign the consent agreement now or things will get much worse for you”.

Scott brought Manuel’s improper behavior to Dalrymple’s attention expecting the Executive Director to correct the problems (like any good leader would do). But instead, the cover up began. Currently, even the BTR does NOT deny what happened in Scott’s case (because Scott was smart enough to record his conversations with Manuel - otherwise they probably would have lied). But since they knew they were caught, the BTR instead claimed they didn’t have to follow the rules and give Scott due process because his case was administratively opened (note: upon hearing this lame excuse, one of our attorneys nearly had a heart attack). However, the BTR refuses to give any legal justification, such as a statute or rule that allows this so-called exemption. And the BTR is now refusing to talk about it at all because even they realize there’s no legal basis for their claim.

In fact, the BTR completely ignored a legally filed Motion for Review of Scott’s case that was properly filed within the allowed time and in accordance with the law. Yet, instead of ruling on it within 30 days or at the next meeting as required, the BTR just ignored it. They didn’t send a letter and say it’s being denied. They didn’t send a letter saying we’re looking into it. They didn’t send a letter saying we’re scheduling it for a Board meeting on such and such date. They didn’t send a letter saying we’re going to do nothing. They just buried their head in the sand and hoped it would go away. That same Motion contained a complaint regarding the way Manuel handled the case. Again, no communication.

This was such an easy problem for the BTR to resolve and look what Dalrymple turned it into. I’m pretty sure that on the first day of Conflict Resolution 101 they teach you not to ignore a problem because it will only get worse. Was the BTR’s typewriter broken? Dalrymple couldn’t have sent Scott a letter saying, “I received your complaint and am looking into the matter. Thank you for bringing your concerns to my attention. Have a nice day. Signed, Ronald.” That took me less than a minute to type, and I don’t have a secretary to do it for me. Why would the Executive Director of an agency be so BAD at handling a simple problem? Scott could understand if a low level employee like Manuel Maltos makes a mistake, even a really bad one. But when that mistake is brought to the attention of the agency’s Executive Director, you expect at least a little integrity and professionalism. You certainly don’t expect roadblocks, stall tactics and outright refusal to answer simple questions about your case.

Scott has made FOUR (4) WRITTEN ATTEMPTS to obtain basic information about his case relating to dates decisions were made, etc. Some of this information may be relevant to his future appeal rights and he has a right to know the information. Yet the BTR has refused to answer his simple questions all four times. Several of these written attempts were sent to all 9 Board members in addition to Dalrymple. Yet no answers from anybody. The BTR can’t answer his questions without incriminating themselves so they went into CYA mode and are just refusing to talk about it while Scott’s appeal rights are possibly ticking away. I’m not sure if the Board members are being totally snowed by Dalrymple or if they have a majority that’s just as worthless as he is. They either don’t have the ability or they don’t have the courage to control Dalrymple. It really surprises me that someone like Dalrymple who used to be a cop doesn’t understand due process. Most police officers I know are very professional and respectful of others’ rights. But based on Dalrymple’s handling of Scott’s case, I’d say he obviously thinks rules and accountability are for other people.

There’s ALOT more to this story. And I wish I could tell more because as the story continues, the BTR really starts to show its true colors. Unfortunately, I’ve said all I can say for now about the specific facts in Scott’s case (there are many legal actions which may still be filed if the BTR doesn’t acknowledge what it did was wrong and correct its procedures). But one thing is very clear... Scott’s case was handled very differently than your case, wasn’t it Randy?

You stated to Scott, “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.” Scott has been to many AZ ASHI meetings, including the one you were referring to in that comment. And the BTR has never ‘substantiated’ a complaint against Scott to this day. They tricked him into signing a consent agreement by violating his rights, which is not quite the same thing. But since we’re offering suggestions, I would suggest that you do a little less volunteering and a little more getting your own house in order. Letting your financial assurance expire is a very amateur mistake, isn’t it? Likewise, letting your firm registration and your individual license expire are also very amateur mistakes. But letting all three of them expire, and then preaching to Scott about how to avoid a complaint? That makes you a special kind of hypocrite in my book.

The BTR’s allegations against Scott were very minor and they did not allege he missed any defects or damaged the customer in any way. In fact, I think Scott’s $100 fine may possibly be the lowest fine in BTR history. But of course if he had damaged somebody, our company does at least maintain financial assurance.

Dan, who is an Enforcement Advisory Committee member, stated the following:“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.

If you apply Dan’s comments to Scott’s case, then you can easily see the outcome of Scott’s case may have been very different if he had been given the benefit of due process. We can’t really say Scott did or didn’t violate anything, because we don’t know the whole story do we? The BTR didn’t want to know the whole story. And they didn’t even care if he was innocent or guilty, they just wanted him to confess and pay a fine so Manuel could enjoy his upcoming vacation.

Scott planned on talking with AZ ASHI leadership about what the BTR did to him. Not because he wanted you to go to bat for him, but because he didn't want what happened to him to continue happening to others. But after the BTR tried to cover up what happened to Scott, he realized the BTR’s lack of integrity went all the way to the top. He also realized that going to AZ ASHI leadership would be like walking into a BTR minefield. The majority of those tied to AZ ASHI leadership are also on BTR committees, some of whom may have been directly or indirectly involved in Scott’s case. You really don't see a problem that almost every member of AZ ASHI leadership is also serving on a BTR committee?

How was Scott supposed to know where AZ ASHI leadership stopped and the BTR began? If an ASHI member goes to their leadership in confidence about improper actions by the BTR, shouldn't they be able to know they're not talking to someone who helped the BTR process their complaint? Since Scott was never even given the benefit of appearing before an Enforcement Advisory Committee, he didn't know who might have been involved in his case. And Scott had already notified the BTR’s Executive Director about Manuel’s improper behavior, after which Dalrymple quickly made it obvious that he too was part of the problem. So tell me again why Scott should have trusted anyone even remotely associated with the BTR at that point?

What you obviously do NOT get is that none of this is about Scott's case. He doesn't care about a stupid $100 fine. He wants to make sure this doesn't keep happening to his fellow home inspectors - which should be AZ ASHI’s role, not Scott’s. He already paid his little fine and could just go on and not worry about the next guy. But if he just walks away and says nothing, the BTR is never held accountable. As a result, they’ll just keep violating the rights of AZ home inspectors. You’re okay with that?

Does it not make you angry that the BTR skipped almost the entire process they were supposed to use, starting with NOT even letting Scott know there was an open case against him, and not letting him know what the allegations were? Do you not see a huge problem with the BTR just calling up a home inspector's wife and saying the inspector needs to come down to the BTR today or tomorrow to sign a consent agreement for a complaint he didn't even know was open? Does it not bother you that Manuel Maltos told Scott he had given other people even less time to sign a consent agreement, when he only gave Scott 2 days from the first time he saw the allegations? Do you think 2 days is really enough time to review the allegations, Standards, inspection report and get an appointment to see a decent attorney if necessary, so you can make informed consent when you sign a consent agreement? And during these 2 days you were given, what if you also had at least 2 appointments each day and at least 2 reports to write? Are you on your way to the BTR to demand some answers from your friend Ronald Dalrymple yet? I didn't think so. Why not?

You stated, “ Those of us that work closely with the BTR think they are doing a good job.” Of course you do! While you deny it’s because of conflict of interest, you go on to say, “ It’s because we know the staff at the BTR.” Exactly. They’re your friends, who you’re inclined to defend no matter what. And you work “ closely ” with them, so why would you criticize them, even when they’re wrong?

The questions and responses I made to those who came running to the BTR's defense were completely justified. I disputed them point by point and asked some legitimate questions. Yet they never came back to respond. I NEVER MENTIONED ONE OF THEIR NAMES until they brought themselves into this by attacking my credibility and/or Scott's competence. So you think that's okay, but my response to them is not? And you don’t think you are biased? Really?

Not everybody in AZ ASHI leadership is biased, and not everybody in AZ ASHI leadership is protecting the BTR. Some of those who are unconditionally defending the BTR have voluntarily come out of the woodwork and identified themselves for all to see on this blog. That was their choice...I just pointed out the obvious. Perhaps I didn’t make it clear enough that I am not accusing you or anyone else in AZ ASHI leadership of doing anything crooked or underhanded. I simply believe you have a conflict of interest which can cloud your judgment because you are too close to the BTR. I don’t expect you to see it - you can’t and that’s the problem.

Your conflict of interest is clearly demonstrated by the fact that you're here posting to defend the BTR and ASHI before you have an answer to the simple question which you have certainly seen posted everywhere on this site: " Under what circumstances is the BTR claiming exemption from the complaint resolution process required by AAC R4-30-120 through R4-30-126?" and " What rule or statute allows said exemption?"

Rather than confronting the BTR on how they are ACTUALLY processing complaints against home inspectors, AZ ASHI planned a luncheon to let Maltos come tell AZ ASHI members how he’s SUPPOSED to process complaints. What a soft-ball way to deal with a tough problem. And talk about making lemonade when life gives you lemons... you even found a way to make money off it by charging $175 to let home inspectors hear the BTR talk about how they're SUPPOSED to handle complaints. Instead of charging $175 for the seminar the BTR is giving at SEVRAR, why not arrange to have it at the BTR for free? All home inspectors pay for the BTR’s office space, right? And shouldn’t the BTR be holding regular meetings like that anyway - for all AZ home inspectors? They certainly have the staff for it. Since their purpose is to protect the public, wouldn’t it be smarter for them to focus their resources on prevention (education) rather than enforcement (disciplinary actions)? But then prevention doesn’t bring in any money for them.

Other than the past year or two when he’s had more CE’s than he knows what to do with, Scott has been to the majority of all AZ ASHI meetings. As such, I find AZ ASHI’s attitude of “anyone who misses a meeting should be punished” very troubling. A year or two ago, the BTR decided to raise the Standards without changing the actual Standards, they just changed the way they interpret them. AZ ASHI had a meeting to talk about this, one of it’s most important meetings ever, and it was held on the same night as a NACHI meeting. And knowing that many inspectors wanted to go to both meetings, AZ ASHI’s attitude was basically- too bad, if you go to the NACHI meeting you won’t know about the BTR’s new rules.

What the BTR expects from a home inspector is NOT supposed to be a secret that’s only told to a select few in AZ ASHI leadership. The BTR should not be giving AZ ASHI the exclusive rights to distribute the BTR’s new rules and expectations - they should be readily available to any inspector with or without a meeting. All home inspectors should be able to know what the BTR expects of them, whether they belong to AZ ASHI or not, and whether or not they were able to make it to that one specific meeting.

You think the BTR cannot be eliminated because ‘it’s been around for decades ’. You really think it doesn’t matter how inefficient or corrupt the BTR may be? The BTR is just untouchable because it’s been around so long? That’s what the SPCC thought this time last year. But this year, the SPCC is making transitional plans because lawmakers are eliminating the entire agency. It seems our legislators got fed up with hearing complaints of SPCC incompetence & corruption and decided to make the problems go away themselves. The SPCC is not being eliminated for budgetary reasons because like the BTR, the SPCC is a 90/10 self-supporting agency. And like the BTR, the SPCC has been around for decades. In fact, the SPCC is almost twice as big as the BTR, yet it’s being eliminated because like the BTR, the SPCC thought they were untouchable too. So they just ignored problems rather than trying to fix them. Any of this sounding just a bit familiar?

When the SPCC finally realized they were NOT untouchable, they tried firing the SPCC’s Director to save their own skin. But lawmakers thought it was too little, too late. Now SPCC employees are closing up shop and looking for new jobs. There are some real similarities between the way the BTR is functioning, and the way the SPCC was functioning right before lawmakers pulled the plug for good. While I don’t want the BTR to be eliminated, I’m also realistic enough to know the BTR’s days are numbered if something doesn’t change. By the way, the primary sponsor of the bill which is eliminating the SPCC (the guy who’s making the ‘untouchable’ SPCC disappear) just happens to be my Representative ... and a really nice guy :)

I’ve recently heard leadership of AZ ASHI say that ASHI members won’t volunteer. But Scott has volunteered every time he’s been asked. He’s helped with thankless jobs like counting ballots, and he even went to you and offered to try getting lockbox keys for inspectors that don’t require CBS codes, but you never got back to him about it. That’s something that would make most home inspectors’ lives easier every single day, yet you never called him back after he volunteered to work on it. Before that, he volunteered to work on some PR committee and again, nobody ever called him back. So to say AZ ASHI members aren’t willing to volunteer is really insincere.

I was personally told by someone in AZ ASHI leadership that ASHI members just won’t volunteer for BTR Committees either, so if AZ ASHI leaders don’t do it, the NACHI guys will be on the BTR committees. First of all, so what? To me, a MEMBER of any organization is better than the President of any organization being on BTR committees. Second, I simply don’t believe ASHI members won’t volunteer, especially when we’ve never seen any real effort to ask for volunteers. There’s nothing on AZ ASHI’s website or the BTR’s website asking for volunteers. I haven’t seen any letters or emails asking for BTR volunteers - except for your very recent email which was a first. And let’s be real, if not for Scott and/or this blog, that email probably never would have been sent either. I’ve read EVERY BTR newsletter, plus all (available) minutes of all the BTR Board meetings and committee meetings. Yet this is the first time ever that I’ve seen the BTR or ASHI looking for BTR volunteers.

You asked Scott, “ What task forces or committees have you served on? What leadership positions in professional organizations have you held?”. How is that relevant? Does he need to be on a committee to expect fair treatment from the licensing agency? Does being a ‘regular’ ASHI member who isn’t on a committee mean he should expect less from ASHI leadership? Do you think you’re better than other ASHI members because you have a couple titles to throw after your name? A title doesn’t really mean anything if you don’t have the guts to use it. If you can’t even find the courage to ask the BTR why they’re treating home inspectors unfairly, I’d say Scott has more leadership abilities in his little toe than you have in your whole body... with or without your titles.

Realistically, home inspectors don’t join ASHI to volunteer or otherwise ‘give’ to ASHI. Call me selfish but most people join because they expect to get something in return. Scott doesn’t have the time, nor should he have to take the time to go to every BTR committee and Board meeting. That’s a key reason people join ASHI, right... to keep up on what’s happening at the licensing agency, in the legislature and in the industry without having to personally go to all the various meetings and events. At least, that’s a benefit AZ ASHI claims in its advertising.

But as someone commented earlier, the only thing ASHI members really get in return for their dues is the ASHI Reporter and the use of the logo (which really doesn’t matter anymore). Real estate agents and clients don’t know and don’t care what ASHI is anymore. They just care if the inspector is state certified. AZ ASHI has pretty much become irrelevant since licensing took effect, and it’s really ASHI’s own fault. ASHI members used to be the cream-of-the-crop in home inspectors. But then when the state adopted AZ ASHI standards, ASHI members became the minimum standard overnight. This is just one of many examples of how AZ ASHI’s desire for influence at the BTR is NOT good for ASHI members. Sure, it gave AZ ASHI leadership an ‘in’ at the BTR. But meanwhile, AZ ASHI members instantly went from being the best in their field, to average state certified inspectors.

In the past 3 or 4 months, I’ve actually had 2 real estate agents ask if our inspectors were NACHI members. That’s new, it used to be ASHI they asked about. What does that tell you? My daughter would say it means, “ASHI is soooo last Tuesday”. Think about it... over the past several years as ASHI has been losing membership, NACHI has been increasing its membership. Why? It’s simple ...because ASHI doesn’t seem to care about its members anymore.

Home Inspectors don’t join ASHI for CE credits - in fact AZ home inspectors don’t even need CE credits until AFTER they join an organization. Plus, even members have to pay for AZ ASHI’s classes. There are many other places an inspector can get continuing education now anyway, both locally and online. Yet that’s all AZ ASHI seems to do these days - classes. In the past few years, it seems the only time we ever hear from AZ ASHI is when they’re selling a class. I hear AZ ASHI leadership saying they’re working with the BTR to make a lot of changes. But the changes that I see being made seem to benefit the BTR, not home inspectors. Those in AZ ASHI leadership that are also on BTR committees are just giving the BTR more power. They may not realize it - perhaps Dalrymple has you all snowed the same way he has the Board members fooled. Either way, those of you in AZ ASHI leadership who are working with the BTR are helping to create a monster. And that monster will some day turn on you. In fact, that’s probably why you’re afraid to confront the BTR now, isn’t it?

I used to attempt to track what happened at the BTR through the agendas, meeting minutes and other public information (sometimes) posted online. But the BTR has been doing such a poor job of putting that information out lately (actually I think they have intentionally become less transparent). Perhaps you should bring that up at your next committee meeting - ask the BTR to actually post the minutes of the Board and committee meetings. I’ve tried requesting copies by telephone, but the BTR is very unhelpful. The Committee you’re on only met about 2 or 3 times last year, and I’ve seen no great accomplishments come from it. I’m sure that will all change now that you’re there, right? Here’s what I do know from following the meetings over the past year or so:

The BTR has spent several months struggling with the meaning of “good moral character and repute”. Since examples of “good moral character and repute” are few and far between at the BTR, this really doesn’t surprise me at all. What would surprise me is if you (AZ ASHI President) went along with the BTR’s desire to add vague, catch-all language to the rules in order to give the BTR more broad discretionary power in denying/revoking home inspectors’ registrations. Did you support this power play, or did you fight them to the death since this change is NOT in the best interest of AZ ASHI members?

Oh wait...this issue is being discussed by the OTHER Legislation & Rules Committee - the one that has NO home inspectors on it. So, while it makes rules which affect home inspectors, no home inspectors have any input. This is because Dalrymple never wanted the BTR to regulate home inspectors, so they never integrated home inspectors into the BTR. It’s run like 2 different agencies, which is one of the reasons the BTR is so inefficient and expensive. Home inspectors have no representation on the Board or the Legislation & Rules Committee. Instead there’s a special Home Inspector Rules & Standards Committee to deal with Home Inspector rules. Great, but home inspectors should also have input on the rules that affect ALL registrants, like the definition of “good moral character and repute”. But instead, home inspectors are left out of that discussion. And with no representation on the Board, home inspectors have no say in many other important BTR decisions either.

You stated, “the Rules and Standards Committee did several things today that will benefit the members of AZ ASHI and all home inspectors in Arizona. We will tell our members about these at the Chapter Updates at our next class.” Well, do tell. What’s the big secret? Why wait until your next class, and what about the 85% of AZ home inspectors who can’t make it to your next class? You have an opportunity to post your information right here, where anyone can see it. Yet you save it for a meeting where only a small percentage of home inspectors will actually benefit from it? That’s what AZ ASHI always does with information it gets from the BTR - force people to come to one specific meeting and pay for the information. Otherwise they’re just out of luck.

The BTR could use email, websites, newsletters, mail and many other ways to get information out. Yet some of the most important information regarding home inspector regulation is kept secret, only to be released to those who attend a certain AZ ASHI meeting. I can understand ASHI trying to maintain it’s relevance. But you’re on a BTR committee and as such, your loyalty is not just supposed to be to ASHI members, is it? As a member of the BTR Home Inspector Rules & Standards Committee, you are supposed to be serving the public, not just ASHI members. Certainly, it’s in the public’s best interest for ALL inspectors to be informed, not just those inspectors who are at the next AZ ASHI meeting, right?

But then, what happens at the BTR stays at the BTR, right? The BTR likes to change the rules and not tell anybody, other than a few select people in AZ ASHI leadership. The BTR has a history of changing important rules and not informing the home inspection community:

1. Firm registration - the BTR initially told home inspectors they did NOT have to register their company. Then right about the time everyone figured that out, they changed it and didn’t tell anyone - they just started fining people.

2. Standards & Report Checklist - the BTR has “raised the bar” by changing the way they interpret the Standards. Changing the way you interpret Standards that have been in use by Arizona home inspectors for more than a decade is really just changing the rules without the proper approval (i.e. lawmaking process). And are the requirements of the checklist really the same as the originally approved Standards? AZ ASHI may have had a meeting to inform a small percentage of home inspectors about the change to the Standards the BTR has effectively made. But what about the other 85% of AZ home inspectors? Don’t they also deserve to know about these changes, since they too will be held accountable for following them? There’s never been anything about these changes in the BTR newsletter, no email, no letter and no notice on the BTR website. But the BTR wasted no time in punishing inspectors for NOT meeting the new expectations they didn’t tell anyone about. By the way, isn’t this checklist an accomplishment of the Home Inspector Rules & Standards Committee?

3. Pool & spa standards - AZ ASHI may be in the know when it comes to the pool and spa standards. But the BTR has made no effort to inform the rest of the home inspection community that pool & spa standards are even being considered. Nor has the BTR asked home inspectors for input. Why not? Should a select few in AZ ASHI leadership be the only ones that know what’s happening and have input? The subject has vaguely been discussed at a few Board meetings, but there has been no real substantive information put out, and no mention in the BTR newsletter. And since the Rules & Standards Committee doesn’t seem to post its minutes, you’d have to be at every meeting to find out what’s going on with the pool & spa standards.

Perhaps you should ask the BTR to address some of the following issues at your next committee meeting:

1. Why don’t home inspectors have a Board member? There are other occupations with the same or fewer number of registrants who have representation on the Board. Why don’t home inspectors have representation? There are three engineers and two architects, but no home inspectors on the Board. And how did AZ ASHI miss this for the last 6 years?

2. Why aren’t Home Inspectors and drug lab remediation occupations properly integrated into the BTR? If the BTR was run like one agency instead of two, it would be more efficient and less costly. (Note: these occupations are the red-headed stepchildren the BTR doesn’t want in their agency, except to use as a source of income & justification for additional resources.)

3. Why do home inspectors only have representation on the Home Inspection Rules & Standards Committee, when the Legislation Rules Committee also makes rules that impact home inspectors? Again, if home inspectors were properly integrated into the BTR, they would have representation on both Rules committees. Or better yet, home inspectors wouldn’t need their own Rules Committee. There could be one Rules committee that includes a home inspector and someone from the drug lab/remediation occupations (who also currently have their own rules committee). That way, home inspectors and drug lab remediation occupations would also have input into the BTR’s general rules which affect all registrants. It would also increase efficiency and eliminate two unnecessary committees that often have difficulty getting a quorum to meet anyway, right? I believe it has been brought up previously that there is no geologist representation on this Committee. But the Board disregarded the request to diversify the make-up of the committee. By merging the three Rules committees which currently exist, the one resulting committee could have more members, resulting in representation by all occupations.

4. Why are almost half of the BTR’s enforcement staff focused on home inspectors, who only represent about 5% of the BTR’s total registrants? And don’t say it’s because home inspectors naturally have that many more complaints - I don’t buy that for a minute. And if that was the case, it’s the BTR who is failing by not letting inspectors know what’s expected of them. For example, nearly every single home inspector that’s had a disciplinary action in the past year has been dinged for ‘functional drainage’. This is generally because the report does not contain the exact term “functional drainage”, right? So knowing this, what does the BTR do:
A) Inform home inspectors via it’s many resources (newsletter, mailouts, emails, websites, associations, etc.) OR...
B) Don’t really make any effort to let inspectors know the expectation, and make as much money as possible by fining inspectors before they figure it out.
...note: If you picked “B”, you’re obviously starting to realize how the BTR operates.

5. Why are nearly 50% of all disciplinary actions against home inspectors, when inspectors only represent about 5% of all registrants? Perhaps question #4 already answered this question.

6. Why isn’t the BTR more transparent?
A. Post the names of all members of each BTR committee (on the website, like the Board members are posted)
B. Post the names of all those currently volunteering for Enforcement Advisory Committee and report reviewing duties
C. Consistently post meeting agendas well in advance of all Board meetings, all committee meetings, etc.
D. Consistently & promptly post minutes (once approved) for all Board meetings, all committee meetings, etc.

7. Why doesn’t the BTR utilize its website, newsletter, email, mailouts, associations, etc to more effectively communicate with home inspectors? On at least two occasions that are thoroughly documented in the minutes of Board meetings, the BTR was supposed to put out important information in the BTR newsletter for home inspectors, but never did:
A. Report review checklist - In July 2007, Mr. Starling suggested that Dalrymple put an article in the newsletter reminding inspectors to check their reports against the checklist. Of course, that never happened. According to the meeting minutes, it sounds like the checklist has been so well hidden on the website that even the Board forgot there was a checklist.
B. Parallel inspections - In December 2007, Dalrymple informed the Board he was looking for ways to hold certifying inspectors more accountable for parallel inspection reports. The Home Inspector Rules & Standards Committee was supposed to get the word out “through the associations, news letters, and word of mouth”. Didn’t happen.

I went back and looked at all of the newsletters, which I always read and keep. Both times, the information did NOT make it into the newsletter as was requested/expected by the Board. Both are issues which have caused many complaints against home inspectors, yet the BTR made no attempt to inform home inspectors of relevant information/changes. It’s almost as if home inspectors are being set up for failure, unless of course they attended that one AZ ASHI meeting.

8. Why doesn’t the BTR regularly hold FREE informational seminars (at the BTR, one Saturday of each quarter, perhaps?). The BTR could provide information to help both new & experienced inspectors to understand and stay current on what the BTR expects. This is not to teach inspectors how to be inspectors, but simply to help them understand how the BTR interprets the Standards, etc. This would help prevent complaints instead of reacting to them, which is a much more effective use of the BTR’s resources. It would also allow home inspectors the opportunity to ask BTR staff specific questions in a non-threatening environment. Likewise, it might even rebuild some of the trust & confidence that many home inspectors do NOT currently have in the BTR.

9. Also, please remind the BTR that ALL Home Inspectors are People Too! As such, AZ home inspectors expect BTR staff to follow their own rules and treat ALL home inspectors fairly.

I don’t need to brag, or have anybody pat me on the back either. In fact if you want, you can even take credit for all my ideas and then pat yourself on the back for coming up with them. And if you don’t, I’m sure Dan will. All I care about is ending up with a licensing agency that’s worth a crap, that can follow its own rules and NOT interfere with people’s right to earn a living. And when all of the issues above are ironed out and you need more ideas for the Committee to work on, let me know. I can give you at least ten more important issues the BTR should be addressing and isn’t. I’ll post them whenever you’re ready.

When HB2077 seemed it might increase the requirement for an organization to have 75 members instead of 50 in order to be eligible to serve on the BTR’s Rules and Standards committee, you sent a (very) last minute email asking other home inspectors to oppose it (to save your Committee job?). Back in the day when ASHI was by far the biggest & best organization for AZ home inspectors, I bet ASHI would have supported, or even initiated a bill like HB2077 just to keep control of the Committees. So I was surprised you were opposed to it. That told me AZ ASHI was worried about having to maintain 75 members.

Scott & I were both at the House of Representatives during HB2077's first Commerce Committee meeting. We were there that day for another reason, but we did stop in the hearing room briefly. We saw you hanging out with Dalrymple and another person I won’t mention by name. My contacts at the House told me HB2077 was being postponed a week because you guys were “blindsided by it” and needed time to prepare. So you asked them to change the 75 member requirement to 40 members. They were glad to appease you because if YOU are truly talking to legislators, then you know HB2077's true purpose. But after you decided to support the bill instead of opposing it, you never sent another email telling ASHI members that you CHANGED YOUR POSITION ON THE BILL. Why not?

Scott and I were also at the 2nd House Commerce Committee meeting. Dalrymple was there too, but I didn’t see you. Scott & I spoke against the bill, not because you asked Scott to, but because: 1) we knew it wouldn’t matter, and 2) HB2077 wouldn’t resolve any of the problems that need to be addressed.

When SB1171 threatened to eliminate the BTR, I’m pretty sure this website generated more opposition than AZ ASHI did. While the BTR is safe for now, another bill to eliminate the BTR will surely come up next year or the year after if things don’t change. For future reference, our legislators are not stupid and will not fall for the same lame excuses every other agency uses when they’re on the chopping block. In the email you sent to save the BTR, you asked inspectors to write their legislators using the same talking points that failed the SPCC:

The BTR is exceptionally well run and exists for professions who need to be administered differently than tradespeople.” Exceptionally well run? Are we talking about the same BTR that took 6 months to do something when your financial assurance expired?

The BTR does a terrific job of processing complaints - the ROC does not.” That’s just funny.

The BTR fees for licensure are among the lowest in the country.” This is just plain untrue - AZ is the MOST expensive of all 50 states. You asked ASHI members to lie to their legislators?

The Arizona Home Inspector licensing law as administered by the BTR is so good that it is rated #3 in the country.” According to who? ASHI, of course! Again, how funny! Obviously, it’s a no-brainer that ASHI’s going to pat the BTR on the back for endorsing ASHI standards. That #3 rating is a joke and means absolutely nothing.

You said Scott should have “listed all the things” he’s done to “better our profession”. I know this is really difficult for you to comprehend, but Scott’s not interested in ego trips. While some people are busy bragging about their ‘efforts’, Scott’s has actually achieved some RESULTS. In short, I’d say Scott has done more for Arizona home inspectors in the last 6 months than AZ ASHI’s done in the last 6 years:
1. Scott confronted the BTR and brought attention to the unfair complaint process being used against home inspectors.
2. As a result, the BTR is probably following their processes more carefully now.
3. We’ve seen more communication from AZ ASHI in the past 2 months than in the previous year.
4. AZ ASHI is having a class about BTR expectations - hmm...because of Scott and/or this blog?
5. AZ ASHI is being forced to re-evaluate “what are we giving our members?” and “what do our members want?” (Prediction: AZ ASHI will improve for the better because of Scott and/or this blog, even though he’s never volunteered for an AZ ASHI leadership position).
6. Scott and/or this blog have brought attention to the fact that Home Inspectors do not have representation on the BTR’s Board. Why hasn’t AZ ASHI brought this up in the past 6 years?
7. Scott and/or this blog have brought attention to the fact that Home Inspectors do not have representation on the BTR’s Legislation Rules Committee, which makes rules that affect home inspectors too. Again, why hasn’t AZ ASHI brought this up in the past 6 years?
8. Scott and/or this blog have brought attention to the fact that Home Inspectors are the subject of a disproportionate number of disciplinary actions compared to engineers, architects, etc.
9. Scott and/or this blog have brought attention to the fact that the BTR has a disproportionate number of enforcement staff focused on going after home inspectors.
10. Scott and/or this blog have brought attention to the fact that Home Inspectors pay 7 times more in fees than engineers, architects, etc.
11. The BTR recently asked for committee volunteers rather than just passing the baton to the next AZ ASHI leadership member - I would say Scott and/or this blog had something to do with that too.

The items listed above which Scott and/or this blog have accomplished in such a short time are ALL GOOD FOR ARIZONA HOME INSPECTORS and AZ ASHI members. Whether or not you want to admit it, Scott and/or this blog have put the BTR on notice that home inspectors are not going to be treated like red-headed step children anymore. As an extra added bonus, Scott and/or this blog seem to have lit a fire under AZ ASHI as well. While you personally may not like it, this is all good for AZ home inspectors.

Scott doesn’t feel the need to pat himself on the back though. If that’s what this blog was about, your comments would surely have never been posted. Scott doesn’t care to “brag” about any influence he might have had, as you suggested he should do. In fact, he’ll even gladly let you and the establishment bash him for standing up to the unfairness which you claim doesn’t exist. Because he knows that as Manuel Maltos processes future complaints against home inspectors, he’ll think twice about skipping those important parts of the process that ensure the home inspector is treated fairly.

Scott doesn’t need you or others to thank him, and we certainly don’t need your approval to make the truth public. Whether you’re willing to admit it or not, you and I both know the BTR is processing complaints against home inspectors in a very different manner than they did, say 6 months ago. For example, have you noticed all the Enforcement Advisory Committee notices that have been posted lately? It seems they’re actually doing the meetings now, whereas six months ago...not so much. But of course, the BTR groupies who defended the BTR’s improper behavior may have already set back some of that progress.

Regardless, by confronting the BTR about denying due process rights to home inspectors, Scott has done something AZ ASHI didn’t have the courage to do. That one act alone has probably had more significant positive results for AZ home inspectors’ rights than everything AZ ASHI has done in the past 6 years combined. He could have said nothing about the fact that BTR staff was completely ignoring their own rules and violating Home Inspectors’ rights. But then some things are just too important to ignore.

The rule of law and due process are two of the most essential principles upon which our country was founded. The rule of law is important because it requires both the people and the establishment to comply with certain rules, which are supposed to ensure fair treatment for all. And when accused of breaking one of those rules, we as Americans are guaranteed due process prior to being subjected to punishment. It’s certainly your right to say Scott is “silly” for standing up to the agency that regulates him. Just realize that you’d probably be saying it in a totally different language if it wasn’t for people like Scott. Our country and life as you know it exists because people like Scott were NOT afraid to stand up to unfair treatment by their government, despite the risk of retaliation.

Scott could have easily walked away after paying $100 fine, but then the BTR would be that much bolder when they screwed the next home inspector out of his rights. He was advised by multiple attorneys that by challenging the BTR, he would likely be risking retaliation and further unfair treatment by the BTR (as wrong as it may be, that’s something all the attorneys agreed would probably happen... and we’ve seen evidence of it already - what a shame.). He was advised that he had very little to gain and MUCH to lose, yet he challenged the BTR anyway. Not over $100 fine, but because if he didn’t, who would? This crap has been going on for years, unchallenged whether you want to admit it or not. He knew AZ ASHI would never stand up to the BTR because they have to kiss Dalrymple's butt to maintain their perceived power over NACHI.

You stayed up until 3AM falsely accusing Scott of slander, but have you asked the BTR to account for how they are treating home inspectors? They don't deny what they did to Scott, and Maltos even admitted he gave other people less time than he gave Scott (if that's even possible). As the President of an organization that takes money from home inspectors under the pretense that you are promoting what's best for them, how can you defend BTR staff instead of demanding answers from them? Or have you asked, and possibly just been snowed by Ronald Dalrymple, the way he seems to be doing to Board members?

I’m sure you think this website is an embarrassment, but it’s not embarrassing to Scott or other home inspectors as you said. However, AZ ASHI should be embarrassed that so many people tied to its leadership came to this blog and defended the BTR, without even asking any questions first. So tell me again how it’s good for ASHI members when you defend the BTR’s unfair treatment of home inspectors? In fact, defending the BTR’s improper behavior is worse than doing nothing at all. Doing nothing would allow it to continue, whereas defending the BTR actually makes them even more bold and confident as they violate the next inspector’s rights.

In order to correct the problems at the BTR, those problems must first be identified, which this website has done whether you like the truth or not. Most everything on this website is negative, you are correct. But I didn’t make it so, I’m just telling it like I see it. And besides, the BTR has plenty of cheerleaders already. The writing is on the wall, Randy. If you don’t like the message, you can either fix the problems or you can shoot the messenger. I see you chose the latter... so much for taking the high road, huh? I for one am not big on pretending so I pointed out several major problems AND many possible solutions (apparently you missed the solutions). But ignoring the problems which clearly exist only ensures those problems will continue to exist. Is that really your preference? I don’t even see it as a viable option.

You had a huge opportunity to show all AZ home inspectors (many of whom are watching right now) what side you and others in AZ ASHI leadership are really on when push comes to shove. How sad that you overwhelmingly chose to defend the BTR instead of inspectors’ rights. Again, that alone is enough to show the obvious conflict you have by being in AZ ASHI leadership and on a BTR committee at the same time. The BTR doesn’t like home inspectors - you know as well as I do that Dalrymple never wanted icky home inspectors to be part of his ‘professional’ agency. That’s why the BTR is run like two agencies instead of one. Do you think Dalrymple likes home inspectors any better now than he did 6 years ago? Of course not, inspectors are just a source of income to him. And with all the BTR groupies sucking up to the BTR, I’m sure Dalrymple has even less respect for inspectors now than he did 6 years ago.

You can try to make Scott the bad guy here, but that just makes AZ ASHI look even worse. Not only are you defending the BTR instead of home inspectors, but you unnecessarily attacked one of your own. You’re the leader of an organization that’s supposed to be promoting what’s best for home inspectors, and instead you attack an ASHI member for comments he didn’t even make. It was me, not Scott, that made the comments you were angry about. In fact, think back for just a second, Randy...Scott even called you and told you about this website to give you a heads up so you and AZ ASHI didn’t have to get caught short, remember? Likewise, Scott also gave the BTR an opportunity to resolve their problems easily and without public scrutiny. And like AZ ASHI, rather than swallowing their pride, acknowledging mistakes were made and correcting those mistakes, the BTR decided to go into denial too. As you can see, ignoring a problem only makes it worse. And believe me, what’s come out so far is ONLY THE TIP OF THE ICEBERG.

The way this story ends isn’t up to me. You, AZ ASHI and the BTR get to write the ending... I’m just blogging about what happens. It is what it is... And you can deal with reality, or you can wait for reality to deal with you. We didn’t create the problems at the BTR, and we’re not going to be ashamed to make people aware of those problems. You can badmouth us and accuse us of lying. You can send the BTR groupies out to try and intimidate us (it was highly unprofessional of the committee members to publicly comment on this blog, by the way - you all should have taken the high road, with your titles and all). You can criticize me, Scott and this blog all you want. Notice it’s only the people who stand to lose power that are doing the criticizing...which only reassures us we did the right thing.

Again, sorry to everybody reading that this is sooooo long... and I could easily keep going for another hour or two because the facts are on my side and there’s overwhelming evidence to support what I’m saying. But enough is enough. If you don’t get it by now, you never will. You may not like what has been said here, but it needed to be said. And let’s be real...it’s long overdue. If you want to show you’re a true leader, set your personal feelings and other influences aside... then take a good, hard, unbiased look at the complaints this blog has brought up. If you can get the BTR to address these legitimate complaints, you will greatly improve both the BTR and AZ ASHI. Then you can brag about the huge positive results you’ve achieved for AZ home inspectors.

Dan -
Although most of your rants are barely understandable, I’ll try to sort through the misspelled words, grammatical errors and overall rambling to address a few of the ridiculous statements I think you’re trying to make:

You stated, “Despite being accused of being one of them due to being a member that volunteers on a committee, and not an AZ ASHI leader, as accused, ...” You really don’t like to deal with reality, do you? I did NOT accuse you of being ‘one of them’. I simply ASKED you if you were. I asked because as you defended the BTR, I got emails from people telling me that you conveniently forgot to disclose your relationship to AZ ASHI and the BTR. Now that wasn’t very honest of you, was it? And it turns out they were right. Perhaps that’s what upset you - you got caught. In your answer to my QUESTION (not accusation - there’s a big difference), you stated that you are “one of them”. You said it, not me - I just asked. Here’s a link to your own comment to help jog your selective memory.

In that same comment, you also said that you are AZ ASHI’s “co-central district person”. Are you now backtracking from that statement too? If so, I’m not sure it’s fair to blame others for any confusion you have created yourself.

You said you respect Scott as you do all AZ home inspectors. Yet, here’s the comment you made about Scott on NACHI.org before you knew anything about him, and before he or I ever had any contact with you on this blog: “ Not sure what he intends to accomplish, Is the ROC going to be cheaper? The fees now account for less than a buck per inspection, getting lower fees will amount to? maybe .10 less per. Bitc-ing on a blog , and begging to nick and for tips to help his cause, what ever happened to getting involved and getting your hands dirty if you want to solve or change something?? Kinda looks like some body has tooooo much time on their hands and got POed at the state for lack of inspections”.

Is that how you ‘respect’ people? You would make a comment like that about a person you respect in a situation you admittedly knew nothing about? And Scott is a fellow ASHI member even - so who’s bashing who? And of course, you had your facts all WRONG because Scott was fighting AGAINST, not for, eliminating the BTR. Here are some links to more comments made by the ‘other’ Dan Harris you don’t see at ASHI meetings:
Dan Harris bashing NACHI
Dan Harris bashing NACHI vendors
Dan Harris bashing NACHI #2
Dan Harris bashing NACHI #3
Dan Harris bashing NACHI #4

Dan Harris bashing NACHI #5
Dan Harris bashing NACHI #6
Dan Harris bashing NACHI #7
Dan Harris bashing NACHI #8
Dan Harris bashing NACHI #9
Dan Harris bashing NACHI #10
Dan Harris bashing NACHI #11
Dan Harris bashing NACHI #12
Dan Harris bashing NACHI #13
Dan Harris bashing NACHI #14
Dan Harris bashing NACHI #15
Dan Harris bashing NACHI #16
Dan Harris bashing NACHI #17

And those are just a few of the tame ones. There are much nastier ones, but I chose those particular links because they’re threads you started yourself. They are examples of you, unprovoked and for no apparent reason, going out of your way to attack or discredit other inspectors. You’ve been bashing other home inspectors for years, Dan. And like I said, you’re not replying to other posts that bash you - you’re constantly going out of your way to bash others just because they’re in NACHI instead of ASHI. And you accuse me of bashing people? I simply posted facts about an experience I witnessed involving the BTR, and then I responded to attacks launched by the BTR groupies.

Do you treat NACHI inspectors with that same bias when you work on a BTR Enforcement Advisory Committee? Or are you somehow just instantly able to turn off your hate for NACHI inspectors when you make decisions regarding their disciplinary actions? You clearly think anyone who is not in ASHI is less qualified than someone who belongs to ASHI. You have a right to your opinion, but someone who is on a disciplinary committee at the licensing agency should obviously refrain from publicly making statements that show such bias. Talk about an embarrassment to ASHI and the BTR. Does the BTR know how you constantly attack NACHI inspectors, and were they aware of your bias when they approved you to be on the committee?

Scott says you’re not angry and hateful like that in person - almost like 2 different Dans. One Dan goes to AZ ASHI meetings and pretends to care about other home inspectors, while the other Dan bashes his peers from behind the safety of a keyboard. Please don’t come to this blog with your holier than thou comments and pretend to be someone you don’t have the guts to be in person.

You said to Phx. Inspector, “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.” Name one person I have called a lier, or liar. Just one. If you can’t, then who’s the liar? When was the last time you let me post hateful stuff about you and call you a liar with nothing to back it up on your website? Anyone reading this blog can easily see I’m very tolerant of others’ views, even when they don’t make any sense. So claiming that I’m not tolerant of opposing views just shows how insincere you really are.

You said to Phx. Inspector, “Your interesting comment repeated, by this blog owner about the seminar, after my comment to you is a good example.” A good example of what, Dan? I believe the comment Phx. Inspector made was, “Hmmmm...” to which I replied, “Hmmm indeed ”. So when someone else says “Hmmmm ” you agree with them, but when I reply “Hmmm indeed ” I’m calling people “liers, biased, and not creditable ”. How exactly did you get all that from “Hmmm indeed”? Okay Dan, you just plain don’t make any sense now. But feel free to keep on rambling - your lack of coherent thought only adds to my credibility. Why do you think I let you keep making comments?

You said, “Fact is, It was I that was talking to others, including Dave S, our Prez and VP, about doing this seminar again last fall.” Sure you did. Way to pat yourself on the back, Dan! Of course, I’m sure this ‘mystery meeting’ has nothing to do with Scott. And as for your statement about egos- well, in the spirit of NOT bashing AZ ASHI, I won’t even talk about egos.

You said, “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.” Actually it shouldn’t cost that much if you do it right. You say a brochure takes an incredible amount of time to make? Really? Just change the date, time and subject from the last one you sent out - what’s that take- 5 minutes tops? Or just send an email to all ASHI members - quick, easy and free. And put a post on NACHI.org for free - you spend half your life there anyway, right Dan? Of course, food is nice but not mandatory and NOT worth $175.

The BTR could and should be giving these seminars for ALL INSPECTORS FOR FREE at least quarterly. They have the office space and they have the staff. They also have a statutory requirement to protect the public, which means letting inspectors know what’s expected of them. Fining an inspector AFTER a violation has occurred doesn’t help anybody. But educating inspectors so violations do NOT occur would be helpful (but less prosperous, so the BTR will never go for it). The BTR could and should make the arrangements for the seminar, and do the mailouts to all inspectors themselves - and put it on their website and in their newsletter, and let each inspector know about it when they register/renew their license. Make it the first Saturday of each quarter or something predictable. Oh wait, then AZ ASHI wouldn’t be able to make a bunch of cash off it...never mind, bad idea. (NOTE: I’m sure Dan probably had this idea last year too - so when the BTR starts doing this, it will be because of him, not this blog).

I realize your favorite past time is disrupting any online conversation that isn’t about how great ASHI and Dan Harris are. And of course, you’re welcome to come back and post here IF you have something other than hateful comments and false accusations to post about, or if you can answer any of the legitimate questions I’ve posed. Otherwise, please keep your baseless insults to yourself or go post them on NACHI.org, where Nick has so graciously allowed you to spew your anger and bias.

Phx. Inspector - I agree with your statement, “Let sleeping dogs alone ”. But these were not “sleeping dogs ”...they were attack dogs that came out of nowhere and attacked, unprovoked and without notice. Prior to their attack when they were truly “sleeping dogs ” to me, I did leave them alone even though I was aware of some issues that one might consider incompetence and over-stepping of authority. But I didn’t care because I didn’t feel it affected me. The problem with running away scared and leaving attack dogs alone is that once they taste flesh, they just get hungrier and hungrier. And it makes them that much fiercer when they attack the next guy. Someone had to confront the BTR attack dogs and it obviously wasn’t going to be AZ ASHI, even though I do believe it’s exactly the type of issue AZ ASHI should be confronting.

I also agree with you that it’s troubling for competitors to be involved in the disciplinary process. I didn’t used to feel that way because I also agree with Dan’s point that it helps the others on the committee understand the complaint from a home inspector’s perspective. I still think it’s the lesser of two evils to have one home inspector (and only one) on an Enforcement Advisory Committee - especially since it’s the first part of the process and there’s (supposed to be) plenty of other steps after that which should eliminate any bias. But in light of what I’ve recently seen with the BTR, more than one home inspector on a committee judging another home inspector is very troubling to me. And I definitely see your concerns of a potential ‘hit job’ even with just one home inspector on the committee.

The current rules seem to be vague, in requiring each committee to “be comprised of one public member and a minimum of four registrants, at least one of whom is registered in the same category or branch as the respondent ”. And a quorum of three committee members is required for each committee meeting (AAC R4-30-120). To me that means there may be as few as one home inspector on the committee, or as many as four home inspectors participating in the disciplinary process against another home inspector. Even worse, if the public member does not show up, and all other members are home inspectors, you could potentially have a committee made up of FOUR of your competitors judging you. And these committee members are chosen by Dan’s friend, Mr. “D” according to the rules.

Yes, I definitely do see your concern.

Gotta admit if some one has a different opinion than you, this site is sure earning the title it's earned. "The Hate Site"
Please keep us, all AZ inspectors informend on how you are going to single handly change the way we do business.

Wow, that was great info. I for one really appreciate your comments. After consideration, I agree with pretty much everything you had to say.
The BTR & ASHI have been in bed together for way too long.
I got the notice about the $175.00 meeting, that SHOULD BE FREE!!!!
Heck, our yearly fee is the highest at BTR.
So, ASHI is making money off this??
What about NACHI??
This seems to be ILLEGAL!?
I too have considered leaving ASHI for NACHI. They actually have a working and very active web forum.
The New national ASHI forum sucks and hasn't had a post in weeks.
The AZ-ASHI chapter has become a joke and has no more influence to help "US", their members, get more work.
None of the agents I meet at offices care a wit about ASHI. They don't even care if you're licensed. They ONLY care about how much I'm gonna charge and if I might kill their deal.
Keep up the good work. I'm behind you.

Hi again Phx Inspector,

Thanks for your comment and support. Other than the few very vocal opponents of this website, most AZ home inspectors that have commented feel the same way you do. Hopefully by bringing attention to these problems, they will be resolved so all home inspectors will be treated fairly by the BTR in the future.

I don't know much about NACHI, but I agree they have a very active web forum. I've never posted there but I do read it quite frequently and it's a great way to stay current on what's happening in the industry. I set up this site in about 3 hours for less than $50, and would have been happy to set up a blog for AZ ASHI if anybody had ever asked me to volunteer my time. I really think ASHI may be scared of a public forum though. There are already websites out there where ASHI members accuse ASHI of having a "country club" mentality. I just don't see ASHI allowing the kind of free speech Nick allows on NACHI.org. I don't know Nick but I do admire his tolerance. I know I wouldn't let alot of those attacks on NACHI be posted to NACHI.org if I was him.

When I have some time, I plan to add a couple new features to this site you might like. If you have any suggestions or information you'd like to see posted, let me know. Also there are some other important home inspector issues that will be brought up here soon, so be sure to stay tuned!

You're right that agents are primarily concerned with the deal falling through. With the market the way it is, that seems to be getting worse every day. We've even seen some pretty bizarre attempts by listing agents to micro-manage the home inspection lately. In fact, the listing agent for Scott's morning appointment made it a point to be there early to open the house and have coffee & water set out for him. Sure hope she's not expecting anything in return for that kindness!

Anyway, gotta get back to work. Thanks again for the support.

I have just been on the BTR site and I find no documentation or information regarding ANY new changes, requirements or Standards that AZ Lic. Home inspectors must comply with. YET, there is a meeting with our BTR regulators next Sat. that says there are just such "New" reporting standards that I MUST comply with. Now I MUST PAY $$$ to find out just what these requirements, standards, etc. are!!!!!!!!?????
Heck, next month I have to send them my renewal fee of over $300.00, just what I am I paying for??
Just what am I getting for my $$$???

This AZ-ASHI meeting is not a CE course. It is not about leaning something new. It is solely a meeting with State Employees, paid by our Taxes!!!???
I ask, WHY does this meeting cost ANYTHING???
Someone please respond.

Wow. Guess you told me!

You accuse me of inaccuracies. I made none. But you made so many I can’t possibly list them all. Let’s just take the most obvious.

"Just remember, he was man enough to call you and others in AZ ASHI leadership to give you a heads up about this blog. If it's all lies as you and your friends claim, why would he call you up and talk to you about it?"

Scott called me at night. He told me he had a problem with the BTR. I listened. We had a nice 30 minute talk. I told him I would look into it. The last thing he said was "oh by the way, you might want to check out my new website...". I could tell by the tone of his voice that he was nervous or embarrassed about something, so I did check it out after we hung up. And I found this hate site. He didn’t ask for help or tell me he had a problem until after this hate site was posted. Will he be ‘man enough’ to admit this is the truth? And that I listened to him and told him I would check into it? You suggested that even if I don’t like a member I should be willing to listen and help him. There are no members that I dislike, even you two although I admit I won’t be inviting you to my retirement party. And even if there was a member I didn’t like, I would help him/her in any way I could. And I would have helped you and Scott until I found this site. You don’t want help dealing with a problem, you want revenge and to justify your crusade, and I won’t help you with that.

The only ‘heads up’ Scott gave me was about the website because he figured I might hear about it. You later state you didn’t bother to ask azashi for help because by association we must be as corrupt as those BTR employees. So which is it? Was Scott “man enough” to give us a heads up, or did you not contact us because we were ‘corrupt by association’? I freely admit that I don’t lie because I’m not smart enough to do it well. Neither are you.

And actually Scott was right, I did hear about this hate site. I have spoken to dozens of home inspectors since that first phone call. Exactly two have mentioned this site. They both felt the same way as I do, and neither have returned. So go ahead and talk about your hundreds of groupies and fans. I believe the traffic on this hate site is much less than you say, and that a majority of people read it one time and decide to go find a more honest, positive site.

"So I stand by my position: those in AZ ASHI leadership positions should NOT be on BTR committees too."

You will never convince me of this. I will never convince you you're wrong. If there was any chance of a conflict of interest I would step down immediately from one position or the other. Thousands of professionals in dozens of professions see no conflict of interest in serving for a professional organization and regulatory agency at the same time. And you have said nothing to convince me those thousands of professionals are wrong. Despite what you say in this website, I am not dishonest, stupid or blind. I am very honest. In my first posting I stated I have voted in ways that would not benefit me as a one-man-shop in Prescott, but would be better for the profession and/or the majority of members. I can’t think of a conflict of interest, and you haven’t given a specific example. If one did somehow come up I could excuse myself and not comment or vote on it. If I ever thought I could not vote honestly and objectively for the issue at hand I would resign from all positions and hang my head in shame.

I will also tell you that after you change the home inspection profession, you can start on Realtors, Doctors, Lawyers, and all the other professions that also have the far-fetched silly idea that their profession is capable of policing itself, and that those in the profession are the best qualified to treat members fairly.

You took great joy in broadcasting my complaint. Yes I had one. I’m not proud of it. You accuse the BTR and me of intentionally overlooking my expired status. How naive can you be?? I seriously doubt the BTR would do that, and I damn sure know I would not. The BTR tried to notify me. They had an old address for me. The people at that address (my old house) never told me they were receiving mail for me, including fedex packages, birthday gifts, mail from the BTR, etc. I thought I put in a change of address at the BTR. Maybe I did, maybe I didn't. But the error I made was 'bookkeeping'. I did not act unethically towards a client, produce a report that was not in compliance with the Standards, etc. I thought a $1000 fine was too high. If the BTR was showing me favoritism, how come I got a $1000 fine and you got a $100 fine? For a few minutes I blamed the BTR and thought about how unfair this fine was compared to $100 fines for poor report writing. Then I grew up. If you are in a regulated profession, it's up to you to make sure your registration, insurance, etc. stays up to date. If you mess up, either by letting your registration lapse or writing a poor report, you can blame the regulatory agency that caught and fined you, or you can say "gee that was really stupid of me" and make sure it doesn't happen again.

So here’s my comparison of two complaints. Scott Hubbard, who is not on BTR committees, writes a report that does not comply with the Standards of Professional Practice for Arizona Home Inspectors. He’s fined $100 (and starts a lifelong vendetta against the BTR). Randy West, who is on BTR committees, lets his registration and bond lapse and gets fined $1000 (and learns an expensive lesson and moves on with his life). This sure sounds like favoritism, but favoritism to you!!! Maybe I should start a website whining about how unfair it is that Scott only got fined $100 for writing a poor report.

$100!!!!! I didn’t know this till you said it. You guys are wasting all this energy on $100!!!! For $100 fine you accuse the BTR of not following rules and giving you time to consult your attorneys. Why on earth would you consult your attorneys for a $100 fine?? Please don’t ever tell me again me how busy you are….

I admit that after a while I just scanned your last post. I do have a life. So I won’t quote you exactly on the rest of this. You said something about I sent an email out for the first time looking for members for the BTR committees, just because of you. Not true, don’t flatter yourselves. I sent out two similar emails last year when Brion Grants term was ending. I sent out two this year because Peter Leeds term is ending. And inspectors replied to my emails last year and sent in letters of interest to the BTR. So I know the emails went out. Get your facts straight. The world is not changing because of you, but in spite of you.

You’re wrong again about HB 2077. We conferred with other home inspector associations, and it was them that requested the size of an association be lowered instead of increased. Not because of azashi’s failing membership. We didn’t show up at the second hearing because we had succeeded in getting the bill changed to our liking. So why were you speaking against it the second time? Or maybe you didn’t say that. It doesn’t matter if you said it or not, because you manage to spin everything so drastically anyway.

You accused AZASHI of something bad about the Pool standards, I forget exactly what since your website is nothing but accusations. Maybe if you put one little positive comment somewhere, other than congratulating yourselves for changing the world. There was a task force set up to make the pools standards. There were ASHI members on it, but there were also members from other associations. The task force meetings were well publicized to all home inspectors. But of course somehow azashi and the btr are bad guys for whatever reasons you managed to spin.

You said something about ‘how convenient’ AZASHI scheduled a BTR class for the first time after you made this hate site. You really like to think that people react to your hate-mongering, but it’s just not true. I hate to confuse you with the facts, but the BTR staff has spoken at chapter classes in Phoenix several times. In Sedona several years ago we had Kathryn Fuller, head of investigations, and Nan Mitchell, executive assistant, speak about the registration and complaint process. About 4 years ago we had Susan Skrynski, investigator for the BTR, conduct a ‘mock’ EAC committee meeting at a Chapter class in Prescott. Yes, these incompetent, uncaring, corrupt, and all around worthless BTR staff members came to Sedona and Prescott on a Saturday to speak at a Chapter class. Oops, there I go defending them again. What’s wrong with me? I hope they continue to speak to us if they see this site. I’m not sure I would. And by the way, we plan our classes in advance. The BTR and report verification class was scheduled before Scott called me and told me about this web site. But I know that won’t stop you from taking credit for it.

You said something about how AZASHI withholds info unless you attend our classes. Boy do I resent that. We always have a national, state and BTR update at our classes. We’ve been doing this since the first class I attended 15 years ago (of course the BTR updates weren’t around until we were regulated). If there is something important the BTR and/or the chapter does notify all members. The BTR has sent postcards to all inspectors, for example about the preferred vendor program. And the chapter has sent postcards at our expense to all Arizona home inspectors to inform them of important events or changes. When I mentioned that Scott should attend meetings, I meant the BTR meetings.

You babbled on for a long time about how the BTR or AZASHI should provide free classes. It’s not the BTR’s job or budget. They don’t do that for engineers, architects, etc. Realtors pay for their classes. So do lawyers, doctors, my chiropractor, etc. But somehow you deserve this for free. Despite what you say azashi does a lot for it’s members and this profession. This includes advertising in Realtor publications, making PSA videos, keeping tabs on legislation that could affect our profession, communicating with other related organizations and agencies (including the BTR), putting on exhibits at Realtor trade shows, maintaining the azashi web site, etc. And the only money azashi makes is membership dues and education classes. We make a little on selling the Standards, and have not made a profit yet on selling AZASHI shirts and stickers. We do this more as a benefit to the members than as a money making venture. We receive nothing from national ASHI, no contributions, no one has left us millions in his/her will yet. And it cost us money to put on a class- rent the room, AV (microphones, screens, etc.), snacks, drinks, lunch, etc. If AZASHI put on free classes we would be broke in a year. How totally unrealistic of you. But since you seem to always be so busy and can afford mulitiple lawyers, why don’t you put on a free class for home inspectors? As long as you provide lunch and snacks, someone will likely show up. You can devote the entire class to moaning about unfair the world is.

I said the last Rules and Standards committee did some things to benefit all inspectors. You said “do tell”. Why use sarcasm. Just call me a liar. But if you’re going to call me a liar at least take the time to show up at the meetings and verify your facts. One thing we asked the BTR to do was to make the Home Inspection Checklist easier to find and/or a stand alone document on the BTR website. And they said they would. We didn’t feel this was so earthshaking that we needed to immediately tell all home inspectors about it, but it is just one example of the committee listening to complaints from home inspectors and asking the BTR to change or improve something.

And you know what, the BTR listens! They may not always make the change, but they damn sure have always listened. I am getting so tired of you insulting them. You may have some legitimate complaints, questions or ideas about/for the BTR. And if you proposed them at a BTR meeting they would have listened and you could have had a positive impact. But instead you put in print that the BTR staff are inept, corrupt, stupid, liars, etc. And then you whine because the BTR doesn’t want to talk to you. Go figure!

You (now!) claim your vendetta is to help other inspectors from sharing your dismal fate. Yeah, right! You never came to AZASHI leadership with your problem or concerns. Of course not, because we're all corrupt. But that’s so easy for you to claim when you never gave us a chance. I have to tell a quick story. When I became Treasurer of AZASHI, I made a formal ‘reimbursement form’. I had to, it was getting hard to read the bar napkins. I presented this at the first Board meeting I attended as Treasurer. Someone suggested I put the reimbursement rates that board members can receive on the back of the form, such as reimbursement for a hotel if a board member had to travel more than 100 miles to a meeting. I suggested we may not want to do this because I may send this form to the general membership. Boy was I corrected in a hurry! I was told we do NOTHING at a board meeting that the general membership is not fully aware of. All members can attend any board meeting. All members can request something be put on the agenda, whether they can attend the meeting or not. We do NOTHING that is not in the best interest of our members. I was so impressed by the honesty, integrity and energy of the people at that table! And I have carried on that tradition. All members are still invited to all board meetings. We have never had an ‘executive session’. When something comes up on the agenda, we ask “is it good for the members” and “is it good for the profession”. If either answer is no- we move on to the next item.

I tell this story because I have more respect for the current and past AZASHI leaders than for any other people I’ve ever met. Any one of them has more honesty in his/her little toenail than you two could muster between you. That’s why I get so angry when you say we wouldn’t help you. First you say Scott gave us a ‘heads up’, which is a lie. He called me after the web site was up- that is not a ‘heads up’. Then you say you didn’t come to us because we’re dishonest by association. And you will likely spin my little story somehow to reflect badly on AZASHI leaders, so I will say it again: the current and past leaders of AZASHI are the most honest and ethical people I know. That’s the only reason I got involved in chapter leadership, and associating with these people has been the biggest reward of chapter leadership. And you suggesting they are anything less is unfair and just plain WRONG. You are woefully uninformed, as you seem to be on many issues.

But perhaps you didn’t want help and changes anyway. Something positive and good may have occurred if you had actually contacted your chapter leaders or attended a Home Inspector Rules and Standards Committee at the BTR. And then you couldn’t go on this crusade and claim you're doing this to protect other inspectors. Come on! I’ll be man enough to admit that I took the time to write this because you made me angry, if you’ll be man enough to admit you don’t give a rats butt about the other inspectors in the state. If you did you wouldn’t have made this web site. You would have gotten on a committee, attended meetings, and tried to make a positive change in our profession. Of course that takes actual work, not just some typing after dinner. And someone may accuse you of having a conflict of interest and being too stupid to realize it. But I guess that’s what makes a leader- someone who will work for change in spite of the whiners out there. Thank goodness I’m a home inspector. I love my profession and my peers. The vast majority of home inspectors are not whiners and appreciate it when someone does something good for the profession, whether it’s another home inspector or not.

You referred to your attorney and attorneys several times in your post. You suggested I confer with mine. I don't have an attorney. I didn’t run to an attorney regarding my complaint. I goofed up, admitted it, paid my fine, and went back to inspecting homes. I don't need an attorney. You also referred to your Representative as the one that did away with the Pest Control Commission, a not-so-veiled threat that you can personally do away with the BTR if you desire. Such arrogance. I suggest you do it!! Come on, I'm calling your bluff! Let’s see you do it. Do away with the BTR. Then Janet can put home inspectors under the ROC and you can explain to 1000 Arizona home inspectors how this was not a personal vendetta for you, and you did it for the betterment of our profession. Even you would have trouble putting a spin on that one!

Those of you that know me know that I am basically a happy guy. I love telling or hearing a good joke. I don’t think I take myself too seriously. I trust people and give them the benefit of the doubt. I personally feel people that automatically distrust other people or think the worst of them are either unhappy themselves or act this way themselves and therefore expect others to as well. How about you two? Accusing your peers of stupidity and dishonesty without giving them a chance. Accusing your regulatory agency of even worse. Accusing AZASHI of withholding information from the public. Accusing everyone of something. There’s just no way that any of that complaint and/or complaint handling could have been your fault! Not even one tiny bit your fault! It had to be those corrupt state employees and those stupid leaders and committee members. Yes sir, you didn’t ask for any of this, and now you just want to make the world a happier place for everyone else. And of course you take credit for all the changes that so many have worked hard to accomplish. Because of one hate site!! What egos you have!! This web site accomplishes nothing, and most of the few people that find it read it once, laugh for a few minutes or just shake their heads, and move on. The people that are really making changes don’t have time for this. This hate site is doing nothing to better our profession, it is just written whining.

Well I’d rather be happy, so I’m through with this site. I’m not into ‘blogs’ anyway. This is one of only a few that I’ve read, and a very very few that I actually posted something on. I admit I only made it half way through your last post before I started just ‘scanning’. So I have no idea what else you accused me of. I just don’t have time for all this negativity anymore. If someone wants to debate me face to face, fine, but I’m done exchanging insults and accusations via letters. That’s the way cowards work. I will not read or post items on this site ever again, so you are free to post all your threats, biased opinions, false accusations and anything else you want. Whine away. Maybe someone will believe that you and Scott have saved the world again, and that you’ve done more for the profession by making a whiny website than all the home inspectors who actually helped write the law years ago and now man the committees. No one can accuse you of not having egos, that’s for sure.

Maybe you got mistreated by the BTR, maybe not. We may never know now because of the way you handled it. I say this to all home inspectors. Most of the ‘facts’ on this website are not factual. Ask me for help and I will help you if I can. There are dozens of home inspectors that could verify that, but they likely will never see this web site. And I’m not going to tell them about it, because that’s exactly what the authors want, attention and justification. I know I’ve helped people. I know people have helped me. And I know that I’m smart enough that if I need help from someone I’m not going to start by printing all kind of untrue derogatory statements about them. And then whine because they wouldn’t take me seriously. That takes a special kind of hypocrite.

All this over a $100 fine. Get over it. The systems not perfect. You can try to change it. Or you can criticize everyone else for all that’s wrong and take personal credit for what’s right. I see which path you took. I have no more time waste on this.

If any AZASHI members or other professional home inspectors happen to stumble across this site, I apologize for my unprofessional comments here. This was not very 'presidential' of me. I have held my tongue in the past when I wanted to say how I really thought. But not anymore. I’m almost done as chapter president. I’m proud of my chapter and my profession. I’m proud to be on a BTR Committee. I have never done anything dishonest or unethical in my home inspection career, or as a committee or board member. You (Scott and Shannon, although I think it’s Shannon more than Scott because Scott’s multiple attorneys have advised him not to defend himself) have a grudge against the BTR. It may even be legitimate, I’ll never know now because you didn’t discuss it. Instead you made a hate site insulting me and others that had absolutely nothing to do with your complaint. And now you try to claim you’re doing it for the betterment of our profession. I DON”T BELIEVE THAT FOR A SECOND. How’s that for direct? Creating whiny hate sites that insult everyone is not how you better a profession. It just gives a few unhappy people someplace to come to justify themselves.

You have insulted and slandered me, my friends in AZASHI leadership, my fellow inspectors and my profession as a whole. At least I think you slandered me. Now that I think of it, that was something I was supposed to ask my attorney. Or attorneys, apparently you have more than one working on how to sue the BTR. What a waste of time and money. I’ve always been one to handle problems myself without running to the nearest attorney. I am very proud to say that I have never sued anyone about anything. I have a problem, I knock on your door. But since I don’t have an attorney, and you have plural attorneys, I better retract that last comment. I’m not sure if you slandered me. But you accused me of lying, unethical-ness, conflict of interest-ness, corrupt-ness, not-answsering-direct-questions-ness, etc. You have made no effort that I can see to better our profession- I don’t consider this ‘hate site’ as any kind of a positive contribution, nor do I see suing the BTR over a $100 fine as accomplishing much of anything other than soothing and boosting your egos and putting you in the spotlight for a minute. I truly regret that this energy was not put to good use somewhere instead of being wasted here. If you had really wanted to better the profession, you could have! If you had spent the time and energy you wasted on this site to do something constructive, you could have made a positive difference.

I am a better and busier person than this site merits. Anyone, including Scott and Shannon, are welcome to contact me personally at any time (but no whining!), but I have already forgotten this web site exists.

Randy West
Proud Home Inspector
And a firm believer that Actions Speak Louder Than Words

Phx Inspector.
It's clear if anybody tries to give you an honest answer on this site they will be considered one of them, then be discredited and bashed.

AZ ASHI seminars offer far more that the topic for the seminar.
Over the past 2 weeks I spoke to 18 AZ inspectors about this seminar, [ 4 of them non- AZ ASHI members,]after talking to them, one was hesitant about the value of this seminar, all the others were very interested.
It seems you are buying into the BS on this site that non -AZ ASHI BTR committe members and AZ ASHI members are out to get or control AZ inspectors.

If your interested in seeing for yourself what the truth is, I have a $75.00 discount coupon for an AZ ASHI seminar that I will give you, and will personnaly pay the difference.
No Idenity needed, just tell Dena that your are the Phx inspector taking Dan up on his offer.

The only thing I ask, if after attending the seminar you felt it was worth while, and information provided will change the way you report 1 or more items, that you pay the AZ ASHI member price, and pass the coupon onto another AZ inspector for a future seminar.
If after attending the seminar you still feel the other, and AZ ASHI members on BTR committes are still out to get AZ inspectors, and or you felt the seminar was a waste of money, you owe nothing, and the only person that knows your idenity is Dena.

If your interested let Dena know by Thur PM so she makes sure to have enough food ordered.


I'm really sorry you took this personally and your feelings were obviously hurt. This isn't personal, and Scott & I don't have any bad feelings for you personally. Scott & I don't think you're a bad guy or that you're dishonest, and we didn't say that you were. I think you’re so angry that you’ve misunderstood all of this. This is not about you... this is not about Scott... this is not about AZ ASHI... this is not about a $100 fine... This is about a licensing agency that is treating home inspectors unfairly, and has been for the past 6 years. I don’t think the unfair treatment is because of AZ ASHI leadership being on BTR committees. But I think AZ ASHI leadership’s conflict of interest has stood in the way of someone confronting it. And now even when it’s brought to your attention, you still defend the BTR’s unfair treatment of home inspectors rather than addressing the problem. I didn’t say it was because you’re dishonest, I said it’s because you have a conflict of interest and therefore you are unable to see the situation objectively.

I mentioned AZ ASHI’s conflict of interest on this website very briefly, only as one factor in the BTR’s problems. I have a right to my opinion whether you agree with it or not. I made sure I did NOT attack you or anyone else in AZ ASHI personally when this site was set up. I went out of my way NOT to make it personal. But then Dan, Allen, you and others tied to AZ ASHI leadership/BTR came here and attacked my credibility and Scott’s competence without even getting all the facts or asking any questions. I didn’t take ‘joy’ in bringing up your complaint. In fact, although I knew about it all along, I only brought it up AFTER you and your friends took great joy in bringing up Scott’s complaint and insinuated he’s an angry, bad inspector because of one complaint out of several thousand inspections. To be brutally honest, what I originally posted on this blog about AZ ASHI’s conflict was very sugar-coated and I could have said much worse. The ‘hate’ began only after Dan and your other friends started bashing Scott & I in defense of the BTR. Look through the comments and see for yourself when the ‘hate’ began. It’s the same thing Dan’s been doing for years over on NACHI.org. He goes on and posts a bunch of hateful stuff, and then when they defend themselves, he calls it a ‘hate site’.

If Scott or I launched an attack against anybody, it was the BTR. But honestly, we haven't even taken the gloves off yet. This has been going on for almost a year now. As the BTR stomped all over Scott's rights, he just documented it and asked a few questions (which they have refused to answer). While we previously consulted several attorneys, we only recently retained legal counsel. The only reason we had to retain legal counsel is because the BTR basically told Scott that if he wants answers to simple questions about his case, he ‘needs to retain an attorney’ (in other words, the BTR doesn’t want to talk about it). And we do NOT automatically distrust people. In fact, Scott trusted Manuel so much that Manuel took advantage of him by deceiving Scott about his rights, and then tricking him into signing a Consent Agreement without giving him the benefit of the required process. Scott has given the BTR since last October to do three things:

1. Take accountability for what happened in Scott’s case and treat him fairly (no, he was not treated fairly before and his appeal rights were also completely disregarded by the BTR - they did not even respond to a legally filed Motion)

2. Assure Scott that what happened to him will NOT happen to other home inspectors in the future (yes, Scott put this unselfish request in writing to the BTR also)

3. Assure Scott that he would not be retaliated against by the BTR for bringing this complaint to light (seems like a no-brainer, but you'd be surprised what you can NOT take for granted with the BTR)

Those are the things Scott asked the BTR to do after his rights were completely stomped on ...how do these requests make Scott such a terrible guy? Are these unreasonable things to expect from a licensing agency?

If AZ ASHI leadership decides to throw itself in front of punches that are meant for someone else, I can't help that. You don’t have to blindly defend the BTR, but you have chosen to. And yes, this is exactly why Scott didn’t trust his AZ ASHI leaders to begin with. Not because he thought you were corrupt but because you have a conflict. Scott knew that many members of AZ ASHI leadership are very connected to the BTR and he was not willing to confide in you or others as a result. That alone should be a problem to you. Scott was even advised NOT to discuss his case with anyone in AZ ASHI leadership (except for certain basic facts which are already clearly documented in Motions, etc.). When he contacted you, it was NOT about his case. He did want to give you a heads up and let you know what was going on so you were not blindsided by it, and so you could ask the BTR why they're claiming they don’t have to follow the rules in complaints against home inspectors (on behalf of ASHI members, not Scott). He didn’t ask you to do anything related to his specific case. He has lawyers to take care of his case (yes, plural because there are at least 3 different types of law involved). And you can attack Scott personally and try to make him look bad, but you know he told you about the website AND told you that he felt you and others in AZ ASHI leadership have a conflict of interest by serving on BTR committees too. And he told you about what happened to him first because that’s the logical progression for the conversation - here’s what happened, here’s how it’s relevant to you, and here’s what I’m doing about it. As mad as you obviously are now, just imagine if he had started the conversation with, “Hey Randy, I started a ‘hate-site’ and want you to check it out.”

If AZ ASHI leadership is using all of it's officers, etc working on BTR committees to benefit home inspectors, why haven't any of the issues I mentioned been brought up? Home inspectors have had NO representation on the Board or the Rules & Legislation Committee from the beginning, yet nobody has ever asked us to support trying to get that representation. So nobody has noticed in the last 6 years or nobody has been willing to fight for it? And now nobody is even willing to stand up for home inspectors’ most basic rights?

In my opinion, AZ ASHI has spent too much time trying to control the BTR through it's committees when it should be focusing on providing value to its members. With that being said, if AZ ASHI is going to focus its resources on obtaining power at the BTR, then shouldn’t home inspectors at least be benefitting from those efforts? I just don’t see how they are. I see a BTR that has gone from bad to worse in the last 6 years. I see constant power grabs by the BTR going unopposed by AZ ASHI leaders (at least, we’ve never been asked to mobilize and fight them). And now I see a BTR which claims it does not have to follow its own rules, and NOBODY from AZ ASHI even asks why? Scott & I are not complainers... in fact, we’ve kept silent for 6 years but we won’t be quiet anymore. Not until the problems are being resolved.

There are complaints from home inspectors all across the country that say ASHI tries to control the local home inspector licensing board. Scott and I are not the first or only people to think this is a conflict of interest. I think the mentality comes from ASHI national and unfortunately, that mentality is putting them under financially. Here’s what happens when a home inspector association goes into denial and stops caring about what members want. Have you seen that memo? I assume you’ll be letting your members know about ASHI’s financial problems at your next meeting so they can make informed decisions as to whether or not they want to renew their memberships with a financially troubled organization, right?

If people like us don’t speak up, the problems will continue to be ignored. You keep accusing Scott & I of wanting the BTR to go away, but you know we fought against eliminating it, despite how badly the BTR treated Scott. Likewise, we don’t want to see ASHI become irrelevant either but it’s happening. Scott & I have probably invested $10,000 in ASHI over the years... between his memberships and those we paid for our inspectors, along with all the continuing education and national conferences we paid, both for Scott and our other inspectors. We have always supported ASHI in every way, and have asked the same from our employees.

But ASHI now has its priorities all screwed up. Strength comes from within... in ASHI’s case, from its members, not from the BTR. If AZ ASHI focused on its members, everything else you want would fall into place (happy members, beating NACHI, power at the BTR, etc). But attacking your members for bringing up legitimate issues isn’t the path to success.

I could spend hours writing another blogopotamus to dispute what you’ve said and return your personal attacks, but that’s not my intention. But you really should do more than 'scan' my last comment because from your response, I believe you misunderstood much of it. Again, I’m really sorry if you took this personally. But we are NOT sorry we brought these problems to light, and we will NOT stop bringing these problems up until they are addressed. Scott & I can agree to disagree with you on certain things. But we cannot agree to sit back, pretend everything is fine and do nothing. You’re right, actions do speak louder than words. So don’t tell us there’s no conflict of interest, show us.

Phx. Inspector -

Be careful letting anyone in AZ ASHI leadership know who you are if you even remotely agree with me on anything. Saving $175 is great but your anonymity is seriously worth more than a free ASHI seminar since you don’t seem to be a ‘yes man’. I wouldn’t want to see you get blacklisted and bashed like certain people in AZ ASHI leadership have done to Scott. But then hey, $175 is $175... I totally understand that too :)

I think Dan & Randy missed the point of your question. The way I understood your comment, you asked why the BTR doesn’t make ‘changes to the rules’ available to home inspectors for FREE. And I agree with you completely - the BTR should. This isn’t about learning to be a home inspector, these are things the BTR has decided to change. Like you said, they could just put information on their website and it would be there ALL the time for everybody. The BTR website already has pages called “Proposed Rule Changes” and “Latest Rule Changes’. Why not use them? Those who want to go to AZ ASHI’s class could still go, but nobody is forced to pay their hard-earned money just to know the rules.

Likewise, I think Randy and Dan misunderstood me as well. My problem is not with AZ ASHI charging money for a class. If AZ ASHI gives a class, they have to pay their expenses - I get that. But it’s the BTR’s responsibility to make their rules available to ALL home inspectors with or without AZ ASHI. And the BTR should allow home inspectors the option of obtaining this information for FREE.

I’m not sure, but I don’t think the changes they’re going to talk about at the upcoming meeting are really new. I think they’re just the changes the BTR made awhile back in the way they interpret the Standards. But since the BTR never put the information out to anyone except a few in AZ ASHI leadership, people still don’t really know about it. AZ ASHI had a class a year or two ago but anyone who didn’t go to that class was just out of luck.

I may be wrong about what will be discussed at the meeting, but no worries... Dan will correct me if I am!

Sorry cannot take claim to naming this site "The Hate Site" Truth is a non ASHI member found this site, and termed it that when asking another inspector about it.

"Be careful letting anyone in AZ ASHI leadership know who you are if you even remotely agree with me on anything.
I wouldn’t want to see you get blacklisted and bashed like certain people in AZ ASHI leadership have done to Scott."
If you truley believe this I trust you informed the inspectors that picketed the BTR of this.

" This seminar is not about being an inspector??"

From what I gather this blog started due to an inspection report that did not meet state standards.

Why would you suggest someone not attend a seminar to help them avoid the same thing happening to them??

I'm not one of movers and shakers, I'm just a plain old home inspector. I just ask simple questions. Since this is the only forum in Arizona for some discussion, I'm here. I do wonder why the BTR can't just post their "new" interpretations on the web site.
No I'm buying into anything on this site, just asking the question.
I'm not a full Ashi member but what about the State Licensed Home Inspectors that are not members of Ashi or any other group.
How does BTR plan to inform them?
I'm just asking for a little more communication from the BTR.
Dan, thanks for the offer. I do appreciate it, but I have family in town and we are going to Sedona tomorrow so I won't be able to attend this meeting.
This is another reason I want the BTR to just post the new requirements because I can't attend.
I'll bet there are quite a few others that are in the same boat.
Anyway, thank Dan and I don't want to get in between the argument I'm just asking the questions.
Phx. Inspector

You crack me up, Dan. You're really picking at anything you can come up with to attack me... I gave you pages of facts to attack, yet I haven't seen you address one real issue... what's wrong? Oh yeah, that's right...you CAN'T address the real issues. That's why you're attacking me, YOU HAVE NO ANSWERS on the real issues so you have to change the subject and make me the bad guy for bringing up legitimate problems.

Okay Dan, I'll play your silly game, but this is the last time. Next time you come back, I expect REAL answers to REAL questions, just like I am giving you REAL answers to your REAL funny questions.

1. You said "If you truley believe this I trust you informed the inspectors that picketed the BTR of this."

I don't know of any "inspectors" who have ever picketed the BTR. However, the inspectors that I told about this website were also advised by me NOT to use their real name in their comments in order to avoid retaliation. My mistake was in assuming that retaliation would come solely from the BTR. Even I didn't expect the attempt at intimidation that certain members of AZ ASHI leadership have displayed. That tells me that certain people in AZ ASHI leadership have a much bigger stake in the BTR than even I thought. And yes, we have seen evidence of retaliation, all of which has been documented accordingly with our attorneys, and with various agencies. We will patiently continue adding to our documentation... And not only do I truly believe what I said, it's all supported by hard evidence. We already have a file about 8 inches thick, along with a very nice library of audio files (recorded conversations/phone calls with various people, including Manuel at the BTR and others). If it was up to me, I'd be doing podcasts on this site, but you know how lawyers are... they like to save all the really good stuff for later. [NOTE to Randy: Don't worry about not having lawyers... they ruin all the fun anyway!]

2. "This seminar is not about being an inspector??"

It's not. This isn't a CE course that improves an inspector's technical knowledge. This is just about letting inspectors know how the BTR changed the way it interprets the Standards, and to let them know how a complaint is handled if an inspector violates the Standards, right? It's not about expanding your knowledge on plumbing (for example), it's a class to let you know how the BTR expects you to report what you find, right?

By statute, the BTR exists to protect the public. If the BTR has expectations of home inspectors in order to protect the public, shouldn't they let inspectors know those expectations for FREE? It's great that AZ ASHI is getting the information out - pat yourself on the back for me. But the BTR, not AZ ASHI has the responsibility to get that information out to ALL AZ INSPECTORS independently of AZ ASHI. Otherwise, how are they protecting the public? Fining an inspector after the public has been damaged does not accomplish the BTR's statutory purpose of protecting the public. But educating inspectors on BTR expectations to prevent violations from occurring would protect the public. And it's the BTR, not AZ ASHI that legally has this responsibility. Where am I going wrong, Dan?

3. You said, "From what I gather this blog started due to an inspection report that did not meet state standards. Why would you suggest someone not attend a seminar to help them avoid the same thing happening to them??"

WRONG, and you know it. This blog started due to a licensing agency that can't follow it's own rules. Had the BTR observed Scott's rights as they processed the complaint, he never would have said a word and this website would not exist.

And you can try to twist my words, but others can read and judge for themselves. I did NOT suggest that Phx Inspector stay home from the seminar. In fact, I assumed he is going to the seminar and the only question is whether he's paying for it himself or taking you up on your offer. I simply said his anonymity might be worth paying the $175, suggesting that he go to the seminar but pay for it himself. If I suggested NOT going to the seminar, the $175 would have been irrelevant. And of course you conveniently left out the end of my statement when you quoted it, which said, "But then hey, $175 is $175... I totally understand that too :)".

So Dan, now that I've answered each of your questions, it's your turn to answer mine:

1. Is AZ ASHI leadership going to disclose ASHI's financial problems to its members, so they can make informed decisions about renewing their memberships with a financially troubled organization? AZ ASHI has been working really hard to get ASHI members to renew their (overdue) AZ ASHI memberships all the sudden. It would be dishonest to take people's money without telling them such relevant information, right? Yet, Scott wasn't even given a hint about ASHI's financial trouble when he was sent an invoice and asked to pay his hard earned money to AZ ASHI. Apparently, ASHI can't even afford insurance for it's chapter Directors & Officers anymore. Is that why the AZ ASHI renewal application has a big legal disclaimer members must sign agreeing that AZ ASHI has no liability, even if they damage you?

2. Is AZ ASHI really letting Inspectors pay $175 to listen to Manuel talk about how complaints are SUPPOSED to be processed? Even the BTR does not deny they skipped all the required steps in Scott's case, and admitted doing it to other home inspectors as well. So why ask inspectors to pay good money to let the BTR spit in their face and tell them it's raining?

In reality, the required steps are NOT followed (or at least have not been in the past). But do you really think that's what he's going to tell these paying inspectors who are at the seminar?

3. Why hasn't anyone in AZ ASHI leadership brought up the fact that home inspectors do NOT have representation either on the BTR's Board or the Rules & Legislation Committee? The BTR committees have been basically controlled by AZ ASHI leadership & ex-leadership for the past 6 years. So if these people are working for the good of all home inspectors, why hasn't something so obviously unfair been brought up by AZ ASHI in the past 6 years?

Those are just a couple of the gazillion issues that need to be addressed. But we'll try crawling before we walk.

I could have attacked you and made you look bad in my response. I tried really hard not to... Instead, I fully answered each of your questions. I have dealt with the facts and expect you to do the same. I will NOT post anymore of your attacks. If you won't address the questions posed, don't bother to make any more comments - they won't be posted. I look forward to your response.

Back from Sedona. Not my cup of tea but my wife and her sister loved it.
So I'm wanting to find out what happened at the Az Ashi meeting yesterday.
What are the "New" guidelines as announced by Manuel and the BTR?
Any new happenings?

Okay Dan, I'll play your silly game, but this is the last time. Next time you come back, I expect REAL answers to REAL questions, just like I am giving you REAL answers to your REAL funny questions.

My reply…
Gosh.. I’m glad you decided to crawl when asking questions.
Sorry I don’t consider posting the truth/ another side a silly game.

2. "This seminar is not about being an inspector??"
It's not. This isn't a CE course that improves an inspector's technical knowledge. . And it's the BTR, not AZ ASHI that legally has this responsibility. Where am I going wrong, Dan?
My reply.
.Some inspectors believe that being able to provide an inspection report to the AZ Minimum Home Inspector Workmanship Standards, which requires us, to provide a better knowledge of the home to our customer, is just as, if not more important than technical knowledge.

. And it's the BTR, not AZ ASHI that legally has this responsibility
My reply.
I would suggest AZ inspectors look up, and read the BTR newsletter from apx 03-06, from my understanding all home inspectors were informed of the new check list by the BTR.

So Dan, now that I've answered each of your questions, it's your turn to answer mine:
1. Is AZ ASHI leadership going to disclose ASHI's financial problems to its members, so they can make informed decisions about renewing their memberships with a financially troubled organization? AZ ASHI has been working really hard to get ASHI members to renew their (overdue) AZ ASHI memberships all the sudden. It would be dishonest to take people's money without telling them such relevant information, right?

My reply.
As a result of making the decision to be informed of not only local HI issues, and as an ASHI member I also try to keep informed of the national HI association that I chose to belong to.

1st thing, the post referenced by you , by Gromicko is a lie.
It states that ASHI eliminated the ED director, truth is Angela was in charge of conventions etc. The letter that you posted also stated the $s from that position were going to go to members education.

I also read the intro to our new ED, in the ASHI reported, one of his qualifications listed were convention planning. Hmmm. Maybe he felt those $s, our $s could be better spent on member benefits.
I also make it a point to attend ASHIs annual convention. If you have ever attended one of them, I’m sure you are aware the members in attendance are informed and given a copy of ASHIs financial condition. I am also aware that any ASHI member can get that info, simply for the asking.
If you want to see the other side of this, yet another lie about ASHI by gromicko,this topic was, and still is on the ASHI BB, all one has to do is read it to see there is another side to the story.
Now if you want to believe gromikos members that are commited to destroying ASHI, and our profession, I would also suggest considering not paying AZ taxes since the state treasure stated there are only a couple more months of funds left in the states funds.

2. Is AZ ASHI really letting Inspectors pay $175 to listen to Manuel talk about how complaints are SUPPOSED to be processed? Even the BTR does not deny they skipped all the required steps in Scott's case, and admitted doing it to other home inspectors as well.

My reply ….
I don’t know the answer to your question about Scotts issue.
The little legal knowledge that I know, is if there is legal action against someone, it’s in their best interest to relay any information thru their attorney.

I don’t know if you had a “ reporter” present, if not I’ll give the 1000s of viewers to this site, my version of this seminar.. There were apx 60 AZ HI present, many of then non-ASHI members, not one of them left saying, my report is perfect, what a waste of money.
In fact, after much imput and debate by the inspectors present, the sample report, and current check list presented, had a couple items that should be re-worded to assure our customers are better informed.

I do know that the 1 ½ hr that Manny donated to AZ inspectors was very well received, and the inspectors present got a totally different side of the complaint process than what is portrayed here.
The information provided a wide range of his position at the BTR, the complaint process,
How many people at the BTR process complaints against His , how many complaints are received each year, options that an AZ home inspector has, as far as what process they can chose to , or not do, and much more.
The one rule that I was not aware of, was an inspector does have the option of signing a consent agreement with out going thru the full process. From what I understood once an inspector signs that agreement the process is ended..
My interruption of that was it is kind of like a plea agreement.

3. Why hasn't anyone in AZ ASHI leadership brought up the fact that home inspectors do NOT have representation either on the BTR's Board or the Rules & Legislation Committee? The BTR committees have been basically controlled by AZ ASHI leadership & ex-leadership for the past 6 years. So if these people are working for the good of all home inspectors, why hasn't something so obviously unfair been brought up by AZ ASHI in the past 6 years?

My reply….
I don’t have an answer for this. My question would be, where is it written, if this is a concern to you, or any other AZ inspector, why should AZ ASHI leadership be the only ones to address AZ home inspectors concerns.??

So, has this page died?
I asked a simple question and I've asked several other inspectors if they attended last weeks BTR meeting hosted by Ashi. None did but all of us have the question, what happened?
What's new? Can anyone fill us in or tell us where to look.
I've been to the Btr page and there is nothing there.
A little help please.

So, has this web page gone dark?
Did anyone attend the BTR seminar?
Was there anything new announced?

Phx Inspector -
Sorry, it's my fault there were no comments posted for awhile - I was slow to approve the past few. My daughter recently had some surgery and I've been too busy to check the blog. Dan did actually respond earlier but since comments are moderated, his comment and yours weren't posted until just now when I checked and let them all through. I'll try to be quicker, and maybe someday when everybody can play nice in the sandbox together I'll switch back to unmoderated comments! Again, my fault and I apologize.

Dan -
I will give you credit for responding to my questions, but your idea of "the truth" is twisted.

1. Yes, being able to provide an inspection report to the AZ Minimum Standards is important for all home inspectors...Which is why it's extremely important for the BTR to make their expectations regarding those Standards readily available to ALL home inspectors for FREE.

Communicating with home inspectors is especially important if the BTR is going to change how they interpret those Standards. In other words, if the BTR tells home inspectors what they expect, then home inspectors will stand a chance at complying.

I think you said everybody that attended the recent AZ ASHI meeting would change how they report at least one thing. So obviously, the BTR is failing to communicate their expectations to home inspectors. Whether or not AZ ASHI has a seminar does not eliminate the BTR's responsibility to make its expectations readily available to all AZ home inspectors for free, at all times.

Although it doesn't really matter, please email me a copy of the "BTR newsletter from apx 03-06". I have always read the BTR newsletters each quarter and have never seen anything about the checklist mentioned. In fact, I've looked back through all the old ones and haven't found any mention of the new interpretation of the standards or the checklist. Is this one newsletter the reason you claim that "from my understanding all home inspectors were informed of the new check list by the BTR"? If it's there, it's hidden (like the checklist is hidden on the website).

And it's not just the checklist the BTR is not communicating about. There's alot of other important information/changes they've failed to make available and then penalized inspectors for not knowing. I won't re-post them all, they're already covered elsewhere on this blog.

2. You stated, "1st thing, the post referenced by you, by Gromicko is a lie.". But I didn't reference any post by Gromicko. I simply linked to an ASHI memo that Nick referenced in that post. What was said in the post you're talking about was NOT previously referenced by me as you stated. Nick and NACHI have nothing to do with it. The memo I posted was from ASHI - do you deny that?

Is the memo a lie? You didn't dispute it on NACHI.org. Instead you seemed to confirm it, even insinuating that ASHI being in a deficit position is similar to the state of AZ cutting the budget to prevent a deficit situation. ASHI can't prevent the deficit situation if it's already there, huh? And do you really want your home inspection organization to be run as efficiently as the state government?

You have to be an ASHI member to be an AZ ASHI member (after the first year), right? So that would make ASHI's financial situation relevant to anyone renewing their AZ ASHI membership too, wouldn't it? Yet AZ ASHI mentioned nothing about it as it solicited renewals. I think that's wrong and your response is that something said on NACHI.org is untrue? It looks to me like you're doing the "BTR dance" around the facts. Apparently when you don't want to answer a question directly, you start making invalid comparisons to state taxes.

Scott & I have been to annual conventions and have never been offered ASHI's financials. Please tell me where to get them if they are available to all members "simply for the asking".

If you listened to Manuel talk about the complaint process, you know they violated all their own rules in Scott's case. If you're still having difficulty putting 2 + 2 together and coming up with 4, here's a link to the BTR's required complaint resolution process. The things they definitely skipped in Scott's case are highlighted in pink, and the rules they actually obeyed are highlghted in blue. As you can see, I almost used up all the ink in my pink highlighter while my blue highlighter is still like new. The BTR is supposed to be enforcing rules against home inspectors, yet they don't even want to be in the same room as their own rules.

You really think it's okay for the BTR to blindside an inspector with a consent agreement before even giving them notice that there's a case open against them? And it's okay for the BTR to force an inspector to sign a consent agreement or face excessive punishment, while denying them access to legal counsel?

You work with AZ ASHI and the BTR, yet you claim legal ignorance. But Scott (who doesn't work with either AZ ASHI or the BTR) is supposed to have all kinds of legal knowledge without being able to talk to an attorney. You stated, "I don’t know the answer to your question about Scotts issue. The little legal knowledge that I know, is if there is legal action against someone, it’s in their best interest to relay any information thru their attorney".

So these things are better left to attorneys, except for in Scott's case - he should just fully understand the process and a 4-page legal consent agreement without being allowed to consult a lawyer, and without even having a reasonable amount of time to review it all himself?

Obviously you realize now that the BTR completely violated all the rules in Scott's case. Since they have no excuse, all they can say is he signed a consent agreement - which was improperly obtained. So according to your logic, it would be okay for the police to require you to sign a plea deal without being able to first consult legal counsel. You and I both know that plea deal would be thrown out in a heartbeat because it was improperly obtained. It's this exact type of constitutional rights violation that often allows murderers and child molestors to walk free. So you feel home inspectors accused of violating the Standards should have fewer constitutional rights respected than dangerous criminals?

Look at the BTR's complaint resolution process again. Trying to obtain a consent agreement is at the END of the process, it's NOT step #1. And there are several other steps which are required first. The process may indeed stop with a consent agreement, but it does NOT start with one. And consent by deception is not informed consent.

If you really don't see a problem with calling an inspector's wife and telling her to have her husband come to the BTR to sign a consent agreement "today or tomorrow" as the first step in processing a complaint, you are clearly looking at the BTR through rose-colored glasses like some in AZ ASHI leadership. You should take them off sometime and see the real picture. Then maybe AZ ASHI leadership would be asking questions of the BTR, like why don't home inspectors have representation on the Board, and on the Rules and Legislation Committee?

Contrary to your comment, I never said AZ ASHI has to be "the only one to address home inspector concerns". But if you have all these AZ ASHI leadership members saturating the BTR committees supposedly for the benefit of home inspectors, isn't it a little odd none of them have noticed and questioned this? Oh yeah, and since AZ ASHI takes money from AZ home inspectors under the pretense that they "address home inspector concerns", shouldn't they actually be doing it?

And yes, Dan - you're much smarter than the folks at the BTR. We did indeed have someone at the seminar 'taking notes'. And like the others present, we also feel we got all $175 dollars worth... thank you, Manuel :) Also you'd probably be surprised to know that at least 3 of the inspectors present at the seminar have also made comments on this blog (but probably not the people or the comments you're thinking of).

how much e&o insurance is a home inspector required to have in az?

michelle -
AZ home inspectors are not required to have E&O insurance. They can have a bond or other financial assurance instead. Here's what ARS 32-122.02(B) says:

Within sixty days after certification, a home inspector certified pursuant to this chapter shall file one of the following financial assurances pursuant to the rules recommended by the home inspector rules and standards committee and adopted by the Board:

1. Errors and omissions insurance for negligent acts committed in the course of a home inspection in an amount of two hundred thousand dollars in the aggregate and one hundred thousand dollars per occurrence.

2. A bond in the amount of twenty-five thousand dollars or proof that minimum net assets have a value of at least twenty-five thousand dollars.

3. A financial assurance mechanism with a value of at least twenty-five thousand dollars recommended by the home inspector rules and standards committee and approved by the Board.

A bond only costs $300 per year, and E&O costs several thousand, depending on the limits and endorsements your policy has. As a Realtor, I would only do business with a home inspector who has E&O insurance.

I just found this web site and geez it intense. Good stuff and something I have been really thinking about. Except the real question I have is about my Bond. Mine is coming up for renewal and I am looking to save some dollars. Mine is costing me about $550.00, and no I don't have and cannot yet afford E-O. Sorry, but I'm still paying for braces on 2 kids. I just want to know if that is High, Low or about right. Any help?

Hi Inspecting Gilbert,
I think that's high. We usually only pay $300 for a $25,000 bond for our inspectors. Here's a link to a bond agency in Mesa.

I feel your pain about E&O! It's outrageously expensive. Even if you do buy E&O, I would suggest keeping a bond just for public records. If you put your E&O on public record with the BTR, you may find yourself a target for lawsuits. At least that's what we've been advised.

Good news!! At the July 22, 2008 BTR Open Session Meeting, item number 4 on the agenda is to change the Registration, Certification and Renewal fees for Home Inspectors to $165 Triennial ($55 per year), which is an 82% reduction from what we have been paying!! There has been a lot of pressure from within and outside the BTR to bring our fees in line with the other professions. After the change, our fees are equal to the other professions. Thank you to all who have made this possible. Go to the July 22 meeting and support the vote to reduce our fees!!

NOTE FROM WEBMASTER: Fees were reduced because THIS WEBSITE BROUGHT ATTENTION TO THE ISSUE, and because the webmaster of this website personally met with a certain State Representative who most likely pressured the BTR into doing the right thing for Home Inspectors. Too bad AZ ASHI didn't use their influence at the BTR to stand up for AZ Home Inspectors in the same way. The BTR was gouging Home Inspectors on fees for more than 5 years before this website was set up. And AZ ASHI never confronted their buddies at the BTR about the disproportionately high fees Home Inspectors were being charged? And then certain AZ ASHI leadership members MADE FUN fun of this website for saying that Home Inspector fees were too high. Read through the comments on this website and you'll see. So yes Mr. Hecht, sometimes it's necessary to shame the government into doing the right thing, especially when those who are supposed to be looking out for our interests aren't really. If we had all just acted like BTR cheerleaders and sheep people who go along to get along, you and every other AZ Home Inspector would still be paying 5 times more for your license each year. Thank God for people who are NOT afraid to stand up for what's right.

Little hard to make it up. But it is nice, that you encourage visitors in a positive way. Good follow up comments too. Do stay in touch.

I have been in front of the gestapo called the BTR and my capital crime was leaving off the statement that the inspection was done in compliance using the az standards of practice. I also was dinged for not staing I could not observe pipe supports or insulation. Total cost $800 fine. The complaintent who turned me in was found to have no valid complaint. but I was punished for oversite. The board would not let me have an attorny present. I have since learned that the cannot do this. In the future and for all others, contact a lawyer. He will stop all action until the board allows due process. The BTR is nothing more than a money making entity to keep the lies of the director and his minions in a job. They offer no viable protection for the consumer. The courts will do that.

The comments to this entry are closed.

About This Website

  • Exchange links with us!  We'll add a link to your site here on HomeInspectorsArePeopleToo.com!

    This website is owned and maintained by

    Both the company and this website were founded by an Arizona business owner who became fed up with corrupt and incompetent government.
                            more info...


    The order in which "Comments" are displayed has been changed. The most recent comment is now displayed at the top of the MESSAGE BOARD, instead of the bottom.

Mesa, Arizona Weather

Recent Posts

Join a Worthy Cause...

Articles from Arizona's Real Estate Blog