Suing a home inspector?

[pushkins]

Is he a licensed home inspector in your state ?

You have the right to re address none, some or all of the issues he listed, If I were you I'd work through the list correct any issues you deem correct and needing repair, then on lines like the three outlets powered by a wall switch put a little sticker on the switch and a lamp or something in one of the plugs, work through the list making the correction or solutions like above then ask the buyers to come back, this way they can also walk through the list and see them either fixed or explained (like the switched outlets).

I'm a little curious now, he mentioned three outlets that failed to work, did he mention a light switch that didn't turn on a light ?

Legally you cannot sue an inspector for what he writes as he is brought in by a third party (buyer) his contract is with the buyer (person paying him) not you. Now if he damaged your property in the course of performing his inspection, you have a case to seek compensation.

I respectively disagree with you HayZee on the circuit issue, the inspectors job is to perform a comprehensive inspection of the premises inside his scope of knowledge and experience, electrical always falls into the required category, anything outside the scope of a standard inspection or issues that are found that he cannot deal with should always be addressed by advising the client to "seek expert advice" usually a qualified electrician.

However in this case a clue to the inspector should have been a wall switch that didn't turn on anything obvious like a ceiling fixture.

[EIFSpector]

I responded to jvetter713's post yesterday in a different forum; if there is any interest I will copy and post it here.

As a licensed Home Inspector, I find quite a few very interesting opinions and experiences; some of which I agree with and some that I disagree with.

When inspecting any home, I am as loyal to my client as a Bulldog! I do not solicit agents and get very few agent referrals; the last 3 agent referrals I received were for family members of the agent. I take that as a compliment.

The average home inspection for an approx 2,000 sf home takes me about 3-4 hours, and an additional 4-6 hours to compile the report. My reports are filled with a tremendous amount of specific information... and very little fill. But no matter how hard I try, and no matter how careful I am; I am sure that there are things that are missed. Anyone expecting or advertising otherwise is not being realistic... or not being honest. There are always limitations to what you can access, there are problems that are intermittent, etc. I’m sure that if you had 2 different inspectors inspect the same house; there will be things that each missed and the other caught.

What should always be considered is; "was the inspection worthwhile?" If the inspection alerted you to $10,000 worth of problems, but missed $300.00 worth, was the inspection a failure? Should you sue the inspector for not catching the $300.00?

There are times that an inspector deserves to be sued, there are times that an inspector should lose his (her) license, there are inspectors that do not have sufficient knowledge, and there are inspectors that “sugarcoat” in order to stay on the good side of the agent in order to keep getting their referrals.

There are also very good inspectors who try very hard to do right by their clients. Unfortunately, in many cases you will not know who you selected until it is too late.

Interesting though, many clients that shop for an inspector are only interested in the price. Few ask to see prior reports… few ask about construction experience. Not all inspections are created equal.

I recently wrote a thread about Real Estate Agents referring Home Inspectors, which by the way is the way most inspectors are selected. My thread upset a number of people, who felt it would be punishing the agents (who they swear are interested in their client’s best interest, and not in a commission), and punishing the inspectors who rely upon the agents for referrals.

The thread was based upon my belief that agents should not refer inspectors. I feel that so many refer those that for whatever reason make the deal go smoother. In my opinion nobody who has a financial interest based upon a buyer’s decision should refer the inspector who is providing the information that the buyer bases his decisions on (conflict of interest).

Steven Turetsky
New York State Home Inspector
Certified EIFS, Stucco, Building Envelope Inspector, Moisture Analyst
homeinspectionsnewyork.com
eifsinspectionsnewyork.com

[pushkins]

The thread was based upon my belief that agents should not refer inspectors. I feel that so many refer those that for whatever reason make the deal go smoother. In my opinion nobody who has a financial interest based upon a buyer’s decision should refer the inspector who is providing the information that the buyer bases his decisions on (conflict of interest).

and here I've been thinking I was the only one who see's that as a conflict of interest.

Kinda like going to a Mortgage Broker and finding out they only have one lending firm Conflict of Interest !!

Thank You

[EIFSpector]

and here I've been thinking I was the only one who see's that as a conflict of interest.

Kinda like going to a Mortgage Broker and finding out they only have one lending firm Conflict of Interest !!

Thank You

It is so obvious, yet the denial is amazing!