Suing a home inspector?

[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!

[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]

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]

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.

[HayZee518]

I would seek out a reputable firm. What you got was total BS! Inspectors look for structural problems, roof leaks, sub-standard electrical. NOT how a circuit functions.

[jvetter713]

Do I have any recourse options?

I am in the process of selling our home and the prospective buyers had an inspection performed. Our house is about 50 years old but we have spent 5 years completely renovating it.

The inspection report was insane in my opinion. It had 39 line items of nothing but BS in my opinions.

For example, one line item reads:

Painting on backdoor trim does not match...requires re-painted.

Since when does an inspector provide interior design advice? My take on this inspection was that there was nothing wrong so he had to find things that were wrong. The buyers are foreign and are first time home buyers and they really don't understand this. They see 39 line items and are terrified.

Another issue is the inspection reported that 3 outlets were dead. The inspector failed to realize that in all 3 cases there was a corresponding wall switch that controlled them.

In the event this rediculous report causes our home sale to fall through could I sue them for something? I really just want to make this guy feel like and idiot...I'm so pissed off at him.

During the inspection he tracked cullulose from the attic all over the carpet. He tracked mud and leaves from the outdoors inside. He left his lunch garbage in our kitchen. I mean really?

[PatHIverson]

I believe the home inspectors should be held responsible for many of these problems. If they are not able to catch these issues they should find another line of work....

Sue him!

[cole1434]

Our inspectors are highly trained and very thorough in every property. We believe that top notch quality should still be affordable to everyone buying a home. We stay up to date with new industry information and are proud members of the

Torrance Certified Home Inspector

[manhattan42]

Little Recourse

Unfortunately, one has very little recourse against unscrupulous or incompetant real estate inspectors.

First, their contract language absolves them of any liability except for items they have noted in their report. In short, if they did not note a defect, they did not see it. If they did not see it, they did not 'inspect' it... and are therefore held harmless for items missed.

Second, the maximum you can usually recover from a real estate inspector is the amount you paid him/her for the inspection. That clause is also normally contained within the contract language.

If you choose to sue anyone, you should sue the seller for failing to disclose known defects to you. They CAN be held accountable for these items.

That is not to say you shouldn't also sue the real estate inspector, just not to expect much more than the fees you paid plus court costs as a awarded judgement.

[areolamay]

Ditto!

I've been in my new home for 6 months now and with the rain we have been having in Denver the past month, I am getting leaks in a back extension of my home.

I've had two roofers and my insurance inspector up there and all have said the same thing: The back extension is not roofed to code! Either previous owners or even before them - have used asphalt shingles on a 'flat' roof - not only that, they are not 'off-set' and aligned in rows. There is also
a pretty sizeable hole/patch right in the center of the roof that would have been visible to my home inspectors!

The house was a fix and flip - more like a slap and dash.
I can't believe the home inspectors I hired didn't inform me of such obvious mistakes/problems with the extension roof!!!

There is also visible severe hail damage to the main roof of the house and the garage - again, visible and not reported by the home inspectors!

So where am I at now? I am having the entire roof of the house, garage and extension replaced to the tune of around $8000 - Which on the part of the home inspectors had they been a bit more agressive and thorough in their inspection, I would have asked for a price reduction to accommodate the repairs when I bought the home.

I can't stand the thought of giving lawyers money - but my biggest thing is holding them accountable for such an obvious oversight. The disclosure from the previous owners states - condition of roof: Don't know - so I'm sure I can't go back to them - although I am sure they were aware of the problems.

It's a mess and I'm so frustrated with people right now. Had to share and would love to hear any comments - and maybe some success stories too.

Happy home owning y'all....
it's a labour of love.

[pmwroof]

Hi all,

I moved into my home for 3 months. Two weeks ago, there were several days of rain. Started to see living room ceiling dripping water. I had always wondered why a few areas of ceiling appear to be patched, and a growing crack. now I know why. We went up to the roof and found a completely broken-in-half concrete tile that has evidence of "glued" together before. Another roof inspector today could point it out easily when he just got up there.

I put a tarp cover and secure with several bricks temporarily. I don't see any more leakage last two days of rain.

The house inspection report does not say anything about patched ceiling, and roof report does not say anthing about two broken yet glued tiles. It does say broken tiles.

Should I go after the inspectors? thanks

[SSN596]

Well, of course there are good inspectors and bad ones. If you pay about $200 to $300 and get about an hour and a half, you get what you pay for. Most inspection companies have a ton of "outs" and disclaimers written into the contract. And in their defense, strictly speaking they are not allowed to move things, for example all the stuff inside the sink base; they cannot peel back the carpet to look at the subfloor. Etc. They probably should be poking enough to catch a rotted sash. On the roof, they can spot the number of layers, generally look at the condition of flashing and soffits.

Check with legal counsel about whether you have recourse against the inspector. You might have recourse against the homeowner if they knew about material defects and did not disclose. Proving what they knew is difficult. A new roof should have a warranty from the installer, but it may not transfer to the new owner.

Lots of issues here. Good topic for the legal call-in show Handel-on-the-law ( AM640KFI, and nationally syndicated. Also handelonthelaw.com)

[LazyPup]

If the roof was installed shortly before your purchase and it is not up to specifications for a shingle roof, the liability is not with the home inspector, it is with the seller and the roof installer.

[BrianS]

I'm in the same boat. Purchased my first home, don't know a lot about home repair, our home inspector "missed" the fact that the roof is below minimum grade for shingles, and now this roof, installed only 3 months before I purchased the home (1 year ago) is leaking and not covered by insurance due to faulty construction.

In my home inspection contract, I stupidly signed a waiver releasing him from liability, but that provision doesn't cover gross negligence.

I asked for his help in replacing the roof, and threatened to turn him over to the Better Business Bureau, and he's threatened to sue me if I pursue any action against him.

[leone184]

It can be hard to pin down who is to blame for your troubles. Most inspectors probably have some type of "legalese" in the contact that gets them out of most problems. When you hire one, you are really only buying an "educated" opinion. You as the buyer also have some responsibility for things that are obvious, this is why most banks and real estate companies make you sign off on a final "walk-thru" before the closing.

One thing comes to mind, when I bought my first house, my real-estate agent recommend some cut-rate guy he knew. I don't think he was trying to pull a fast one on me, but he was basically just a salesman who would not get his commission until after I closed. (and signed off on the inspection) To him, this was just a formality. I decided to hire someone I knew and trusted.

Kactuskid makes a good point, take a look at the disclosure statement that was filled out by the seller. The problems with the shower, wet basement and the furnace seem to be something the previous owner should have known about. I'm not sure the other problems will be covered unless the previous owner specifically stated there was nothing wrong with them. Your real estate agent may be able to help you contact the previous owner with your complaint. Take lots of pictures, and consider getting written repair estimates in case you have to take him to court.

leone184