I would like to publicly acknowledge and thank three Active Rain members.

Carl Winters - Carl has, on more than one occasion, provided information in blogs or comments that have benefited me.  His willingness to share his wealth of knowledge is highly appreciated.  Carl has also shown that he is very willing to give credit to other members, rather than keep it for himself.  Carl, thank you. 

Jimmy Breazeale - Jimmy also is very free with his knowledge.  He has helped my business by sharing his knowledge.  Through his comments, he has helped many fellow inspectors to keep work coming in the door, even recommending specific companies to contact regarding work.  Jimmy, thank you.

James Quarello - James is an absolute fountain of knowledge, which he has been very willing to share with other members.  He is also one of the best debaters I have ever gone up against.  He has caused me to reevaluate my position on subjects more than once.  He has also been willing to help me out with some information regarding a problem I was working on outside of AR. 

All three of these gentlemen have earned my respect through their knowledge and willingness to freely give that knowledge.  Gentleman, thank you.  There also many other AR members who have encouraged me, and to them I also say thank you.

Pre-Listing Inspections have become the hot item in the Home Inspection industry.  Many inspectors have begun to push these inspections.  But are they beneficial or a waste of time?  Let's look at the benefits.

•§  The Seller can choose an inspector they are comfortable with

•§  The Seller can set the time of the inspection to best suite their schedule

•§  The inspection may alert the Seller to potential health and safety issues before the home is shown

•§  The Seller is able to assist the inspector, something usually not possible during a Pre-Purchase Inspection.

•§  Inaccuracies in the report can be corrected before the Buyer sees them

•§  The Seller will be able to more accurately price the home

•§  If defects are found, the Seller has the option to repair the defects or reduce the asking price

•§  The Seller can attach repair bills or estimates to the report

•§  The Seller gets to see the home through the eyes of an unbiased, third-party

•§  A clean report can be used as a marketing tool

•§  The report will show the Buyer the Seller is being honest and has nothing to hide

•§  Less likelihood of 11^th hour renegotiations or the deal falling through

•§  The Buyer may waive the inspection contingency

•§  The report will provide for more accurate disclosure of the home's condition

FAQ's

Won't an inspection kill the deal if defects are found due to disclosure rules?                                                                                                                                                    Any defect major enough to kill the deal will be found eventually.  Better to know about them in advance.  

The home is in such good shape, why have an inspection?                                                                             There is no such thing as a home in perfect condition.  If the home is truly in good condition, the report becomes a marketing tool, prepared by an impartial third-party, for the Seller's use.    

If a potential buyer sees there are some defects, won't they just walk away?                                                                                                                                                   If the inspection reveals defects, the Seller has the option to repair the defects and attach the invoices to the report to show the work is complete, or get competitive bids and attach them to the report to show potential Buyers the estimated cost to correct the defects.  The Buyer will also have the opportunity to see the Seller isn't trying to hide anything.

Pre-Listing Inspections are a win-win situation.  The Seller is able to sell the home more quickly, and the Real Estate Agent is able to more accurately market the home.  And they work just as well for Property Investors  For more information, go to http://www.moveincertified.com/, or www.nachi.org/sellerinspections.htm. 

On Tuesday evening, a local radio station ran a piece about home inspections.  According to the story, Angie's List says that 30% of homeowners say their inspector missed items that ended up costing them considerable amounts of money, including mold, asbestos, termites, rodents and leaky roofs.  I contacted the reporter and tried to explain to him that other than a leaky roof, the mentioned items are not part of a standard home inspection.  He said that unless the pre-inspection agreement specifically states these items are excluded, he would expect that they would be part of an inspection.  I put together some information for him, which he said he would read, and dropped it off at his office, as well as sending to the Detroit office of Angie's List. 

This got me to thinking.  How many people actually know what may or may not be excluded in an inspection?   Where would they find these items?  All of the major home inspector organizations have a written Standard of Practice (SoP) that can either be viewed on their website or downloaded.  In addition, the state where the inspection is being performed may have its own SoP.  But how many of our clients actually go out and read them?  I am willing to bet, not too many. 

I wonder what percentage of people who complained to Angie's List would not have complained had they known what the exclusions in the SoP were.  Clients need to be made aware that these SoP's do exist, and where to find them.  As an inspector, I will be letting my clients know when they book their inspection where to find my SoP, and will encourage them to read it. 

I was in a Real Estate office the other day to drop off an information packet.  The receptionist said she would pass it on to the appropriate person who would then contact me.  This was an office I had never been to before, and had no experience working with company.

I received a call from a woman at the office this morning.  She was calling to verify my business address so she could send me an application form and price list to be included on their Preferred Provider list.  I politely informed her that paying to be included on a Preferred Provider list is a violation of the NACHI Code of Ethics, and therefore I would have to decline.  She proceeded to inform me that I could come and pick up my information packet from the receptionist, and she wasn't particularly pleasant about it.

Preferred Provider lists are a subject of great debate in the inspection industry.  I would like to know how other Real Estate Professionals feel about the practice.  Would you recommend an inspector who pays for inclusion on a list, or would you consider this to be an ethical violation?  Why?

My personal opinion is this; as inspectors, we are being paid by the client to provide a concise, unbiased report on the condition of the home.  How can an inspector guarantee impartiality if he is paying a Real Estate office for work?  Who is he really working for?  I would be concerned that the inspector might unconsciously soften the report to ensure the sale goes through, thereby ensuring the agent gets their commission, and the inspector gets more referrals.

I need some advice to pass onto my daughter. 

She is looking for a duplex.  She called the agent who sold her the home she is currently living in, and left him a voicemail about what she was looking for.  She didn't hear back from him for a while.  This agent is a parent of a couple friends of hers.  She mentioned it to me, and said she was thinking of going with a different agent.  I told her I would call a couple of agents I deal with. 

                I called one agent, and he was frank about the fact that he doesn't do much with buyers, and not in the area she was looking in.  Cool, he was honest about it.  No problem.  I called another agent, talked to him for a few minutes, and let him know my daughter's name and that I would have her call him.  Within a couple days, he had some properties to look at.  She asked me to come along to advise her from a construction point of view, and as an inspector.   The agent who did have houses to look at has continued to send her listings, but she has not had any personal contact, i.e. phone calls, emails or voicemails, from him in the past week.

                This morning, I received an email from the first agent she contacted, her original agent, who said he talked to my daughter.  He said he had been working on finding the listings everyday, even some not yet listed.  He also said that my daughter said I was involved and told her to use a different agent.  When I emailed her to find out what was going on, she said she had told the first agent that she had gotten a referral for an agent from me, not that I told her to use a different agent.  Now she doesn't know what to do about the situation and asked me.  I told her I would ask the AR community for advice on how she should handle this situation, as I have never had to deal with something like this.  Any help would be greatly appreciated. 

The question has been asked many times, I know.  Many feel that Home Inspectors should have to carry a license.  There are many who are of the opposite opinion, including myself. 

I work in Michigan, which does not require inspectors to be licensed, unless they are working for a municipality.  There are also no requirements as to how much or what type of insurance we are required to have.  Legislation has been proposed twice in the State Congress, and defeated both times.  Now we have a Representative working on crafting a third bill. 

So I am asking for the opinion of Real Estate agents, brokers, appraisers, inspectors and anyone else who would like to comment.  I do not want any inter-organizational mud-slinging; that just hurts the image of the industry and will be deleted when I see them.  I do not want any personal attacks against posters.  They will be deleted.  Other than that, I intend to leave all other comments up for all to see.  Now, convince me I've got the wrong opinion. 

"Why should I pay so much for an inspection, when your competitor only charges $200?".  This question was posed to me the other day by a caller.  I explained to the caller that as an inspector, there are a lot of time and expense involved.  Her response was, and I quote, "My agent gave me a list and said that I shouldn't have to pay more than about $150.00 for an inspection."  She then promptly hung up before I could say another word.

Her agent said she shouldn't have to pay more than about $150?  What planet was this agent from?  I decided to check prices on my competitor's websites.  I did find three that were around $200 for the size house she was calling about.  I didn't find a single inspector that would do any home that size, 1600 sf, for $150.  As for the $200 sites, in all three cases there were no professional affiliations listed in their qualifications. 

I spent 10 years in construction, and the last three years as an inspector.  I have purchased countless tools over the years, attended numerous training events and paid membership dues to NACHI, my professional organization, as well as my chapter dues.  I have gas to pay for to get to the site.  I have to pay my GL and E&O insurance bill every month.  I have to pay vehicle maintenance.  I have office expenses.  In other words, this job isn't cheap. 

I would like to know how an agent could come up with a price that low.  I have had people tell me that they were told they shouldn't pay more than $300.00 for any size home.  I know there are going to be bargain shoppers in any industry, and I know it isn't all agents telling clients this.  I honestly believe the number of agents quoting prices to clients, especially ridiculously low prices, is small.  I provide agents with a price list, so I know they have the correct price range. 

I would like any agents to explain their reasoning behind telling a client how much they should pay?  I don't mean this as an attack against agents; I just would like to know.  I would think that an agent would want to give a higher range, just so they don't look foolish to the buyer.  Any thoughts?