12 July 2007 - Madison, Wisconsin

      Can a person paid by one party perform a service involving a third non-paying party be totally objective?

I just don't know about Home Inspectors.  I like them and believe they perform a valuable service, but what if the subject property were MINE and the inspector is hired by my Buyer?

The following is for example purposes only - I'm not saying it happened, Maybe it did, maybe it didn't.  But it's food for thought:

My house is a ranch-style with a walkout basement.  It's 15 years old, but well maintained - or so it seemed.  Here we are sitting pretty with a solid contract, thinking all is ripping toward closing, when I get a call that the Home Inspector wants to come over.  OK.  I know what they are looking for - more or less - and figure it'll be a snap.  C'mon over.

The Buyer's agent arrives first, followed by the Buyer in his grubbies - he's carrying a flashlight and work gloves.  So.  It is THE hottest day of the summer and these poor guys are going to crawl around in my attic.  I put bottled water, Gatorade, and pop (Midwest for soda, I know now) in the fridge for the intrepid explorers - no harm (and maybe a few brownie points) in being nice.  I dutifully disappear before the Inspector arrives.

Later that day I get a call and "The Third Degree" from the Buyer's Agent - in a nice way, of course.  I set the record straight.  A couple days later The Amendment arrives with a shortlist of demands (which will kill the deal if not met).  I then get the Inspection Report.  I read it and the list of hafta gottas.  The descriptive language assures me I'm living in Poe's House of Usher about five minutes before the collapse.  Even the things that were perfect were only average or worse by description.  All that CYA language.  I was ready to bulldoze the place and take the loss on the spot.

Of course, I get a tiny bit warm under the collar when a report describes my castle as though it's serf's hovel.  So I call MY Inspector buddy, who tells me the other guy is nit-picky and not busy enough.  Throws in a few words only sailors could appreciate. 

So what!  It's on paper now and is now truth.  Now fact. Now real.  It's part of my condition report, whether or not it's 100% accurate.  I am stuck with it.

So I think.  If I were the inspector and the guy next to me with the gloves and flashlight were paying me to look at a house, wouldn't I have just the slightest tendency to opine in his direction, just a little.  I mean it's 95 degrees and 85% humidity and I've got an attic-crawling buddy.  Gray has so many, many shades.  Kinda like in an NBA game where the home team gets all the questionable calls - the ones that could go either way.

I don't believe there were improprieties, but we are all only human.  So my real question - with so much riding on an inspection and the only alternative is ANOTHER pro or inspector to counter the first:  Are Home Inspections really all that objective? And really, how could they be?  A seasoned vet might see a condition one way - the rookie, another.  Experience plays its role in every service.  Underwriters will let something pass on one loan file and kill it in a later one. 

I don't mind (much) that the Inspections are imperfect, but I mind for the weight they carry.  Maybe if they were mandatory and provided by the lender it'd make more sense to me, but to have it optional and paid for by the Buyer - that troubles me some.

Regardless, after a much wailing and gnashing of teeth (plus a few hundred dollars in contractors and a price reduction) nearly everyone is happy. 

CAN'T WAIT to inspect the home I"M buying!  (Now where'd I put that hardhat?!?!)

Art Blanchet

Your Home-Your Money