Joan~I see this as a wonderful idea and it would definitely make for a strong marketing piece.  At the same time, most of my seller's haven't been one bit interested. I'll be checking back in-I'm curious what the experience has been of other agents.  Have a wonderful Sunday!

Thanks Julie...that was why I wrote it. I thought it made good sense, but I can't get Sellers to see what's in it for them!

To me it would be a way to be forewarned!

Joan...Seller inspections are scary to me.

1. I recently lost a sale because the seller inspection did not discover the same things that the buyers inspection did. His agent failed to inform him that home inspections can be different from inspection to inspection.

2. Years ago....I've had a buyer rely on the seller inspection and not want to do or pay for his own...only to discover that the inspection missed a lot of issues and the buyer did not have a leg to stand on ..no recourse as the inspection belonged to the person who paid it for it...the former seller and not the buyer.

So my limited experience with it has not been positive. 

 Monika...Those are definately legitimate concerns...but avoidable if that Buyers agent had explained just that fact...all home inspections are not equal

Or if your Buyer had been more self  serving and decided on his own Home Inspection?

Wouldn't you think it would be conducive to a feeling of trust?

Hi Joan, This post was great and so well written. You covered most all the points . In California, there seems to be such distrust and on many levels. Here is the main reason I would and have used A pre-inspection for the Seller. To help ascertain what possible serious issues there might be and especially if they would care to rectify them prior to listing. In our market just disclosing them  would probably not be enough. Being a Buyers Market, Buyers are looking for the very best and not into too much compromise unless the price really reflects the property as a bargain.

Yeah...The sellers agent dropped the ball on # 1 and on # 2 despite signing a wavier they did not want to do the inspection. If the consumer is not educated about the merits of it....that they should never rely on a sellers inspection..it can be trouble. Thankfully I had a wavier...but non the less the buyer lost in the end.

Years ago there was a practice of sellers selling home inspections from previous buyers...now that was a nightmare.   

The local Pillar To Post home inspector, Rick & Cindy Taylor have been presenting this idea to area Realtors and sellers.  As you mention there are positive and negative thoughts.  It seems that in the whole scheme of things it is a good idea.

Joan, While I would still get my own inspection if I were buying, I like the idea that the house has been evaluated twice.  Or if there were issues I could decide whether I would want to proceed.  I would find it a benefit and think it's a good idea.

No plan is perfect, but a pre-marketing inspection would certainly send out a 'warm fuzzy' to a potential buyer.  If the agents on both sides of the deal are alert they would be able to guide their clients through it all.  Good post, my friend!

Hi William...I agree with you. I can definately see the win-win aspects but convincing a Seller to spend that money.....that's another story!

Now I can see where that would be a problem Monika...how many years did they do that?Talk about borrowing Trouble!

Helo Philip...We have Pillar to Post here in NH too. They are a very active agency in the areas of education and are always doing seminars on mold and other Realtor related issues...are they the same in Connecticut?

Carole...I would do it if selling my own house too! I hate surprises under pressure. I can deal better if I've ad time to let it sink in!

Carol...and it sure does help to keep up that warm and fuzzy...on both sides. I hate contentious closings!

Thanks for the kudos!

Joan, A Pre-marketing home inspection is great for the sellers to give them the 'heads up', however I would still recommend my buyers get their own inspection done as what one home inspector doesn't find, the next one will.

Also, the home inspection book and commitment given by the home inspector are only for the person(s) who they had the contract with, ie. the sellers in this case, so it wouldn't be of much good to the buyers down the road.

It is a great thing for the seller though, this way they can fix any looming problems before the buyer's inspector finds them....and you're right, it does boost buyer confidence when there is an existing home inspection that they can look at.

Jo 

Hi Joan,
I have not been able to get any Sellers to participate but I think it is a good marketing tool.  In my opinion it is the responsibility of the Buyer's agent to make sure his/her buyer understands that inspections vary from inspector to inspector and explain the consequences of not getting his own inspection.  Once again, it comes down to educating our clients.

I think it is a good idea for the seller to have the inspection.  It takes away surprises for the seller -- of course, they need to hire a thorough inspector.  The seller also can control the cost of the repair - I would never turn over the report to the buyer, however.  The report is for the seller.  On the other hand, even if a report was made available, I would advise the buyer to have their own inspection. 

Jo...I guess it's just a question of finding a way to educate our Sellers on the plusses to them in going this route!

Hi Cynthia...from what you post....I can tell you are great at educating your's!

Joan...that't a good point on the Seller being able to control the cost of the repair. When the Buyer is having it done they are going to go for top dollar!

I've done a lot of Pre-Listing home inspections lately.  They were either booked by a seller who wanted it or by the Realtor who had the trust in their clients that they had a good game plan for selling their house.

Another "pro" for the seller is that when something needs to be fixed they have the time to find a good repairman at a good price.  Many times it seems since there is a time limit on the escrow, sellers have to find someone right awayfor repairs, this adds to the cost because they have to choose whoever is available.

Yet another pro is that they have hired a professional and now it would be difficult to be blamed of non-disclosure later down the road.  Lawsuits for disclosures will be increasing dramatically now that people aren't moving into houses and having $50,000 equity in a few months.

Joan,

In a seller's market, it might be a hard sell.  In a buyer's market, the number one benefit is being able to differentiate their home from the rest of the stingy pack!

Mike in Tucson

Joseph...thank you so much for your input. You made some very good points! And ones I can use!

Hi Mike...That would definately be something a Seller could understand...standing out in a good way!

Joan, I've only had sellers do it a few times, without any issues that weren't addressed prior to the home being put on the market.  If sellers are seeking to disclose that which they ethically should, I really don't see a downside in preparing to offer a solid, fully disclosed property for sale.  Although in NY, their lawyers would likely hyperventilate at the notion!

Joan-when I sold real estate...most of my listings had a pre-listing roof and termite inspection...any problems...disclosed upfront...property can be priced accordingly or the seller would sell as-is providing clear roof and termite!  It was the bomb!  I also think that is how I could consistently have lots of inventory!

Laurie...where have you been? I think you need to go to law school! If you can't beat em join em!

Midori...that sounds perfect! I really wish we could get things to that point. It would save so much aggravation!