One of my clients once insisted on a certain inspector (it was someone they knew personally). They raved about how wonderful this guy was and that he used to be a roofer, etc. Well, to make a long story short, the buyers bought the house and guess what...the roof leaked a few weeks after they moved in. So much for their former roofer-now-home-inspector! A good inspection is priceless, IMO.

A good home inspection protects both parties and should be viewed, as you and others said, as protection for the seller and a road map for the buyer.  Of course, as an exclusive buyer agent, I understand that most sellers are really unaware of many of the deficiencies that the home inspector uncovers, but I do make the most of the report and in our area of New York, the home inspection is done before going to contract, so any item is negotiable.  And we do negotiate.

Excellent post, thanks.

Melina,

That was a fantastic blog!

In 1 instance, I was representing the buyers buying a new construction. Thank goodness I insisted that they get a Home Inspection. There were issues that the builder sorted out, but... there were more issues that the Home Inspector did not see! The buyers dealt with them and didn't inform me.

3 years later... the same buyers now want to move into a bigger home. They come to me, we look at homes and put a contract on a home. And now, the buyers tell me of the problem with the other home. All I could say was: why didn't you tell me?

You bet I called in a 'deal killer' inspector for this home. And made sure that every issue was being resolved.

Melina,

What a great post!  I think it should also be said that getting a seller to have a home inspection done at the time the house is listed will ward off a lot of "deal killing" in the long run.  The seller will know ahead of time if there is something that needs to be addressed, and won't be blind sided when the report comes in, after a contract. 

I loved this part:

"Sellers sometimes do those special DIY projects that are "custom carpentry work."  Yeah...Let's face it, sellers sometimes do "weird fixes" to their home that make sense to the seller, but not to anyone else.    Seller's often forget about these fixes since they did them ten years ago and so they forget to put them on the disclosure form.  It's not their intent to misrepresent, they just forget. Deal killers can find these special gems, and start a dialogue between both sides."

It brings back so many memories. Sometimes I have the Seller and the Seller's Realtor meet me at the street curb when I drive up. Seller, sptting into his portable spittoon, immediately says, "I built this house in 1937 and I've done all the remodeling and upgrading myself." I immediately reach for some extra pens, some more batteries for my camera, and some extra paper. Invariably, yes, I'm there a lot longer finding those "fixes" that they did 10-30 years ago and forgot about because they have worked perfectly fine. The fact that they beat the odds doesn't mean that my Client will be able to beat the odds.

In every, people become accustomed to idiosyncracies and uniqueness. However, the new owners move in and what was a light switch never used in 30 years by the sellers and, thus, hidden behind the life-size picture of [insert your hero's name here], now becomes the new owner's favorite light switch. Unfortunately, the lights are always flickering and tripping the circuit breaker due to some interesting wiring in the wall that only the electrician could discover since the light switch was hidden from me.

I did one house where the Seller had turned his flat roof into a beautiful rose garden. Unfortunately, he didn't realize that overwatering all those rose on top of the roof was causing his roof to rot away, which was only visible from inside the attic, a place he never went.

There's one national builder here who obviously has a great reputation with the city and building code inspectors because I can look at the addresses in the neighborhoods that he built and tell you everything that was done wrong with they were built. Hey, at least they were consistent! In the very first instance many years ago, the Seller's Realtor phone me and called me every four-letter word in the book (except LOVE) because this was a nationally know builder with a very good reputation. As I explained to her, only 75% of the homes are like this because the other 25% are inspected. It's not necessarily the builder who is taking shortcuts, sometimes it's the subcontractors. It's difficult, at best, for a builder to check up on all the contractors and the subcontractors hired by the contractors in a large subdivision, especially when he has subdivisions being built in all 50 states.

So let's say that 500 homes each require 20 normal trusses and 5 furnace trusses since the furnace is in the attic. Let's say that each normal truss costs $1,000 and each furnace truss costs $2,000. If things are done properly, here's the cost:

500 homes * ((20 x $1000) + (5 x $2000)) = $15,000,000

Here's what happens if the furnace trusses are wrongly eliminated:

500 homes * (25 x $1000) = $12,500,000

So the subcontractor with the good reputation with the city and building code inspectors can "arrange" for them to inspect the "buildings that are complete." Since we all know that governments are short on time, money, and personnel, there's no way they can inspect 100% of every building, so spot checks become the norm.

See how that subcontractor can charge an extra $2,500,000 but put it in his pocket instead? It's so easy, and it will never be revealed unless a home inspector like me comes along. I quit working with a contractor in Houston many decades ago because my work kept getting inspected but I never, ever saw an inspector. I'm human; I make mistakes; I like to play by the rules. No inspection of Russel's work meant Russel wasn't gonna work there no more.

So keep on getting those nitpicky, thorough, experienced home inspectors. (Sorry, I just can't bring myself to use the two words beginning with "d" and "k").

Hey, Gail. You said, "As a listing agent I've had sales where there were no inspections, but I've been careful to make sure that the home was being sold "as is".  I'm familiar with a court case here from several years ago where the Court basically said that since Realtors earn about $15,000 commission (3% on a median priced $500,000 house, at the time), selling a home "as is" provides no protection. However, spending $399 for a pre-listing inspection and then selling the home "as is" with the pre-listing report provided as disclosure, would.

Hey, Cristal. You said, "I am in the middle of a major mold situation that we found after we closed escrow and the buyer pulled off all the wall paper....mold city!  We are going back and forth and around and around.  I do have a good inspector and there were no red flags, "deal killers are human too!"

That's extremely common. In fact, in the 818 property renovations that I've been involved with, every time we've pulled off wall paper we found mold. Every time. Bar none. Consequently, when I started my home inspection business in July 2001, I immediately wrote the following and use it often:

"Wall paper/paneling/wall mirrors/wall hangings present. These items can conceal damage to walls; concealed defects are not within the scope of the home inspection. In areas where there is typically a high level of humidity—such as bathrooms, kitchens, and laundry rooms—any damage to the wall paper or paneling can allow moisture to accumulate behind the wall paper or paneling, promoting moisture damage and possible mold and mildew growth. If you have any concerns about mold and mildew, you should have a qualified wall paper/paneling installation professional inspect the wall paper and paneling. Additionally, you should expect such conditions and, if you are remodeling/renovating, recommend adjusting any remodeling budgets to account for unforeseen circumstances and conditions that were not visible at time of inspection and won't be visible until you actually start doing the remodling or renovation."

I have had several Clients over the years call me to tell me "Hi, Russel. You were right on about that wall paper! Thanks for the warning!"

Realtors reading this blog should feel free to use that verbiage for your Clients, even if your home inspector says nothing about it.

Education now can prevent hard feelings and, yes, lawsuits down the road.

Great article. I am a Certified Real Estate Appraiser and a Real Estate Broker. My husband is also a home Inspector, and actually is a certified Instructor for our State licensing. I recently took his class to become more knowledgable and I feel a better appraiser and Broker. I was amazed at what all they have to look for and at. I took the class and passed. I could actually go out (once licensed) and preform Inspections. Am I qualified? Heck NO. But many an inspector is out there after completing the required courses. I know more than most novices since I assist my husband on inspections and help him with the pictures and reports. I have learned a lot just being around him. Anyone that is good at taking tests can take the course, pass the exam and become a licensed Inspector. SORRY, it takes YEARS of schooling, working in the field, and just doing it to learn what you need to know. I'll take my "deal killer" any day of the week. Covers my butt for the future issue. (Has already SEVERAL times in past years) I refer clients to the inspection, adn get a call back, "oh, yeah, he did say it needed repairs, or replaced soon"

One seasoned Inspector took the class so he could become licensed, he told my husband he had missed a lot of things through the years, due to lack of knowledge. He was going ot go back over reports and see how much he had actually missed. makes ya go "hummmmmmm"

Case closed!!

mert

Hey, Myrtle.

All licensing does, for any profession, is create an artificial barrier to entry. It means that one must really want to do it in order to pay the licensing fee, pass the test, and then do it.

If licensing solved the problem, then there would be no lawsuits against doctors, dentists, electricians, plumbers, roofing contractors, attorneys, CPAs, etc. The list is endless.

As you said, anyone can sit down, study, and pass a test to become licensed. We saw that here in California with Realtors when the price of real estate jumped so significantly. Seems everyone thought that they, too, could sit down, study, pass the real estate exam, and voila! your next great Realtor making $15,000 for a few hours work selling a $500,000 home. Ha! Where are all those next great Realtors now? Gone with the wind (with apologies to Clark Gable and Vivien Leigh).

Hey, Sally and David. You said, "unless you are selling foreclosures that have been on the market for eternity, there is no need in this market to shop for a "killer"...thankfully !"

I'm not sure I'm understanding you there. I think there's a need to shop for a good, though home inspector in any market and regardless of which niche market one has created for oneself. However, your post does remind me of what a Realtor here, who has been in the business for 27 years and refers me exclusively, tells his Clients, "Russel's the most thorough you'll find, and he has never killed a deal. However, he has documented the death of some houses by suicide."

I think all the other inspectors beat me to the punch line, but I have to say that I agree with you.  Its people like you who make me proud to be an American.

Hey, Gail. Yes, Courts make different decisions. Keep in mind, though, that many things in our great society get their start out West and move East. I can't explain it other than the fact that one out of every eight people in America live in California. Then include Washington, Oregon, and Hawaii.... If you follow legal proceedings like I do (it's an avocation of mine), you see that many State Courts elsewhere regularly cite decisions handed down by the California courts, particularly the California Supreme Court.

Notwithstanding any Court decisions, I don't understand why every Realtor would not get a pre-listing inspection so that they know exactly what they are trying to sell. Is ignorance really bliss? Not in my eyes. And even NAR regularly reports that homes with pre-listing inspections sell faster, for more money, and with less contentiousness during escrow re-negotiations since new major problems are rarely found then by the buyer's inspector. Those are three things that I always liked to have in my back pocket when I was a Realtor in Texas.

Hey, Rhode Island Real Estate - Focus Professionals.

I couldn't disagree with you more.

First, "caveat emptor" went by the wayside many years ago.

If you think that "any missed in a prelisting inspection could be construed as non-disclosure or misrepresentation," then surely to not even spend the time or effort to determine exactly what you're trying to pass off on the buyers could be construed even more so as non-disclosure or misrepresentation." Personally, I would want to know exactly what I am trying to sell to someone else, regardless of whether it's a home, a car that I don't need anymore, my motorcycle, a refrigerator that I don't need anymore, extra digital cameras, etc. I'm just not one to sell something and hope that nothing happens. I want to do everything that is legal, ethical, and within my ability to ensure that what I'm selling is exactly what I'm selling, no more, no less.

Unfortunately, too often "the seller doesn't disclose what they know" sometimes intentionally, sometimes not, but either way, that certainly isn't the end of it.

You kind of shoot yourself in the foot with your own argument. The mere fact that there is, yes, a "diversity" in skill levels of inspectors is exactly why there should be a pre-listing inspection and a buyer's inspection on the same property. You seem to have that old-time attitude of let's ignore everything and hope that the buyers hire a new inspector with very little experience so that he doesn't find much. If everyone works together, above board, then everything will go more smoothly. When one side hopes the other side fails, that's when all sides fail and all sides ultimately wind up in court or on different sides of the table for mediation or arbitration.

Quote

I also think the fact that a seller was willing to conduct a prelist AND disclose it a buyer goes towards a pattern of openness.  Buyers sue because they think they were deceived.  How is it deceptive if you do the prelist, save your repair receipts, and give them all to the buyer.  Try proving the seller failed to disclose a defect when they do that...

Unquote

That needed repeating.

Hey, Ralph.

Your post reminds me of how home inspector report writing has changed over the years, all because of various lawsuits in various states. Many long-time Realtors will be able to identify (just my take on it):

1976 - The kitchen faucet leaks.

1981 - The kitchen faucet leaked.

1986 - The kitchen faucet leaked at the time of the inspection.

1990 - The kitchen faucet leaked at the time of the inspection and needs to be repaired.

1994 - The kitchen faucet leaked at the time of the inspection and needs to be repaired or replaced.

1998 - The kitchen faucet leaked at the time of the inspection and needs to be repaired or replaced by a licensed plumber.

2001 - The kitchen faucet leaked at the time of the inspection and needs to be repaired or replaced by a licensed plumber before close of escrow.

2004 - The kitchen faucet leaked at the time of the inspection and needs to be repaired or replaced by a licensed plumber before close of escrow to prevent water damage.

2007 - The kitchen faucet leaked at the time of the inspection and needs to be repaired or replaced to prevent water damage and possible mold growth. Recommend further evaluation by a licensed plumber before close of escrow since he might identify additional problems that are not apparent to a generalist home inspector.

2010 - The kitchen faucet leaked at the time of the inspection and needs to be repaired or replaced to prevent water damage and possible mold growth. Recommend further evaluation by a licensed plumber before close of escrow since he might identify additional problems that are not apparent to a generalist home inspector. If further evaluation and repair or replacement is not done before close of escrow, or before you move in, the drip-drip-drip of the faucet could keep you awake at night. That would cause you to not get a sufficient amount of sleep at night, resulting in you being tired and drowsy at work, resulting in you not getting the raise or the promotion that you were expecting to help pay the mortgage on your new property. Additionally, if mold growth occurs, you could become sick, and your sickness, coupled with your lack of sleep, might cause you to seek the advice of your family doctor, who might prescribe some medicines that are not covered by your health insurance plan. The additional health expenses, coupled with the raise and promotion at work that you did not get due to your lack of sleep, might add additional financial stress to your monthly budget, causing you to become further and further behind, and more quickly, in your mortgage payments, ultimately resulting in foreclosure on your new property. Once foreclosure happens, you might find yourself sleeping under the I-805 bridge with San Diego River frontage property. When that happens, please contact me to inspect your new property. Congratulations on your new home!

It's been worse in some states (California!) than others, of course.

When I started in this business, my real estate attorneys provided me with a court case—I believe it was from Santa Barbara or Ventura County—where the judge admonished the home inspector with something akin to the following:

"It seems to me that you have knowledge which your Clients paid you for but which you did not provide. If the kitchen faucet leaked, it seems to me that you should not only state that problem, but provide typical causes of the problem, as well as typical solutions. If there could be many different causes or solutions, a simple statement of such should suffice. Then provide a recommendation to your Clients of what should be done, and when."

Since I believe so heavily in education, and believe that the Judge was correct, I work on the five-point system:

1 - State the problem.
2 - State what kind of problem it is (safty hazard, maintenance concern, fire hazard, etc.)
3 - State typical causes; other causes or multiple causes are possible.
4 - State typical resolutions; other resolutions or multiple resolutions are possible.
5 - Provide a recommendation and time frame: Recommend further evaluation by a licensed plumber before close of escrow.

Hey, Gail.

Yeah, I know. I don't know what home inspector licensing is like in Connecticut, but there is none in California. So we have inspectors using the Standards of Practice of NACHI, ASHI, CREIA, SPREI, NAHI, and, unfortunately, no standards at all.

Several years ago the listing agent called me to inspect her listing for the buyers. The listing agent refers me exclusively when she is working with buyers, but having her refer me to the buyers on her listing caught me off guard. Seems the buyers had a inspection by a guy for $99. He provided them with a 17-page handwritten report, of which 16 pages was about plumbing and the other page about the roof, foundation, electricity, heating and cooling, doors and windows, etc. That immediately told me that he was a retired plumber, and sure enough, he was. He also was a member of no trade association and only did (and still does) a couple of inspections a month just to pay for his SDG&E (and probably, now, auto gas) bill.

Although all the trade associations have similar Standards of Practice, the loopholes are what cause all the problems. Getting national standards sure would help, but when you have six national trade associations, all bickering and fighting with each other, it's probably not going to happen.

When I do a pre-listing inspection, I let my Clients know that I'm not there to look for the knicks and the knacks, but the buyer's home inspector probably will look for those. Consequently, I let them know what kind of knicks and knacks the buyer's home inspector might look for, and I provide my Clients with this document to help them out. I also let them know that I will be there with them to read the buyer's inspectors report and address anything that he finds, as well as let them know why he found it and I didn't. When I do a pre-listing inspection, those sellers are my Clients, and I'll do everything and anything for them as long as it is legal, ethical, in their best interest, and I'm physically and mentally (the last is sometimes questionable! LOL) capable of doing it.

Unfortunately, too many home inspectors believe that once they've done an inspection and gotten paid, they are out of the picture. That can be true, but it doesn't have to be. After all, if I go to bat for them as sellers, it's highly likely that they will use me to inspect the new home they are buying.

Hey, Melina.

I think there are two purposes for making repairs before close of escrow, especially for big ticket items.

First, the inconvenience of repairs occurs while the property still belongs to the Seller. That, I believe, is as it should be.

Second, it is highly like that a licensed heating and cooling professional will find additional problems when he takes apart the 1975 furnace. I don't dismantle the furnace, and the heat exchanger quite often is in the upper reaches of the furnace, not visible during the course of a normal home inspection. If I recommend a good cleaning and inspection by that licensed heating and cooling professional, but the buyers say, "Ah, we can do that after we close escrow," and then the licensed heating and cooling professional finds that there is, indeed, not only a cracked heat exchanger, but the whole insides of the furnace has rusted away from water coming in through the exhaust flue that used to not have a rain cap on it (but did at the time of the inspection). Total cost to replace the furnace: $10,000. It is highly likely that had the buyers had that information before close of escrow, they could have negotiated repairs, a lower price, escrow credits, or, in an absolute worst-case scenario, even sacrificed their $5,000 earnest money to save $10,000 and countless hours of inconvenience from taking off work, calling in sick, whatever, to be there while the licensed heating and cooling professional is replacing the furnace.

I can't tell you the number of horror stories involving just such scenarios involving the licensed chimney sweep, the licensed foundation professional, the licensed heating and cooling professional, the licensed electrician, the licensed plumber, etc.

And then, after escrow closes and the new owners discover that they've got a $10,000 repair bill, who do you think they are going to call? First they will call you, their Realtor, who usually says, "Call your home inspector?" I will then say, "Did you follow my recommendations in the report?" If I didn't recommend doing it before close of escrow, ooooooooooops. I could be on the hook. If I did recommend doing it before close of escrow, and they ignored my recommendation, then I think to myself, "Not responsible for advice not taken." I'll still try to help, though, because I'll encourage them to file a claim against their homeowner's insurance policy. Unfortunately, it will get declined. I can guarantee you that, and that's where I come in again.

Insurance companies are notorious for denying claims for any reason they can come up with, and the fine print usually excludes appliances older than a certain age or with pre-existing conditions. The rusted-away furnace obviously had a pre-existing condition that could not be determined until the licensed heating and cooling professional took it apart.

However, note this, which I have used before and successful gotten the insurance company to pay my Client: The insurance company accepted the warranted items condition when the insurance company accepted the premium payment. Had the insurance company done an independent inspection, the insurance company would have then had the opportunity to deny coverage, return the premium, and not issue the policy. The insurance company did not do that; therefore, the insurance company accepted the condition as "warrantable" and issued the coverage.

Insurance companies basically count on two things: (1) that you will give in and accept their rejection of your claim, and, (2) that your cost to get an attorney to whip their butts will be more than your cost to 'just go ahead and pay for the replacement yourself.'

My most successful case in helping my Client resulted in a letter to the insurance company with a copy to the California Commissioner of Insurance, both sent by overnight mail. Two days later, a check from the insurance company for $11,950 showed up in the mail box of my Client, also delivered by overnight mail. My Client called me crying, so I thought things had really deteriorated. They were tears of joy. All she paid was her $50 deductible.

Knowledgeable home inspectors can help if people will let them. My friends make fun of me by calling me the five-year man because I've had so many careers, quite often changing major careers every five years. However, it's that experience as a Realtor, pool/spa construction, heating and cooling, roofing, plumbing, insurance sales, and property renovation (and more) that allows me to be of help to my Clients in their times of need as a home inspector. I do realize that I'm a unique individual because of my experience, but I would encourage everyone to explore the backgrounds of their home inspectors of choice and see where they might be able to help beyond a normal home inspection. In states with licensing, it might be more difficult. Here in California I used to be a "home inspector." Last July I switched to being a "property consultant" because "consultants" can say and do just about anything; it gives me greater flexibility in stepping outside of the traditional role of a home inspector in order to provide additional help that such traditional role would not be allowed to provide.

Hey, Gail.

I have no problem with Clients making choices. That's their prerogative, but they have paid me for my advice, so I'm going to provide it to them, and it's going to be advice based on my 43 years of experience in all aspects of real estate, from construction to maintenance to destruction. Then, when they make the choice that goes against the advice that they paid me for, then I truly am "not responsible for advice not taken." However, if I never provide the advice, or provided inappropriate advice, then I would be responsible.

Personally, I don't want Sellers to make repairs on something that I buy because my tastes are usually different from theirs, or I want to provide an income to a friend whose work I trust. I'll take a lower price, escrow credits, cash back at closing, whatever. Yes, I've been burned a couple of times by going that route, but I only had myself to blame. Clients who don't take my advice and then discover additional problems have only themselves to blame. Unfortunately, in this great litigious world of ours, they usually want to blame someone else. Just watch Judge Judy to see that. I've been on both sides; one side is definitely better than the other.

There was a lawsuit here back in August 2005, I believe it was, where the home inspector (not me!) stated that things should be done before close of escrow so that if any additional problems were discovered by the experts, negotiations could be re-opened. The buyer's Realtor told the Client to just get some repair estimates and take a lower selling price or escrow credits and have the repairs done after escrow closed. It became one of those broadcast lawsuits where everyone who even thought about that property was named as a defendant. The home inspector was summarily dismissed from the lawsuit because of his recommendation, but it still cost him a couple of thousand dollars in legal fees to file a response. The Realtor lost big time but had E&O as backup. I believe I still have a copy of the lawsuit around here; I'll try to find it.

Hey, Melina.

I have no problem with disagreeing, especially when we are in different states.

The purchase and sale agreement might be a separate beast from the home inspection report, but I'll bet that the purchase and sale agreement specifically state that one has a certain number of days to conduct buyer inspections, including the home inspection. That in and of itself means that they are not so separate after all, especially since the buyer can walk free and clear based on the home inspection report.

I had one Client who, when I followed up with her, stated that she was very disappointed in the report, which really caught me off guard because there were so many problems with the property. Turns out that she was a property investor and was going to gut and renovate, so she didn't care about the cracked windows, the damaged doors, the non-working appliances, etc. That's when I took advantage of my own property investing experience to create my different inspection choices to meet the different needs of different Clients with different circumstances at different prices.

You said, "I think that suggesting how someone negotiate a contract crosses a boundary that home inspectors shouldn't cross. ... Home inspections have nothing to do with the contract." Recommending a time frame for when something is done has absolutely nothing to do with negotiating a contract, and yes, home inspections have everything to do with the contract simply because, as I said above, the buyer can walk from the contract free and clear based on the home inspection report. I might be able to agree with your statement that "It is up to the agent and buyer to determine the best course of action based on the home inspection reports." because it is partially right but partially wrong. The mere fact that Realtors only get paid when the transaction closes leaves a lot of room for the Realtor to "suggest" certain things to buyers and sellers that might not be completely appropriate, and we all know that such occurs.

You said, "I just had a seller (I was representing the buyers) and there was no way on this earth that we trusted him to pick a decent contractor for work completed on the home.  Better to take a credit and let the buyer take care of it." Sometimes yes, sometimes no. It will depend on the Buyer's circumstances, which you may or may not be aware of.

Quite often the Sellers won't make the best choice in repair personnel or materials. They'll choose the least expensive. That's where Realtors, with their negotiating prowess, need to get involved. I've seen purchase contracts that state that only a certain termite company will be used, or that a certain home inspector will be employed, or that a certain title company or escrow company will be used. There's absolutely nothing wrong with Realtors providing a list of items to repair that include estimates (preferably at least three) and the name of the person to do the repair. If one is going to gut and renovate, such is not necessary. If one needs a place to live immediately upon close of escrow because one has to be out of one's current residence, getting the Seller to repair those itesm before close of escrow can prevent a lot of unforeseen problems, not to mention inconveniences to the new owner.

My job specifically is to protect the interests of my Clients. I can best do that if I educate them, and educating quite often means providing a recommended time frame.

Take an extreme example:

I recommended replacing the Zinsco electric panel before close of escrow. Clients decided to take $3,000 cash back at closing and replace it with a panel of their own choosing using an electrician of their own choosing. Escrow closed and they walked away with a check for $3,000. As they arrive at the car, they see several police cars and a four tow trucks. There had been a serious car accident in the parking lot, with a car having gone over the edge of the third floor parking garage and landing on three cars below. One of those cars was theirs. So they now had to rent a car while looking for a new one and waiting for the insurance company to pay on their crushed one. There went the $3,000.

Now fast forward three years. Clients are being foreclosd and trying to sell their house in a short sale. Buyer's home inspector finds the Zinsco electric panel and recommends that it be replaced. Cost? $3,500. Clients don't have $3,500. They had totally forgotten all about the Zinsco electric panel. What could be wrong with it? After all, it's been there since 1975. Clients declined to have the Zinsco electric panel replaced since they didn't have the money. Electricity is a serious issue, so Buyers walked. Clients in worse shape now than they were 30 days ago but they have to get their house back on the market and hope another Buyer will accept the Zinsco electric panel which they now have to disclose. Meanwhile, real estate prices continue to sink.

True story. I did both inspections, the first in 2005, and the second on July 25, 2008.

I have a gazillion bazillion stories of personal interest, courtesy of my wise old grandmother who taught me to save things that were of interest to me, so I learned how to use scissors and Scotch tape. Now I use a scanner. When I retire, I swear I am going to write a book; I just know that it will sell a gazillion bazillion copies and be made into a movie.

Alright, this looks like it's going to get ugly. See my post above.

Sellers (my Clients from three years ago) are in foreclosure trying to accomplish a short sale, so obviously they are selling "as is." Buyers wanted a home inspection and put a 17-day contingency clause in the purchase contract, which was negotiated down to 10 days. Buyer's Realtor refers me regularly, and since Sellers were my previous Clients, they had no objection to me doing the home inspection. Now that the Buyers have walked because the Sellers never took care of the Zinsco panel three years ago, Sellers are threatening to keep the Buyer's earnest money since the house is being sold "as is." What say you long-time experienced Realtors, and any other Realtors for what it's worth? Obviously we don't have intimate knowledge of the listing disclosures and the purchase contract, but it probably is as straightforward as it seems.

This is one of those worst-case scenarios that are the basis for almost everything I do. It will be interesting to see how it plays out. I'm scheduled to meet with everyone at 1:30 this afternoon, but I'm not sure I can be of any assistance in this one. It is what it is, but have I effectively "killed the deal" on this one? Twice in one day?

P.S. Where do they come up with these answers to "What does the graphic say?" when posting? This one is "moosewood." Interesting visual on that one. LOL

Well I shocked a few people when I showed up at the meeting yesteday. The Sellers and Seller's Realtor certainly weren't expecting me. The Sellers, who I have maintained contact with through my customer service program, claimed that I never noted the electric panel then so it should not be a problem now. Right there in the file folder was a copy of their check, the signed inspection agreement, and a full copy of the inspection report. Although it's entirely possible that the Sellers forgot, the story now seems to be a little different from what was conveyed to me via the Buyer's Realtor from the Sellers via the Seller's Realtor. That, of course, doesn't give my current Clients, the buyers, any sort of confidence about the Sellers. Since this is still a short sale and not an REO, the Sellers are still liable for disclosures. Ah what a tangled web some weave.

Lots of interesting comments here, a terrific Realtor I know referred me to this blog, so I'll leave my 2 cents worth. Personally, as a home inspector, I am not outto be a "deal killer", but I have an obligation to my client to report the facts, and I always have to tell the truth, as unpleasant as it may sometimes be. I never feel good about delivering any potentially "deal killing" news because the hopes of the seller, the buyer, and all the hard work of the Realtor can be crushed when I find something like a massive termite infestation, or a crumbling foundation. Nevertheless, I am obligated to report it. In this, highly litigious state, although a Realtor may be unaware of some facets of my work, I am not just looking out for the client, but for my Realtor associates as well. Why? Obviously I'd like to keep getting referrals, through their offices, and when I do things like check to make sure the upper sash on a window moves up and down, making it a double hung window, as apposed to fixed upper sash, single hung window, I am making sure that the Realtor hasn't accidentally misrepresented the house, and may be liable for new windows. I also know that sometimes a desperate seller will lie to their own listing agent to try force a sale. I had an instance where a new Realtor, in his early 20's had listed a 3 family house as having a new roof. He lacked the experience to tell the difference. I watched beads of sweat form on his forehead as I pointed out fist sized holes in the old roof which was past due for replacement, and found the place where the seller had installed drywall over the access to the attic hatch. He said he had to make a phone call to kill the newspaper ads he had placed that morning for the house. Everyone except the seller was grateful for my discovery, which probably headed off lawsuits. The seller who assumed everyone else was as easy to fool as the young Realtor was not happy about being found out in his attempts to cheat the buyers. Surprisingly, the buyers still took that house, but at a lowered price to offset all the needed repairs, and although shaken by the deception, the young Realtor had learned a valuable lesson. That is why I recommend "pre-listing" inspections. Some offices here will not accept a listing without a new home inspection, and this practice is growing. Knowledge is power, and having the knowledge about defects in a house can save the Realtor from a great deal of last minute worry and wasted time and effort over what the inspector might find. It puts the seller and the listing agent in the position of being able to do something about the defects, and make some repairs, to make the home easier to market, or be ready to make a price adjustment to offset repair costs. Obviously, the additional benefit of not having to worry about whether a seller mislead their listing agent is invaluable.

Hey, Melina.

Keeping in mind that California is soooooooooo different, many of the major brokerages here recommend that Realtors stay away from the home inspection or, if they have to go to let us in, then to go out to the car and do some work rather than sitting inside.

When I asked many of my friends at Century 21, One Source, and Prudential about that, it kept coming back to Realtors what was happening at the inspection. For example, when the Seller's Realtor was there, s/he would defend the place against everything the home inspector noted, sometimes adding an hour or more to the "inspection" time.

When the Buyer's Realtor was there, s/he would put every item under the "Oh, don't worry about that. Your home insurance policy that the Sellers are providing will take care of that."

And if both the Sellers and the Buyers were there with their Realtors at the same time, a two-hour inspection on a 500-SF condo could turn into a four-hour morning free-for-all. Emotions run high when everyone is on the property.

So it came down to liability. If Sellers' Realtors defended everything at the actual inspection, they then took back some of the liability that had previously been downloaded to the home inspector. If Buyers' Realtors pooh-poohed everything at the actual inspection, they also then took back some of the liability that had previously been downloaded to the home inspector.

Ever since the brokerages started that recommendation, which was back in May 2006 (my Domestic Partner is a Realtor with Century 21 Award), I can count on one hand the number of inspections where the listing Realtor and/or the Sellers have been present at the inspection. One was yesterday at a $899,000 condo downtown on the 17th floor of the Renaissance Building—more on this in the last paragraph).

Buyers' agents, when they show up, never ever follow me around any more. About 50% of the time, they will let me and the Buyers in and then take off to run errands or something and I'll call them on their cell phones about 15 minutes before I'm finished. If they don't leave, then they will sit down at the kitchen table and go over paper work with the Buyers if the Buyers don't want to follow me around.

I will admit that since May 2006, it's been much more enjoyable because I never have to tell the listing Realtor, "Look, I appreciate your viewpoints, but I'm here to work with my Clients. If you will permit me to do that now without interrupting me, then I can leave and you and them can go over everything without me here."

I enjoy meeting people, especially when every job is different—that's why I like being in real estate—but let's face it, when someone has lived in their home for 37 years, they and their Realtors can get quite defensive when someone like me comes along with the sole purpose of finding problems, problems that they never had a problem with.

Now back to yesterday's downtown condo in the Renaissance Tower. The listing agent lived across the hallway, so she had no problem coming to the inspection to, as she said, "protect the interests of [her] Clients." She followed me around everywhere and cautioned me about running up the water bill, leaving the air conditioning system running, leaving a window open where the cat might jump out and fall 17 floors, "Do you really have to take the electric panel cover off? I've never had a home inspector do that before"--she's been in real estate for 10 years!). It was very frustrating. Finally, one of my Clients, he of British descent with an accent to prove it, saw what was happening and started engaging her in small talk, medium talk, large talk, and very large talk to keep her away from me. He was quite adept at doing it, too, and he told me down at the street that he hoped it wasn't a problem with him taking the Realtor away but he thought I could do a better job without her interruptions. I told him he was right, and I thanked him. His British accent is still ringing through my ears, though.

As a state licensed home inspector, and as someone who sees Realtors as professionals, and who sees himself as a professional, I have to say, HOO RA!!!

Finally, a realtor who gets it.

Care to start practicing in my area?

Rhonda had this to say: "An inspection should be used as a negotiating tool that allows the seller to have things repaired and possibly prevent the buyer from ordering another one.  They are critical to the strategy of selling a home."

I presume she is talking about pre-listing inspections, and I can't let that go unchallenged. Yes, they can be "critical to the strategy of selling a home," but not in the ways stated.

The first fallacy is that "an inspection should be used as a negotiating tool." That's just flat-out wrong. Sorry. Part of the problem with that is that one industry is using the work of another industry as a negotiating tool. As every national and state trade association states, "The purpose of a home inspection is to document the condition of the property at a specific point in time." Surely the people who do the work get to define how their work is used, and that is why many states have made the home inspection report a private, confidential document. Some states even allow the home inspector to maintain copyright and control over his work so that any unauthorized use by a third party can have legal consequences.

For any Realtor to try to "possibly prevent the buyer from ordering another one" is ever so disheartening to me as a home inspector, to me as a former Realtor, and to me as a person who loves real estate but recognizes that the conditions of that real estate changes constantly due to people and pets living in it and how it reacts to Mother and Father Natures tears of joy (rain) and occasional spats (tornadoes, hurricanes, earthquakes, etc.). Between a pre-listing inspection and a buyer's home inspection, I've seen the heating system fail, a wind storm damage the roof and chimney, a fire storm destroy the house (which precluded the buyer's inspection, actually), a new pet pee everywhere, leaving the house smelling like urine instead of that beautiful, fragrant potpourri that was there for the pre-lising inspection, etc. To try to possibly prevent the buyer from getting his own inspection, or even hope that he doesn't, is disingenuous at best and, in my opinion, unethical and not in the best interests of keeping all parties out of court in the long run.

I'd liike to make Ms. Tomson an honorary member of InterNACHI.

Nick Gromicko
Founder
InterNACHI
www.nachi.org

I read the comments of Russel Ray regarding a realtor who was interrupting his inspection. When I was a green inspector I might have tolerated the interuptions. But, as I learned my way in the business I realized that I had to be in charge of the inspection, and nobody else. I had an inspection in a Boston suburb with a young couple who's buyer's agent was a Russian immigrant and extremely over anxious to close the deal. She tried to refute every defect I found with the 90 year old house as being nothing. After tolerating her for 10 minutes, I was done. I told her that this was not a debate, one of us is licensed and trained to do do inspections, and the other is not. My report is a legal document that can be used as evidence in a courtroom, so if she wanted to be present duing my inspection, then she had to remain silent until I was done, otherwise I was leaving now.  The buyers were actually very happy I got her to keep quiet, so they could ask their questions during the inspection, and have them answered by me, without the realtor talking over everyone. She was the exception though, because by and large most of the realtors I've worked with over the years have been great, and just let me do my job. A good inspector doesn't use scare tactics to blow up a small issue out of proportion, nor should he downplay any major issues. I think it's best to be a bit like Sgt, Joe Friday, from the old TV show "Dragnet" and report "just the facts", except I don't have to adopt his flat monotone personality. Here in Massachusetts, an inspection report must hold up for years, so we have to be very careful about what we put on paper. Years later no one is going to remember what a realtor might have commented about during the inspection, so the inspector is going to impacted by a buyer who is seeking compensation for unreported defects.

Hey, Jim. Good to see you again.

Here in California we have four years of direct liability and another 18 months of discovery liability, for a grand total of 5½ years of liability.

Having been born and raised in South Texas, I'm probably a little more laid back than you Bostonians are, so I'll usually let people get away with a lot. Eventually there comes a point where I'll put my foot down. It only took about thirty minutes for my British fellow to take charge; I think they are a little more "take charge" than we Southerners are. LOL

Holy Cow!  Nice work! 

It is great to hear you state the things that are most obvious to us inspectors about Realtors needing to protect their clients - both on the Selling Side AND the Buyer Side.

Our firm in Ohio goes one step further in protecting EVERYONE in the transaction by taking literally 100's of digital photo throughout our inspection...we will take probably around 300 to 400 digital photos of a 2,000 ft2 house.  THESE PICTURES protect not only the buyer, but the buyer's agent, the seller and the listing agent!  (Sometimes it even shoots us in the foot!)

I can see here very shortly where video of the entire inspection will be rather feasible...if it isn't already...where we could burn a DVD for the client at the end of the inspection with their inspection video.

Lastly, however, it should be pointed out rather strongly that inspectors that are "Deal Killers" need not kill deals needlessly.  They need to keep things in perspective for their clients and help facilitate communicating the results in a fast, friendly, and accurate manner.  Scaring buyers, nit-picking for small things that buyers do not realize are not a big deal, and using language that blows things out of proportion to show how much they know is not professional and will kill deals needlessly. 

A thorough inspection combined with accurate reporting with professional report writing that does not scare people and a report that keeps the large defects that affect the habitability of the house in perspective for the buyer is the ART of INSPECTING that most inspectors just are not good at.  If you can find an inspector in your neck of the woods that can do all of that...grab ahold of them and don't let go...make them a valued part of your "Real Estate Team!"

I recently created an Audio/Visual Inspecting Protocol (AVIP, for short) that saves about 30 minutes for every 1,000 square feet. However, I don't provide an unedited video to my Clients. As my attorneys told me, "There are only two professions that get paid for providing video (movie and television stars) and the both edit what the public sees."

Along with the video, I also take about 50 photos minimum, but I've also taken 516 at one large McMansion. I only use photos in the report to show something that the Clients couldn't see (the attic, for instance) or something that doesn't have a plain English term, such as the corroded TPR valve at the water heater.

Headband, cap, and wristband voice-activated cameras are on their way.

Hey, Brandon.

In 43 years in real estate, I've never seen a home without at least one exterior hose bib, excepting condominiums, of course.

Are you talking about vacuum breakers on the hose bibs? If that's the case, then I can agree with you.

Way to go Melina,  not only are you a fellow Oregonian, but a woman with integrity.  If I had no integrity, I would probably be doing better with my mortgage business.  It is all about the benefit of the clients that matter.  good blog.

Most Realtors never call me except when they want an inspection on the house that they or their family is purchasing.  I am the deal killer you write about.  Thank you for having the integrity to do the right thing and seeking the best inspection possible for your client.  I'm impressed.

I also noted that your favorite deal killer inspector uses thermal imaging during the home inspection.  For those who want to know more about this technology, you can watch a good video here.

The name of the video is called... "A Consumers Guide To Infrared Thermography"

A Consumers Guide To Infrared Thermography

As a home inspector I appreciate referrals from realtors. Not long ago I inspected a home for an elderly couple. Because of all the defects the elderly couple did not purchase the home. The agent who is also the broker never used me again to do her home inspections. Her agents in her office who referred me all the time stopped referring me. Talk about unethical.

I have to sleep at night. I run into clients while shopping in town. Any agent who would do this is not worth his or her referrals. God Bless the honest hard working agents.

The truth is what goes around comes around and it will bite her in the end.

Funny thing is I run into her all the time and she acting likes she's my "BEST FRIEND". Oh, HI Steve, How ya doin???

I wonder what power she has over her agents to make them not referre me?

I hope she reads this forum, she knows who she is. Very unprofessional indeed.

Like I said "God Bless" the "HONEST" hard working agents. They should learn by this forum.

I've learned over the years to either not question why someone doesn't use my services (some people just won't like me because I'm too tall, too skinny, drive a black foreign car, or whatever) or to ask them why. I've found that when I ask them, I get some good feedback that can be valuable in building my business in the future. Sometimes it was because I followed up in four days whereas the other guy followed up in three days. "Time is of the essence," someone once said (probably some attorney somewhere). Other times might have been the result of confusion, misinterpretation, etc. I know in the home inspection business, almost everyone assumes that Realtors don't use a specific inspector because he's too nitpicky or too thorough. I know that happens, but in the instances where I have found it here, it was the Client's lack of education, or my failure to educate him (I do fail at something occasionally. LOL) them, and not the fact that I documented the actual condition of the property at the time of the inspection.

I'm often puzzled when I go to the ASHI/CREIA dinner meetings or seminars and hear some home inspector proudly proclaim, "I was doing an inspection and saw [insert anything here] and told my Client and the Realtor that they should run away now." I sincerely hope that he didn't say such a thing, and I have no reason to believe that he's lieing, but if I had been a Realtor and he had said such a thing at an inspection for one of my Clients, I'm pretty sure I would not use him again in the future. There's no way that I, after spending just a few hours with my Clients, can possibly know what is on their minds in purchasing any specific property, so I just do my job and try to arm them with knowledge to make whatever they are trying to do easier for them.

Trying to buy a house in CT.  Our Century 21 representatives continue to flip-flop over what we should ask for in way of repairs per the inspection report.  Example:  Century 21 agent was there during inspection of house.  Verbally noted a water stain discovered by the inspector was coming from a upstairs bathroom and into garage and had to be fixed.  The inspector found the presence of rodent activity in house.  The septic inspection uncovered that the system was not in town code and also a broken pipe.  The inspector recommended that the water pump was not cycling correctly and the furnace overflow valve needed to be repaired or replaced.  The inspector also discovered Radon at the 3.8 level, acceptable by E.P.A. standard but the inspector noted he would have that corrected immediately.  When we as the buyers requested repairs, we were told by our Century 21 agents "We were asking for too much".  The sellers verbally (not to us) agreed to repair the septic system (nothing else).  Our Century 21 agents thought this was great because she really didnt have to do this.  But that is not true. By town code these repairs had to be done.  On the disclosure form the sellers did not state that ever had any water damage or rodent problem either.  But now we are told that the seller now remembers something had overflowed in the bathroom and was "chalked".  Also the seller has told Century 21 that a  rodent deterrent system was installed.  Our Century 21 agent now  informs us that it doesnt matter what the buyers put down on the disclosure statement, if they repair things they do not have to tell us or disclose anything like the leak from the bathroom into the garage and just because the house has a "few rodents" doesnt mean its infested"!