My client (the buyer) was eager to purchase a Dayton Ohio condo and excited to move into the greater Dayton area. The client indicated that they didn’t think they really needed a home inspection as the current owner had “meticulously cared for” this condo. Many home inspectors across the country charge a reduced fee for condo inspections and disclaim common components such as exteriors and common roofs. Had I followed in their footsteps this sale may have progressed without a hitch, but after my review of the exterior and the visible lack of proper maintenance history, the transaction for this meticulously cared for condo took a turn for the worse… and dear old Mr. Inspector quite possibly would have had to answer at a later date for the apparent lack of service.
The roof had not one, not two, not three, but four layers of 
roofing materials installed. The last of which was poorly installed and in dire need of replacement again. The last covering's nails didn't even penetrate the first. Mr. Inspector could have just as easily disclaimed this “common” roof and charged the client for an “interior” inspection only. I mean, that’s what everyone else does right? Out of sight and out of mind seemed to be the common denominator for this condominium association and its owners.
While the ”laddering” installation provided an interesting shingle design, it was a far cry from “best building practice” observed from more competent contractors. I thought to myself “how unfortunate the current owners are, for having paid for this installation…”
After taking my time walking back and forth around the complex to
inspect the outside (this particular unit was located toward the middle of the building), I also discovered an insidious clue to another serious concern. “I’ll have to take a very close look on the inside to confirm what I suspect…” I thought to myself.
Low and behold, my intuition was correct for this “common” wall. Visible interior damaged had not reared its ugly head… yet. Too bad the maintenance crews hadn’t properly addressed this when they should have. Now we have another several thousand $$ in repairs and remediation. I could have just as easily said “we don’t inspect that” as well. I mean, it’s quite obvious that the maintenance crews took the same opinion and the owners may have been quibbling over who the repair costs belonged to… Regardless, the damage is there for someone to eventually address.
While evidence of significant damage from a recent hail storm
was present all over the exterior and roof, I doubt that the insurance companies would be paying for the necessary repairs based on my observation of poor maintenance and improper installations. Too bad indeed as like my client, the seller was eager to move from the area as well.
Someone has some answers to come up with, but it won’t involve me or my client… I took the road less traveled and inspected everything. That’s my job. That’s what you paid me to do. How about your home inspector?
Comments(2)