This NACHI program is probably the worst idea I have ever heard of.

Of cource the inspector would have a great deal of liability. If a buyer goes up to a house and sees a sign that says the house is certified and the seller gives them your report to prove it, the buyer will assume the the inspector has signed off on everything. I understand that NACHI says the inspector has no liability because it's the seller who is claiming that everything was repaired properly. No matter what contracts or disclaimers are in place if a problem is discovered after the buyer moves in you can bet he will sue both the inspector and the seller. The inspector will have to spend money for legal fees to prove he has no liaility.

What if the seller does properly fix all reported defects but the inspector missed some. Having your name and report tied to something that is sold as certified is raising the expectation that the client has regarding your inspection. This is just crazy.

When we inspect for a buyer we are not certifing and or claiming that the house is defect free. We are just using our experience and judgement to find as much wrong with the house as we can to help the buyer reduce their risk not completely eliminate their risks. That is why we all use inspection agreements.

I know the there are some fine NACHI inspectors out there but in my area all the NACHI inspectors are very inexpeirenced. Many seasoned inspectors would have a field day coming in after them to do an inspection on a house that was labeled certified. I just can't see why an inspector would want to add that much risk and liability to their work

__________________
Mark Mustola
ValueCheck Home Inspections
Linden, MI