Originally Posted by
Tom Edwards
Copied from the Inspection Agreement submitted on this post: LIMITATION OF LIABILITY: ANY LIABILITY OF THE INSPECTION COMPANY AND THE INSPECTOR FOR MISTAKES OR OMISSIONS IN THIS INSPECTION REPORT, THE INSPECTION AND OTHERWISE IS LIMITED TO A REFUND OF THE FEE PAID FOR THIS INSPECTION AND REPORT. THE CLIENT ASSUMES THE RISK OF ALL LOSSES GREATER THAN THE FEE PAID FOR THE INSPECTION. THE CLIENT AGREES TO IMMEDIATELY ACCEPT A REFUND OF THE FEE AS FULL SETTLEMENT OF ANY AND ALL CLAIMS WHICH MAY EVER ARISE FROM THIS INSPECTION.
__________________________________________________ ____
I know that I am swimming against the tide to say this but I think that professionals should get away from this type of language in their service agreements. If you are a professional you should be willing to be held responsible as a professional. To ask a client to trust you to evaluate their prospective home's systems and then weasle on the limit of liability is less than professional gentlemen. They are trusting you for thousands of dollars worth of equipment functionality and you only agree to give back the fee?
We need to stop thinking like tradesmen (who give back the fee) and start acting like professionals who are willing to be held responsible for our work.
You should really think about it.
Tom, I must say that i disagree. I consider myself a professional in inspections and contracting and a lot of other things I do, but I can make a mistake. With inspections, as you know, there are a number of components that have to be checked and with distractions there is a possibility of missing something. There is also a possibility of just missing something because you forgot to go back and look at it or something was OK that day but now the next.
There was a case of my CE instructor who went and did an inspection one day. The buyer bought the house and and a fews later the inspector received a call that a window was messed up. He went right on over there and after looking at it, he realized that when the sun hit the glass a certain time of the day it caused condensation between the panes of glass. Something he did not see when he was there the first time. He offered to refund the inspection fee. I do not feel that he should have offered nor should he have done it in the first place. That has nothing to do with professionalism, but unfortunately lawyers and the general public look after someone to start blaming regardless of what the problems are. Especially when they find out who has the deepest pockets.