No report inspection request

[Luc V. L.]

Just received this message today from a stranger (referral from ex-client):

"We are going to be selling our current home and we were thinking of having someone do a pre-inspection for us. That is, go through the property as you would with a home inspection, but not do the report - just walk us through the elements that you see that may be red flags when the buyer does a home inspection. Is that something you'd be able to do?"

What comes to my mind when I translate this is "we want to unofficially know what is wrong with the place and have no paper trail to prove what we know/don't know before selling".

Does anyone have experience with this kind of request? It seems like a verbal consultation would insert a whole lot of strange grey areas for liability down the road. I've always kept it linear: Contract - Inspection - Verbal Report - Written Report. Just interested in how y'all might respond.

[Jerry Peck]

What comes to my mind when I translate this is "we want to unofficially know what is wrong with the place and have no paper trail to prove what we know/don't know before selling".

Yep, that is their intent.


Does anyone have experience with this kind of request?

I've done that very thing for a number of clients, can't recall if I've done it for sellers. There were quite lucrative, actually ... no time spent on photos or report after leaving the inspection.

There is still one written paper trail: the contract which states what you are doing - a walkthrough inspection looking for what you can readily see, typically no tools, ladder, flashlight, etc., are used, basically you are walking around with your hands behind you going 'Huh-huh.' and nodding your head this way and that way and telling your client what you see.

You will surprise yourself on what you can see by walking around like that. You automatically seem to 'get in the zone' (at least I did) and the deficiencies just seemed to jump out like they were waving flags to get your attention. I suspect that this is because you are not distracted at each item and every turn to stop and take a photo and/or write something down.

Try doing that at your house and see what I mean. Really kind of amazing the way it works out.

It is up to your client to do what they want with that information, just like when you give them a written report - they can shred it as soon as they get through reading it, so not really a big deal.

Just don't forget to get your check. :)

[Garry Blankenship]

I see no problem with being paid for your opinion. I'd be good w/ someone paying me to opine for a while. The liability part is particularly attractive.

[Nathan Thornberry]

Just received this message today from a stranger (referral from ex-client):

"We are going to be selling our current home and we were thinking of having someone do a pre-inspection for us. That is, go through the property as you would with a home inspection, but not do the report - just walk us through the elements that you see that may be red flags when the buyer does a home inspection. Is that something you'd be able to do?"

What comes to my mind when I translate this is "we want to unofficially know what is wrong with the place and have no paper trail to prove what we know/don't know before selling".

Does anyone have experience with this kind of request? It seems like a verbal consultation would insert a whole lot of strange grey areas for liability down the road. I've always kept it linear: Contract - Inspection - Verbal Report - Written Report. Just interested in how y'all might respond.




Here is a one hour course on the "Pre-Listing Consultation" that will tell you everything you need to know about this process, and then some. Complete with powerpoint. I have been asked to do this presentation live at Inspection World in Vegas so if you're an ASHI guy (or not!) come see it live!
Inspector Services Group: Sell More Pre-Listing Inspections - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_7JW45D62dE&feature=share)

Not only is it okay to NOT submit a report, it's encouraged! As long as you're doing a consultation and not an inspection. Definitely worth your time- taught this to over 700 inspectors, get calls every week just about with a success story.

[Nolan Kienitz]

You are in the State of Washington and licensed by that State to do inspections.

Make sure you stay "within" their rules for your licensure.

[Jack Feldmann]

Licensed State or not, its OK to do a "walk and talk" consultation. It is NOT a home inspection, its a home consultation. I do them for investors all the time.

Just make sure you have an agreement that spells out what you are doing, or NOT doing.

I'm doing one next week for a woman that is getting ready to put her house up for sale and wants to know what to fix before she lists it.

[Welmoed Sisson]

We do both full pre-listing inspections (with report), and consultations. Like others have said, we walk through the house, no tools, no ladder, take no notes or photos. Owner walks with us and takes his/her own notes and photos. It's billed as a consultation, usually on an hourly rate with a 2-hour minimum.
Yes, they don't want to have a paper trail. Sometimes their intent is to find out if there are serious problems so they can figure out how to cover them up.
Heard a story from one inspector who looked at a friend's house as a favor; he found a leak in a pipe over the garage ceiling. Friend didn't want to spend the money to fix it, so just put a foil turkey pan under the leak, patched the drywall and left it at that. I feel sorry for the new owners when that pan overflows.

[Nathan Thornberry]

We do both full pre-listing inspections (with report), and consultations. Like others have said, we walk through the house, no tools, no ladder, take no notes or photos. Owner walks with us and takes his/her own notes and photos. It's billed as a consultation, usually on an hourly rate with a 2-hour minimum.
Yes, they don't want to have a paper trail. Sometimes their intent is to find out if there are serious problems so they can figure out how to cover them up.
Heard a story from one inspector who looked at a friend's house as a favor; he found a leak in a pipe over the garage ceiling. Friend didn't want to spend the money to fix it, so just put a foil turkey pan under the leak, patched the drywall and left it at that. I feel sorry for the new owners when that pan overflows.

You and Bob are awesome. Too bad about that last part, unfortunately there are dishonest people out there- but I love how you offer the two options to clients. Very cool.

[Raymond Wand]

I couldn't sleep at night if I knew I was a participant in aiding and abetting a vendor in being dishonest, particularly when the vendor discloses to the inspector their intent.

[Jack Feldmann]

I have never had a client admit to planning on being dishonest or not disclosing something found.

That said, I really have no idea what some of my clients do with the information I have given them anyway. Nor do I really care. My job is to do the inspection, write a report, and get paid. I don't care if they buy the house or not. I don't care if they sell the house or not.

It's also not my job or responsibility to police other people's moral compass.

I can't tell you how many times I have done an inspection, found and identified defects, only to find the same identifiers a few years later when they turn around and sell the property. They probably collected $$$ from the previous sellers to correct the defects found, pocketed the money and didn't fix anything.
Again, not my problem what went on. I just write the defects up again, and tell my new clients.

[Nathan Thornberry]

I couldn't sleep at night if I knew I was a participant in aiding and abetting a vendor in being dishonest, particularly when the vendor discloses to the inspector their intent.

Clarify. By vendor do you mean seller?

[Raymond Wand]

Yes seller = vendor

[Garry Blankenship]

I couldn't sleep at night if I knew I was a participant in aiding and abetting a vendor in being dishonest, particularly when the vendor discloses to the inspector their intent.

You have no control over that. Information from inspections you have already done and may do in the future probably have been miss-used and probably will be. Cover up happens w/o inspections; throw rugs over floor defects, patch & paint w/o fixing the cause, etc. The intent to miss-use the info. would be a small minority, but if judging the actions of others is your priority, be a judge.

[Trent Tarter]

DON'T DO IT! Washington State requires us to deliver a written report on any and all Home Inspections.

[Nathan Thornberry]

DON'T DO IT! Washington State requires us to deliver a written report on any and all Home Inspections.

Respectfully, you are incorrect sir. We reviewed all state statutes prior to ever putting this presentation on, and I promise you my legal fees spent and attorney's review of the issue is a more reliable source than a knee-jerk reaction.

What you said does have a basis in fact- if you are performing an Inspection, then yes a report is required in the state of Washington. For a consultation no- especially when no real estate transaction is yet contemplated and the home is simply listed.

If you don't believe, please call your state licensing authority and tell them several inspectors are offering current homeowners consultations to advise them on what an inspector might be looking for if their house ever does get inspected. You'll find they do not care.

[Jerry Peck]

You have no control over that. Information from inspections you have already done and may do in the future probably have been miss-used and probably will be. Cover up happens w/o inspections; throw rugs over floor defects, patch & paint w/o fixing the cause, etc. The intent to miss-use the info. would be a small minority, but if judging the actions of others is your priority, be a judge.

All legislation and SoPs I have seen allows the client to alter what is inspected and how.

The client is the boss. The legislation and SoPs are there to protect the client against unscrupulous inspectors would might try to force the client to accept things they might not want, i.e., the legislation and SoPs are written to prohibit an inspector from forcing a verbal report on each and every client, but not on any client who so chooses to have a verbal report.

Here is the ASHI SoP which addresses that issue:
- 2.3 These Standards of Practice are not intended to limit inspectors from:
- - including other inspection services or systems and components in addition to those required In Section 2.2.B.
- - designing or specifying repairs, provided the inspector is appropriately qualified and willing to do so.
- - excluding systems and components from the inspection if requested by the client.

The client, as allowed by 2.3, may exclude EVERYTHING from the inspection and written report. The client is then allowed to ask the inspector to do a walk around for such and such and verbally tell the client what the inspector sees.

Do the walk around verbal inspection meet the ASHI SOP? You betcha - because it meets the allowances of 2.3. :)

[Thomas McKay]

Problem I see is that vendor/sellers in some cases are trying to cover up stuff ahead of the inspection anyway. Can't count the times i find the bucket in the attic trick or duck tape around a leaking drain line. Some time its just poor repairs but you can tell when they are trying to hide things its human nature try to fool the inspector. You can call it consultation but when you enter someones home and report the conditions which you see you are doing an inspection and in most states with licensing a written report is required, it is in mine. If money changes hands and there is a contract you best provide a written report or you could get into the "who's on first what's on 2nd" debate. I find most sellers who ask for a quick look to identify big problems are just trying to get a cheep job; if you fall into this trap most likely they will call you back after the real home inspection is done and complain because the guy put 15 things or his report you didn't tell him about. Inspector be ware!

[Dana Bostick]

Problem I see is that vendor/sellers in some cases are trying to cover up stuff ahead of the inspection anyway. Can't count the times i find the bucket in the attic trick or duck tape around a leaking drain line. Some time its just poor repairs but you can tell when they are trying to hide things its human nature try to fool the inspector. You can call it consultation but when you enter someones home and report the conditions which you see you are doing an inspection and in most states with licensing a written report is required, it is in mine. If money changes hands and there is a contract you best provide a written report or you could get into the "who's on first what's on 2nd" debate. I find most sellers who ask for a quick look to identify big problems are just trying to get a "cheep" (as in a little bird told me? :p)job; if you fall into this trap most likely they will call you back after the real home inspection is done and complain because the guy put 15 things or his report you didn't tell him about. Inspector be ware!

:rolleyes: Just poking fun! Couldn't resist.<grin>

[Garry Sorrells]

This is an area that may be the nest addendum to the sales contract dealing with seller's disclosure.

Seller's Disclosure.
The Seller of the property will list all Home Inspections or Consultations performed regarding the property and provide in writing all information disclosed to the Seller in any format, verbal or written, along with the name and license number of the inspector or contractor.

The amount of disclosure and its format has changed radically over the past few decades and it only seems to increase year by year.

[Ron Bibler]

DON'T DO IT! Washington State requires us to deliver a written report on any and all Home Inspections.

I think Trent is correct. And this is why. The state board sets the rules.

You will find these words in the State boards ACT. As prescribe by the board. And/or industry standards.

These are open tools for the State board To go after an inspector if they have a home owner/buyer file a complaint on you.

The point is you are looking at the home and pointing out problems that's an inspection. Not a consutation.

Now i do these inspection all the time i charge $150.00 No report 1hour. For a small home
Calif. Has no state Home inspector Lic. Board.

Best

Ron

[Jack Feldmann]

I was hired by a client to do an inspection on a house in North Carolina. I hold a license in Tennessee, and do not hold one in North Carolina. I told my client that I could not do a home inspection in North Carolina.

After checking with the Realtors, and the State it was determined that I could do a "consultation" for him. However, any report or communication could not be used as a "home inspection" for the purpose of the real estate contract for this purchase.

[John Kogel]

I can do whatever I please, and get paid for it. But if I want my E + O insurance to cover me, I am obliged to follow my SOP to the letter and hand over a complete written report.

That is why you need to be specific and there needs to be a signed agreement. No E + O.

[Jerry Peck]

I think Trent is correct. And this is why. The state board sets the rules.

You will find these words in the State boards ACT. As prescribe by the board. And/or industry standards.

These are open tools for the State board To go after an inspector if they have a home owner/buyer file a complaint on you.

The point is you are looking at the home and pointing out problems that's an inspection. Not a consutation.

Now i do these inspection all the time i charge $150.00 No report 1hour. For a small home
Calif. Has no state Home inspector Lic. Board.

Best

Ron


I was hired by a client to do an inspection on a house in North Carolina. I hold a license in Tennessee, and do not hold one in North Carolina. I told my client that I could not do a home inspection in North Carolina.

After checking with the Realtors, and the State it was determined that I could do a "consultation" for him. However, any report or communication could not be used as a "home inspection" for the purpose of the real estate contract for this purchase.

You state's regulations prohibit the client from being able to ask you to do less than what is specifically stated? You sure it prohibits that?

Would you post the wording which prohibits that - thanks.

[Ron Bibler]

Ifound this info at http://www.dol.wa.gov/business/homeinspectors/docs/hilawbook.pdf

Chapter 308-408 WAC
DEFINITIONS

(13) "Report" means the act of stating one’s observations
clearly in the report.
(14) "Standard home inspection" is a prelisting or presale
written report that contains all or most of the components
listed in the standards of practice. The components must be
listed in the preinspection agreement. This standard home
inspection report cannot be delivered verbally and must be in
writing.

[Jerry Peck]

Ifound this info at http://www.dol.wa.gov/business/homeinspectors/docs/hilawbook.pdf

Chapter 308-408 WAC
DEFINITIONS

(13) "Report" means the act of stating one’s observations
clearly in the report.
(14) "Standard home inspection" is a prelisting or presale
written report that contains all or most of the components
listed in the standards of practice. The components must be
listed in the preinspection agreement. This standard home
inspection report cannot be delivered verbally and must be in
writing.

Ron,

You've missed a few key issues with that.

First, you did not post the section which prohibits the client from making changes and having less done than that which is specified.

Second, that part you did post indicates that the client DOES have the ability to make changes and have less done than that which is specified: "contains all or most".

Thirdly, that states "This standard home inspection report cannot be delivered verbally and must be in writing." and what is being discussed is anything but a standard home inspection report.

Then there is this: ""Standard home inspection" is a prelisting or presale written report" ... by definition a verbal consultation *is not* a "standard home inspection" because it is not written.

Without the full listing of the SoP requirements there is no way to determine what is and is not allowed/required/prohibited - would you post all of the SoP - thank you.

[Jack Feldmann]

Jerry,
I'm not sure if your question was aimed at me or not. Let me clarify my situation...
North Carolina real estate contracts (as well as Tennessee) state that for real estate transactions, when a buyer is opting to use their right to have a home inspection, they MUST use a home inspector that holds a current, valid, home inspectors license (in that State).

My client, knowing that I did not hold a North Carolina home inspector's license, decided to waive his right for a home inspection (by a North Carolina licensed home inspector), and decided to hire me to act as a building consultant.

[Nick Ostrowski]

I'm pretty sure the PA Home Inspection Law requires us to provide a report if we are being paid for the inspection but I'd have to check on it.

[Jerry Peck]

Jerry,
I'm not sure if your question was aimed at me or not.

Part was to you and part was to Ron, and both parts were with regard to doing the inspection for the seller.


Let me clarify my situation...

North Carolina real estate contracts (as well as Tennessee) state that for real estate transactions, when a buyer ...

Jack, the discussion was about doing walkthrough inspections for the seller, not the buyer, and that the seller did not want a written report, the seller (the client) only wanted a verbal from the inspector so the seller could take the notes.

Completely different animal with the buyer as a client, without a written report there is nothing the buyer has to use for the any clause in the contract regarding inspections - if it is not written, it did not happen (so to speak - there is no "evidence" of the inspection which leaves a paper trail).

[Ron Bibler]

Ron,

You've missed a few key issues with that.

First, you did not post the section which prohibits the client from making changes and having less done than that which is specified.

Second, that part you did post indicates that the client DOES have the ability to make changes and have less done than that which is specified: "contains all or most".

Thirdly, that states "This standard home inspection report cannot be delivered verbally and must be in writing." and what is being discussed is anything but a standard home inspection report.

Then there is this: ""Standard home inspection" is a prelisting or presale written report" ... by definition a verbal consultation *is not* a "standard home inspection" because it is not written.

Without the full listing of the SoP requirements there is no way to determine what is and is not allowed/required/prohibited - would you post all of the SoP - thank you.



Jerry Im not from Washington state and i don't do inspection in that state. I just found the Inspection ACT and posted it for you. If like you can read that thing it may have some information you may like to know?

I bet it has more to say on this subject.

Best

Ron

[Darren Spencer]

At the end of the walk and talk I always offer a complete report for the normal charge and most will agree the added value of having a report.









Pacific Northwest Inspections Group,LLC
Bellevue,WA
425.608.9553
Home Inspection Seattle Bellevue | Mold and Lead Paint Testing (http://www.pnwig.com)

[Linda Swearingen]

I would not do that job. If I'm getting paid for an inspection someone is getting my report in writing. What sort of contract modifications would you make for that client? Or would you just give them carte blanche to sue you, claiming that since you didn't warn them of something the buyer asks them to fix, that you should pay for it? If those sellers will leave the door open to defraud their buyers, they will consider doing it to you, too.

[Jerry Peck]

I would not do that job. If I'm getting paid for an inspection someone is getting my report in writing. What sort of contract modifications would you make for that client? Or would you just give them carte blanche to sue you, claiming that since you didn't warn them of something the buyer asks them to fix, that you should pay for it? If those sellers will leave the door open to defraud their buyers, they will consider doing it to you, too.

Good, I will do that inspection and make a ton of money on it and others like it.

What are they going to sue you on?

You have a signed contract which states that THEY do not want a written report ... I don't know of ANY judge who would read the contract where one party stated "we do not want a written report" and then try to claim that you missed doing something that they wanted you to do - they have *no proof* that you missed it, they may have just forgotten that you did it and told them about it.

Sheesh ... so many scared inspectors here. "No written report" is the best way to avoid litigation against you - they do not have proof that you did not, or did, do something. The response is: I did, or did not, do that, we spent 30 minutes discussing it, and you don't REMEMBER anything? THAT is why *I* wanted to give you a WRITTEN report. Judge: Case dismissed.

[BridgeMan]

The verbal consultation thing sounds good on paper, but I suspect there could be some expensive legal ramifications should the person requesting the walk-through tape record every word you say (or didn't say, by its absence), have it transcribed, and have that taken by his/her attorney to show the judge what you forgot to tell him/her.

Should you not want to go through the court thing and pay your own attorney a substantial sum to try to keep your reputation clean, opposing party will happily offer to settle out of court for a mere $25,000 or so.

What say you, Mr. Peck?

[Rick Cantrell]

The verbal consultation thing sounds good on paper, but I suspect there could be some expensive legal ramifications should the person requesting the walk-through tape record every word you say (or didn't say, by its absence), have it transcribed, and have that taken by his/her attorney to show the judge what you forgot to tell him/her.

Should you not want to go through the court thing and pay your own attorney a substantial sum to try to keep your reputation clean, opposing party will happily offer to settle out of court for a mere $25,000 or so.

What say you, Mr. Peck?

In Georgia, what I've heard is (I don't know it to be law)
You can record someone without having consent however the recording cannot be listened to by any person that was not a part of the conversion that was recorded. You cant play the recording in court.

[John Dirks Jr]

I do them from time to time. Primarily for existing owners, some cases they plan to sell and some not. I call the service a "repair consultation". I make it very clear that it's not a home inspection.

I agree with others that they are lucrative and it's amazing how fast you can find stuff when your not hampered by the requirement to produce a written report.

I take pictures as I move around the property. Near the end of the gig, I'll sit with the client and we scroll through the pictures and talk while they jot notes. When I get home, I send them the pics but nothing else.

Everyone has seemed very satisfied and I've never had a complaint in this process.

Now mind you, I've never had anyone come right out and say they want to know what's wrong and don't want a report so they can "pretend" ignorance and not disclose under law. That would make me feel apprehensive.

[Raymond Wand]

Don't think for a minute if you do a walk-through and have a contract one could not be sued for breach of contract and/or negligent misrepresentation.

It might be difficult for plaintiff to prove the case, but you could still be sued by someone who feels they got less than what they bargained for under the proviso a standard of care was not exercised.

One must still exercise a standard of care under the circumstances.

The client could video tape, record, or even have witnesses present during the inspection, along with notes they took.

[Jerry Peck]

The verbal consultation thing sounds good on paper, but I suspect there could be some expensive legal ramifications should the person requesting the walk-through tape record every word you say (or didn't say, by its absence), have it transcribed, and have that taken by his/her attorney to show the judge what you forgot to tell him/her.

Should you not want to go through the court thing and pay your own attorney a substantial sum to try to keep your reputation clean, opposing party will happily offer to settle out of court for a mere $25,000 or so.

What say you, Mr. Peck?

"but I suspect there could be some expensive legal ramifications should the person requesting the walk-through tape record every word you say"

For the party doing the recording without permission, yes.

It is a state by state case as to whether or not "all" parties are to be "notified" (versus having to give "consent"), however, even in states where the consent of all parties is not required to allow the recording to proceed, the person making the recording can be up for hefty penalties if that recorded information is played/shown/given to a third party.

Other posts above have covered it fairly well, but here is some good reading too:
- http://www.rcfp.org/rcfp/orders/docs/CANWETAPE.pdf
- Legal Lad : Is It Legal to Record a Conversation? :: Quick and Dirty Tips ™ (http://legallad.quickanddirtytips.com/recording-conversations.aspx)

Beyond the above information, you would need to seek the advice of an attorney. :D

[Michael Thomas]

Here in IL, if the inspection is pursuant to to a sale, rental, etc., the inspector must prove a written report that complies with the state SOP.

For practical purposes, this means that such a transaction is contemplated within the next six months.

In states with similar requirements, IMO it's a good idea to have whoever is contracting for the inspection to specifically initial a paragraph stating that no such transaction is contemplated within the next six months (or whatever your stare requires).

I have a entire separate contract for these "Property condition Reports".

[Jerry Peck]

Here in IL, if the inspection is pursuant to to a sale, rental, etc., the inspector must prove a written report that complies with the state SOP.

For practical purposes, this means that such a transaction is contemplated within the next six months.

In states with similar requirements, IMO it's a good idea to have whoever is contracting for the inspection to specifically initial a paragraph stating that no such transaction is contemplated within the next six months (or whatever your stare requires).

I have a entire separate contract for these "Property condition Reports".

Michael,

Does your state's SoP allow the inspector to do more than the SoP, and to do less than the SoP if the client requests such (or it is not present, as another example of not meeting the SoP)?

[Benjamin Thompson]

So, by Jerry's reasoning, anybody who lives in a state where licensing is required could do "consultations", essentially home inspections without a license or insurance or an inspection agreement. The written report is not material to the discussion and could still be provided. As long as he / her called themselves a consultant, not a home inspector. Maybe he's right.

[Jerry Peck]

So, by Jerry's reasoning, anybody who lives in a state where licensing is required could do "consultations", essentially home inspections without a license or insurance or an inspection agreement. The written report is not material to the discussion and could still be provided. As long as he / her called themselves a consultant, not a home inspector. Maybe he's right.

That's not what I am saying, but close - the home inspector can do the "home inspection" to the SoP ... which allows the client to ask for less that what is spelled out in the SoP.

This is the ASHI SoP from the ASHI web site:
- 2l Purpose and scope
- - 2.1 The purpose of these Standards of Practice is to establish a minimum and uniform standard for home inspectors who subscribe to these Standards of Practice. Home Inspections performed to these Standards of Practice are intended to provide the client with objective information regarding the condition of the systems and components of the home as inspected at the time of the home inspection. Redundancy in the description of the requirements, limitations, and exclusions regarding the scope of the home inspection is provided for emphasis only.
- - 2.2 Inspectors shall:
- - - A. adhere to the Code of Ethics of the American Society of Home Inspectors.
- - - B. inspect readily accessible, visually observable, installed systems and components listed in these Standards of Practice.
- - - C. report :
- - - - 1. those systems and components inspected that, in the professional judgment of the inspector, are not functioning properly, significantly deficient, unsafe, or are near the end of their service lives.
- - - - 2. recommendations to correct, or monitor for future correction, the deficiencies reported in 2.2.C.1, or items needing further evaluation. (Per Exclusion 13.2.A.5 inspectors are NOT required to determine methods, materials, or costs of corrections.)
- - - - 3. reasoning or explanation as to the nature of the deficiencies reported in 2.2.C.1, that are not self-evident.
- - - - 4. systems and components designated for inspection in these Standards of Practice that were present at the time of the home inspection but were not inspected and the reason(s) they were not inspected.
- - 2.3 These Standards of Practice are not intended to limit inspectors from:
- - - A. including other inspection services or systems and components in addition to those required In Section 2.2.B.
- - - B. designing or specifying repairs, provided the inspector is appropriately qualified and willing to do so.
- - - C. excluding systems and components from the inspection if requested by the client

2.3.C. excluding systems and components from the inspection if requested by the client

The client excludes *ALL* systems and components from the inspection, then asks the home inspector if the home inspector would simply do a walk-through verbally telling the client what the home inspector sees which the home inspector might find if they were to do a home inspection for a buyer.

I know some of you guys may not like it, but there is no limitation to the exclusions and the above scenario STILL results in an inspection WHICH MEETS the SoP requirements because that verbal inspection meets 2.3.C.

[Benjamin Thompson]

That's not what I am saying, but close - the home inspector can do the "home inspection" to the SoP ... which allows the client to ask for less that what is spelled out in the SoP.

I didn't mean that was what you were saying or trying to say, just that that's one logical conclusion of your argument.

[Garry Sorrells]

Depending on the wording of the local licensing law if any, it may revolve around the specific wording of the governing documents. In that if a Home Inspection is offered then it must be performed to the letter of the law. Contract, SOPs, written report and so forth. If an non inspection but a consultation of condition of the home is offered then you are not bound by the governing law of Home Inspection Law. This differentiation may be important as it is in Maryland.

The rub may be in the local requirements of full disclosure which may be required by state law or as defined in the body of the Contract of Sale. The fact that a report is not prepared in a written form may ultimately be mute. If a licensed individual provides an owner an opinion on a defect, the owner has been put on notice and knows knows of that defect. The potential is that the person giving the opinion may be drug into the a future squabble over disclosures made by the seller. Ultimately the licensed person may be drug into court by the buyer.

So written or not the owner has been informed.

[Nathan Thornberry]

Don't get me wrong, I'd rather everyone here get paid for a full inspection all the time...

but those saying a "Pre-Listing Consultation" or a "Repair Consultation" are illegal are wrong. Every time you post a section of the rules, you prove the point further because all of those regs are based on the premise that an "Inspection" is being done.

Don't believe me? Call your state licensing board, send them the link to my pre-listing consultation and report me. Give them my number. Give them my name. Multiple people have done so thus far, and every single time the licensing authority tells them they don't care because it's not under the umbrella of a "home inspection." Further, there's not a state in the union that has regulations prohibiting inspectors from deriving revenue from other sources...you could mow lawns, walk dogs, whatever- you could even teach a home owner what the home inspection includes- and that is what this counts as.

This whole idea that any licensee walking into a house and looking at any issue must then perform a full inspection and deliver a report is asinine. If that were the case, 203k consultants would be losing their license every single day, reinspections would be illegal, partial inspections and auxiliary services wouldn't be permitted, and you'd have to charge your neighbor for a home inspection and deliver them a report every time you pulled up to your house and saw some issue you thought they ought to know about (like my neighbor, who is ignoring a significant structural issue at the moment).

So keep pumping up your chest and posting out of context sections of the regulations and playing amateur attorney if you'd like, but if you're looking for facts call your licensing board and you'll discover everything I've said here is 100% accurate.

[Michael Thomas]

Michael,

Does your state's SoP allow the inspector to do more than the SoP, and to do less than the SoP if the client requests such (or it is not present, as another example of not meeting the SoP)?


PROFESSIONS AND OCCUPATIONS 225 ILCS 441/) Home Inspector License Act.

Definitions:

"Home inspection" means the examination and evaluation of the exterior and interior components of residential real property, which includes the inspection of any 2 or more of the following components of residential real property in connection with or to facilitate the sale, lease, or other conveyance of, or the proposed sale, lease or other conveyance of, residential real property:

(1)heating, ventilation, and air conditioning system
(2) plumbing system
(3) electrical system
(4) structural composition
(5) foundation
(6) roof
(7) masonry structure
(8) any other RRE component as established by rule.

"Home inspector" means a person who, for another and for compensation either direct or indirect, performs home inspections.

"Home inspection report" or "inspection report" means a written evaluation prepared and issued by a home inspector upon completion of a home inspection, which meets the standards of practice as established by OBRE.

Section 1410.200* Standards of Practice*

At the conclusion of the home inspection, a home inspector shall submit a written report to the client or duly authorized representative within 48 hours that includes the home inspector's signature and license number and expiration date and shall:
*
1)Describe the systems and components that were inspected;
*
2) Report on those systems and components inspected that, in the
Opinion of the inspector, are significantly deficient (Unsafe
or not functioning) and

A) A reason why the system or component is significantly deficient.
*
B) Disclose:

Any systems or components designated for inspection,
that were present at the time of the home inspection, but
were not inspected

And a reason they were not inspected.

These Standards are not intended to limit home inspectors from:

1) Including other inspection services, systems or components in
addition to those defined in these standards of practice
*
2) Excluding systems and components in the written agreement
from the inspection.

IF you are inspecting 2 or more systems "in connection with or to facilitate the sale, lease, or other conveyance of, or the proposed sale, lease or other conveyance of, residential real property", it's a "home inspection".

IF it's home inspection, you must provide a written report compliant with the state SOP.

The only "wiggle room" is the definition of "or the proposed " in "connection with or to facilitate"; the advice I received with an attorney familiar with the IL home inspection statutes was that in practice that's "within six months", and that's the standard I use.

[Nathan Thornberry]

PROFESSIONS AND OCCUPATIONS 225 ILCS 441/) Home Inspector License Act.

Definitions:

"Home inspection" means the examination and evaluation of the exterior and interior components of residential real property, which includes the inspection of any 2 or more of the following components of residential real property in connection with or to facilitate the sale, lease, or other conveyance of, or the proposed sale, lease or other conveyance of, residential real property:

(1)heating, ventilation, and air conditioning system
(2) plumbing system
(3) electrical system
(4) structural composition
(5) foundation
(6) roof
(7) masonry structure
(8) any other RRE component as established by rule.

"Home inspector" means a person who, for another and for compensation either direct or indirect, performs home inspections.

"Home inspection report" or "inspection report" means a written evaluation prepared and issued by a home inspector upon completion of a home inspection, which meets the standards of practice as established by OBRE.

Section 1410.200* Standards of Practice*

At the conclusion of the home inspection, a home inspector shall submit a written report to the client or duly authorized representative within 48 hours that includes the home inspector's signature and license number and expiration date and shall:
*
1)Describe the systems and components that were inspected;
*
2) Report on those systems and components inspected that, in the
Opinion of the inspector, are significantly deficient (Unsafe
or not functioning) and

A) A reason why the system or component is significantly deficient.
*
B) Disclose:

Any systems or components designated for inspection,
that were present at the time of the home inspection, but
were not inspected

And a reason they were not inspected.

These Standards are not intended to limit home inspectors from:

1) Including other inspection services, systems or components in
addition to those defined in these standards of practice
*
2) Excluding systems and components in the written agreement
from the inspection.

IF you are inspecting 2 or more systems "in connection with or to facilitate the sale, lease, or other conveyance of, or the proposed sale, lease or other conveyance of, residential real property", it's a "home inspection".

IF it's home inspection, you must provide a written report compliant with the state SOP.

The only "wiggle room" is the definition of "or the proposed " in "connection with or to facilitate"; the advice I received with an attorney familiar with the IL home inspection statutes was that in practice that's "within six months", and that's the standard I use.

203k Financing and the associated inspections are officially illegal in Illinois. lol

You can also not provide:

Well and Septic Inspections
Termite Inspections
Water testing
Mold evaluations
Mold Testing
Pool & Spa Inspections
Irrigation inspections


Does that really make sense to you?

[Michael Thomas]

203k Financing and the associated inspections are officially illegal in Illinois. lol

You can also not provide:

Well and Septic Inspections
Termite Inspections
Water testing
Mold evaluations
Mold Testing
Pool & Spa Inspections
Irrigation inspections


Does that really make sense to you?

All of those are excluded under the "two or more systems" requirement, or a separate section of the act I did not cite. (The same is true of an "inspection" of a property performed in order to prepare a bid for maintenance, repair or improvement of a property.)

What *is* clearly prohibited here in IL, when a residential property is, or is about to be, offered for sale, rent, etc., is a "home inspection" without a written report which meets the state SOP.

[Jerry Peck]

The only "wiggle room" is the definition of "or the proposed " in "connection with or to facilitate"; the advice I received with an attorney familiar with the IL home inspection statutes was that in practice that's "within six months", and that's the standard I use.

Actually, the biggest "wiggle room" is large enough to drive the proverbial 18 wheeler tractor-trailer through.


The client, as allowed by 2.3, may exclude EVERYTHING from the inspection and written report. The client is then allowed to ask the inspector to do a walk around for such and such and verbally tell the client what the inspector sees.

Once the client excludes "EVERYTHING from the inspection and written report", there are no longer the "any 2 or more" ... *everything* ... has been excluded by the client. Now you are just doing a walkthrough 'not a home inspection' inspection/review/etc./whatever you want to call it. No written report required.

And, because it is no longer a "home inspection" by definition in state statute, one would not be required to be a "home inspector" to do those (because, by definition, it is not a "home inspection"). And, because it is not legally a "home inspection" and the person doing it not legally a "home inspector", then, again, by definition in that statute, no written report needs to be provided.

Sometimes, some people try to insist that certain things are required and try to add words into statutes, laws, and standards of practice, when the actual statute, law, and/or standards of practice does not contain the words needed to make their thinking correct.

Just like if you did a "home inspection" and issued a "home inspection report", if you did not charge a fee or solicit any other form of direct, or indirect, compensation, then you are not, by definition of a "home inspector", a "home inspector" doing a home inspection.

[Nathan Thornberry]

/\
|
|

Smart guy. Could come from all that litigation consultation.

Very sensible, viable argument. Could have used you in Kansas the other day. lol

[Michael Thomas]

Corey Friedman would probably be the person to ask about this, at least in IL.

[BridgeMan]

Just received a brief but official opinion back from the licensing supervisor at the Oregon Construction Contractors Board (the state agency that licenses home inspectors and building contractors). Her response to my question of whether a home inspector's license is required for someone doing in-home consulting, without a written report, for the purpose of evaluating things requiring repair:

"Consultants--not arranging for work--do not require a license."

Guess I'll work up a contract form and beat the bushes to see what happens.

[Aaron Miller]

The state of Texas will not allow this, JP's wide-ranging, wild-eyed, side-stepping notwithstanding. In fact, the fines for such an action could exceed $5K with a license suspension. Anyone attempting this dance should first clear it with their state board, if there is one.

Is it really a wise move, for the sake of one measly inspection fee, to get in the face of an inspection board replete with attorneys?:confused:


Section 1102.001 (9) "Real estate inspection" means a written or oral opinion as to the condition of the improvements to real property, including structural items, electrical items, mechanical systems, plumbing systems, or equipment.

535.222(a) For each inspection, the inspector shall:
(1) prepare a written inspection report noting observed deficiencies and other items required to be reported

[Jerry Peck]

The state of Texas will not allow this, JP's wide-ranging, wild-eyed, side-stepping notwithstanding. In fact, the fines for such an action could exceed $5K with a license suspension. Anyone attempting this dance should first clear it with their state board, if there is one.

Is it really a wise move, for the sake of one measly inspection fee, to get in the face of an inspection board replete with attorneys?:confused:


Section 1102.001 (9) "Real estate inspection" means a written or oral opinion as to the condition of the improvements to real property, including structural items, electrical items, mechanical systems, plumbing systems, or equipment.

535.222(a) For each inspection, the inspector shall:
(1) prepare a written inspection report noting observed deficiencies and other items required to be reported

I notice you did not include the part to which I referenced in the other law. Any particular reason you did not include it? Other than not wanting to be shown that it exist in Texas too? :p

[Scott Patterson]

Most if not all state home inspector regulatory boards look at it this way: If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck then it is a duck! If the inspection looks, sounds and acts like a home inspection it is a home inspection regardless of what you call it.

[Aaron Miller]

JP: It seems that the Texas Real Estate Commission may consider itself above the law. You are not in Texas, have not fought with them for the past 15 years and would not, under any circumstance, prevail if you were here and did try.

This is not Flah-dah or Kansas. Dorothy never lived here or came to visit Donald Duck.

[Jerry Peck]

Most if not all state home inspector regulatory boards look at it this way: If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck then it is a duck! If the inspection looks, sounds and acts like a home inspection it is a home inspection regardless of what you call it.

Ahhh ... so true, and ... doing a verbal report does NOT "walks like a duck and quacks like a duck then it is a duck!" :D :p

[Jerry Peck]

JP: The Texas Real Estate Commission considers itself above the law. You are not in Texas, have not fought with them for the past 15 years and would not, under any circumstance, prevail if you were here and did try.

This is not Flah-dah or Kansas. Dorothy never lived here or came to visit Donald Duck.

Aaron,

Don't get me wrong, *I* *DID NOT* write any of those laws, but ... those *ARE* the laws which were written and passed, and what the law states, word for word, is what it is until challenged and either the courts declare differently or the legislatures change the wording.

*I* just read the laws and *I* just look at the words, their use, and their meaning. If someone does not like what the law says, don't complain to *ME*, complain to the legislators who can re-write the laws and make it say what you want it to say.

Like Scott says "if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck then it is a duck!", then it is a "duck" ... unless ... the definitions define a "duck" as an egret, then a "duck" - by definition - it is no longer a 'duck', it is an 'egret'. :)

[Aaron Miller]

what the law states, word for word, is what it is until challenged and either the courts declare differently or the legislatures change the wording

JP: Forgive me if I haven't the pluck necessary to be the Guinea pig on this one.;)

[Garry Sorrells]

Just received a brief but official opinion back from the licensing supervisor at the Oregon Construction Contractors Board (the state agency that licenses home inspectors and building contractors). Her response to my question of whether a home inspector's license is required for someone doing in-home consulting, without a written report, for the purpose of evaluating things requiring repair:

"Consultants--not arranging for work--do not require a license."

Guess I'll work up a contract form and beat the bushes to see what happens.


But, what is their position on a Licensed Home Inspector performing an inspection without providing a written report ?

[Garry Sorrells]

BridgeMan;

Became interested in Oregon Inspection Law since each state differs.

It seems that from the information you received back on your inquiry may revolve around a difference in being licensed. In that without a license you could perform a consultation inspection without a written report and without doing any actual work.

A quick look at the Oregon law found what seems to require that a Licensed Home Inspector is required to provide a written report if they inspect the property (more than one system).

Construction Contractors Board Home Inspectors (http://www.oregon.gov/ccb/pages/home_inspectors.aspx)
Who is a home inspector?
A home inspector is an individual who, for a fee, inspects and provides a written report on the overall physical condition of a residential structure. A home inspector inspects more than one structural component and provides a written report of his or her findings.

http://ccbed.ccb.state.or.us/WebPDF/CCB/Publications/hi-needk.pdf
Written contracts and reports: All home inspections require a written pre-inspection contract, signed by the home inspector and the client. [812-008-0202(2)(a)]. A written inspection report is also required [812-008-0202(2)(c)]. The CCB requires no specific format for either. Consult with an attorney to make sure your contracts and reports comply with the rules.

If you are licensed it would appear that you have restrictions/requirements/mandates that a non-licensed individual are not bound to observe.

[Scott Patterson]

But, what is their position on a Licensed Home Inspector performing an inspection without providing a written report ?

It only becomes an issue if somebody turns you in! :)

[Garry Sorrells]

It only becomes an issue if somebody turns you in! :)

Which is typically the case in most things.

Nat's assertion that "...This whole idea that any licensee walking into a house and looking at any issue must then perform a full inspection and deliver a report is asinine. " is a weighty legal opinion if I ever heard one.

[Scott Patterson]

Which is typically the case in most things.

Nat's assertion that "...This whole idea that any licensee walking into a house and looking at any issue must then perform a full inspection and deliver a report is asinine. " is a weighty legal opinion if I ever heard one.

I agree.. I do all types of consulting work outside of the basic home inspection.

I have a job this afternoon that no report will be issued. I have been hired to do a walk and talk inspection before my client even makes an offer on a property. They already have some concerns and I'm just a second set of eyes for them..

[Nathan Thornberry]

JP: It seems that the Texas Real Estate Commission may consider itself above the law. You are not in Texas, have not fought with them for the past 15 years and would not, under any circumstance, prevail if you were here and did try.

This is not Flah-dah or Kansas. Dorothy never lived here or came to visit Donald Duck.

Just an FYI- I've given my pre-listing consultation course in the State of Texas, had an inspector report me to TREC, and they said (as my attorney said they would)- "It's not an inspection, we have no further comment".

I agree with you that TREC can be overbearing at times, but I've found them to be reasonable on many occasions as well. One thing is for sure- the regulations in that state, nor any other state, on HOME INSPECTIONS only apply to home inspections. Simple as that.

[Jerry Peck]

One thing is for sure- the regulations in that state, nor any other state, on HOME INSPECTIONS only apply to home inspections. Simple as that.

And "home inspections" is always defined within the statute, and that definition of "home inspection" is what applies.

"Home inspector" is also defined within the statutes, and that definition of what a "home inspector" is and does is what applies.

Typically, "home inspector" and "home inspection" are used in one or more of the definitions, so what one needs to do is to put the meaning of each in with where the term is used. That will answer many questions.

Aaron even posted where TREC allows oral opinions:
- Section 1102.001 (9) "Real estate inspection" means a written or oral opinion as to the condition of the improvements to real property, including structural items, electrical items, mechanical systems, plumbing systems, or equipment.

I suspect that there is a lot more to the Texas requirements and which will allow for those oral opinions.

[Nathan Thornberry]

And "home inspections" is always defined within the statute, and that definition of "home inspection" is what applies.

"Home inspector" is also defined within the statutes, and that definition of what a "home inspector" is and does is what applies.

Typically, "home inspector" and "home inspection" are used in one or more of the definitions, so what one needs to do is to put the meaning of each in with where the term is used. That will answer many questions.

Aaron even posted where TREC allows oral opinions:
- Section 1102.001 (9) "Real estate inspection" means a written or oral opinion as to the condition of the improvements to real property, including structural items, electrical items, mechanical systems, plumbing systems, or equipment.

I suspect that there is a lot more to the Texas requirements and which will allow for those oral opinions.

You're absolutely right. Some people want to look at that one line and define an inspection, but plumbers look at jobs all the time they don't get and give the home owner an opinion and then an estimate which may even in written form define the condition. Are they now under home inspection regulation scrutiny? No!

By the way, these pre-listing consultations do nothing for me- if anything they are actually taking away from my bottom line because none of the purchaser-based products from the Inspector Services Group make sense with these deals, so if anything I have the opposite of a conflict of interest, I just don't like to see laws and regulations misinterpreted. Kind of a pet peeve.

[Aaron Miller]

- Section 1102.001 (9) "Real estate inspection" means a written or oral opinion as to the condition of the improvements to real property, including structural items, electrical items, mechanical systems, plumbing systems, or equipment.

Quoting my post out of context will not promote your argument. I have poured over the regulations in my state longer than most folks on this board have been in business. An oral opinion must still be converted to a written report on the TREC-promulgated form, as my post stated. Any house that is even being considered for sale or purchase applies. Additionally, if doing an inspection for the seller, the results of that inspection must be disclosed by the seller to all future prospective buyers. While it may seem pleasant to think that one can just flaunt the rules and pretend that and inspection is merely a "consultation", that is not how pie is made. If you have a written opinion from the TREC General Counsel or its equivalent, let's see it. Otherwise, save the hot air for the upcoming winter . . .;)

[Jerry Peck]

You're absolutely right. Some people want to look at that one line and define an inspection ...

Like it or not, when it comes to what is, and is not, an "home inspection" that is statutory language and technically defines "home inspection" and what it is, or is not, within the eyes of the law.


By the way, these pre-listing consultations do nothing for me- if anything they are actually taking away from my bottom line because none of the purchaser-based products from the Inspector Services Group make sense with these deals, so if anything I have the opposite of a conflict of interest, I just don't like to see laws and regulations misinterpreted. Kind of a pet peeve.

Same there when I did inspections - no seller in their right mind (or their left mind) would want a person telling them that all this stuff needs to be replaced or re-done with permits ... I tried to offer pre-listing inspections but, after explaining to the sellers that they would now need to correct everything I showed them or disclose it on the seller disclosure form ... they would say thank you and hang up. Gosh, I wonder why.

Like you, my inspections were not for the weak-kneed, and sellers are weak-kneed as they do not really want to know what is wrong ... they want the house inspected and then they want to hear 'It's all okie-dokie.'

"I just don't like to see laws and regulations misinterpreted. Kind of a pet peeve."

I don't like to see laws and regulations misinterpreted either, a pet peeve of mine too, that is why I am pointing out that, unless the Texas law states something the other laws do not, and you have not yet pointed out that it does, or does not, then there are big loop holes through it.

That is why I ask, yet again, for you to post the law here or to post the section which gives clients the option to 'opt out' of some part of the inspection, or to state that there is NO 'opt out' part and that EVERYONE gets stuck with the same inspection and nothing allows them to change anything.

But you have not done that either. ;)

[Aaron Miller]

That is why I ask, yet again, for you to post the law here or to post the section which gives clients the option to 'opt out' of some part of the inspection, or to state that there is NO 'opt out' part and that EVERYONE gets stuck with the same inspection and nothing allows them to change anything.

In Texas:

(5) Departure.
(A) An inspector may depart from the standards of practice only if the requirements of subparagraph (B) of this paragraph are met, and:
(i) the inspector and client agree the item is not to be inspected;

AND

(B) If a part, component, or system required for inspection is not inspected, the inspector shall:
(ii) make an appropriate notation on the inspection report form, clearly stating the reason the part, component, or system was not inspected.

So, JP, there is your departure wording for Texas. Let's hear your phantasmagoric kludge for that, given that all inspections must be committed to a written report.:D

[Dom D'Agostino]

TREC rules are clear: report is to be writen, and the TREC form is to be used.

For inspectors that like to find and exploit "loop-hole" conditions, it doesn't state that you have to use "visible ink", nor does it require you to write reports in your client's native tongue.

So whip out you spy-store magic pen, or learn Cantonese.

Otherwise, play by the rules. ;)

[Garry Sorrells]

Aaron,
Not knowing the Texas law, but for argument sake, if the HI also holds a contractor license (if there is one in Texas). It would make sense that the HI would just put his Contractor Hat on and not have to be concerned with the HI Law about a written report.

This would also possibly apply to other stated that require a licensed HI performing an inspection, by law, must have a contract and provide a written report. It is about the act not the renaming of the act being preformed.

The real answer to a seller not wanting a written report is to have a contractor explain what is wrong under that contracting license.....

A contractor can come in and tell the seller what is wrong and what it may cost orally without consequence other than the seller being put on notice of the items that need repair or correction. Putting the seller on the hook to disclose if required in the contract of sale.

Billing the seller on the Contractor's stationary would make the determination as to which license was being used.

[Aaron Miller]

TREC rules are clear: report is to be writen, and the TREC form is to be used.

For inspectors that like to find and exploit "loop-hole" conditions, it doesn't state that you have to use "visible ink", nor does it require you to write reports in your client's native tongue.

So whip out you spy-store magic pen, or learn Cantonese.

Otherwise, play by the rules. ;)

Finally, someone who is actually paying attention.:eek:

[Aaron Miller]

Not knowing the Texas law, but for argument sake, if the HI also holds a contractor license (if there is one in Texas). It would make sense that the HI would just put his Contractor Hat on and not have to be concerned with the HI Law about a written report.

Moot point. Texas does not license general contractors. Why can't everyone just stop with the lame workarounds and be professional? Oh yes, I forgot. This is the HI "profession". What on Earth was I thinking?:confused:

[Jerry Peck]

In Texas:

(5) Departure.
(A) An inspector may depart from the standards of practice only if the requirements of subparagraph (B) of this paragraph are met, and:
(i) the inspector and client agree the item is not to be inspected;

AND

(B) If a part, component, or system required for inspection is not inspected, the inspector shall:
(ii) make an appropriate notation on the inspection report form, clearly stating the reason the part, component, or system was not inspected.

So, JP, there is your departure wording for Texas. Let's hear your phantasmagoric kludge for that, given that all inspections must be committed to a written report.:D

Like I said way back when - the client states that they do not want any systems inspected - (adding the following part for Texas, would not hurt for other areas either) - write that in the report, .... then do the walk and talk.

Jeeze, Aaron, you are trying soooooo hard to try to limit yourself into having to write a report where you tell them the house needs to be torn down.

Write the friggin' report, state that the client insisted that all systems be excluded, have client initial each section, hand THAT report to the seller, keep your copy, then ... THEN do the "walk and talk" consultation as you *are no longer* doing a "home inspection" by definition.

You are fighting to keep the box nailed shut, I'm outside your box trying to pry off those boards and let some daylight shine in, but you need to stop pulling the boards back in place so it is dark and you can't see. :(

[Aaron Miller]

You are fighting to keep the box nailed shut, I'm outside your box trying to pry off those boards and let some daylight shine in, but you need to stop pulling the boards back in place so it is dark and you can't see.

JP:

I suppose you mean Pandora's box. The TREC has finally reached its goal of becoming a semi-autonomous commission. This means that they get a little less oversight from the state, and a bit less money. That deficit has to be made up. In order to offset the loss of funds they have implemented what anyone with an IQ above that of flat grey primer would consider to be draconian. This is reminiscent of the things one reads in murder mysteries or watches on TV crime shows where the law enforcement agency in question is much better at crucifying its own members than it is at actually enforcing the law or protecting the public.

The investigators at TREC are fair enough, but the attorneys they must work with are, how shall I say? - well, I had better not say here on this forum. Let us just state that they seem to take a lot of liberties in defining the English language as it pertains to their standards and regulations.

Now, let's consider this hypothetical scenario. An HI in any state does the JP Shuffle and pretends not to be a home inspector while not inspecting a house for a seller who claims to not want it inspected (WTF?). Let us just pretend, as you have been doing all along, that this is not just outright lying. Said pretending-not-to-be-an-inspector produces no written report. This miserable skank reports orally to the low-life seller just how distraught his house is. Mr. low-life sells the house to Mr. too-stupid-or-cheap-to-hire-a-competent-inspector. After moving in, Mr. too stupid finds a laundry list of defects. He later proves that Mr. pretending-not-to-be-an-inspector told Mr. low-life about all of these items. Mr.s low-life and pretending-not-an-inspector now have a very real problem that will certainly be announced to them by lawyers acting as lawyers and reporting to them in writing. Shortly thereafter, Mr. pretending-not-to-be-an-inspector will no longer have to pretend.:D

[Nathan Thornberry]

JP:

I suppose you mean Pandora's box. The TREC has finally reached its goal of becoming a semi-autonomous commission. This means that they get a little less oversight from the state, and a bit less money. That deficit has to be made up. In order to offset the loss of funds they have implemented what anyone with an IQ above that of flat grey primer would consider to be draconian. This is reminiscent of the things one reads in murder mysteries or watches on TV crime shows where the law enforcement agency in question is much better at crucifying its own members than it is at actually enforcing the law or protecting the public.

The investigators at TREC are fair enough, but the attorneys they must work with are, how shall I say? - well, I had better not say here on this forum. Let us just state that they seem to take a lot of liberties in defining the English language as it pertains to their standards and regulations.

Now, let's consider this hypothetical scenario. An HI in any state does the JP Shuffle and pretends not to be a home inspector while not inspecting a house for a seller who claims to not want it inspected (WTF?). Let us just pretend, as you have been doing all along, that this is not just outright lying. Said pretending-not-to-be-an-inspector produces no written report. This miserable skank reports orally to the low-life seller just how distraught his house is. Mr. low-life sells the house to Mr. too-stupid-or-cheap-to-hire-a-competent-inspector. After moving in, Mr. too stupid finds a laundry list of defects. He later proves that Mr. pretending-not-to-be-an-inspector told Mr. low-life about all of these items. Mr.s low-life and pretending-not-an-inspector now have a very real problem that will certainly be announced to them by lawyers acting as lawyers and reporting to them in writing. Shortly thereafter, Mr. pretending-not-to-be-an-inspector will no longer have to pretend.:D

That's an interesting theory, but it's never happened and these things take place all the time, so the legal hypothesis from the non-practicing non-licensed attorney is a moot point. I'm not sure if anyone else has actually hired an attorney they paid to look into this, I did, and I did so in preparation to speak on this topic in the state of Texas. The holes are big enough to drive a truck through, even the stuff you've posted gives anyone reading this thread more than enough to know they'll be fine- all they have to do is agree to exclude parts of the inspection as you wrote above even if they take the most conservative view on this topic.

If I read your posts correctly, you've gone from "illegal" to "very illegal" to "illegal unless the client is okay with it" to "fine, but you're going to get sued and go out of business." Is that a fair assessment of the timeline? All you had to do was pick up the phone and call TREC and they'd tell you the same thing they told the last guy...

[Aaron Miller]

If I read your posts correctly, you've gone from "illegal" to "very illegal" to "illegal unless the client is okay with it" to "fine, but you're going to get sued and go out of business." Is that a fair assessment of the timeline?

Just goes to show that you can lead a man to write a book, but you can't make him think.:D

[Jerry Peck]

Mr.s low-life and pretending-not-an-inspector now have a very real problem that will certainly be announced to them by lawyers acting as lawyers and reporting to them in writing. Shortly thereafter, Mr. pretending-not-to-be-an-inspector will no longer have to pretend.:D

Aaron,

As can be seen by some respected inspectors in the posts above who do these 'walk and talk' inspections, your hypothetical is quite hypothetical and no more likely, even less likely, to result in the "fat letter" from an attorney than, say, um, a REGULAR WITH WRITTEN REPORT home inspection is.

The 'walk and talk', in the case presented above for Texas, has a written contract, a written report the client (seller) initialed stating that each and every system and component listed in the SoP is excluded from the inspection. The inspector doing the 'walk and talk' for their client (seller) has only two people to be concerned with: the inspector; the client. Sound familiar? Same goes for a standard home inspection and its report.

The 'walk and talk' 'inspection report' was given at the time of the inspection, it is not up to the consultant doing the 'walk and talk' to write down what was 'talked about' during the 'walk and talk' "walkthrough review".

If said buyer, Mr. too-stupid-or-cheap-to-hire-a-competent-inspector, and has their lawyer contact the consultant regarding the 'walk and talk' review, the consultant provides a copy of the inspection report and says: 'Yes, I did a "home inspection" on this property on this date and this is a copy of it. By the way, my client, the seller, EXCLUDED EVERYTHING from the inspection and the report shows that, and my client, the seller, initialed next to each request to EXCLUDE THAT ITEM. I then did a 'walk and talk' review with my client, the seller, and my client said he was taking notes. Contact the seller for a copy of those notes.

And, of course, no notes exist because the seller was doing a 'walk and listen' while the consultant did the 'walk and talk'.

Aaron, your continued arguments simply do not hold water, you are trying too hard to empty a lake by throwing water from the lake onto the shoreline, besides, you are using a sieve*.

*Martha Stewart Collection 3-Piece Sieve Set - Kitchen Gadgets - Kitchen - Macy&#039;s (http://www1.macys.com/shop/product/martha-stewart-collection-3-piece-sieve-set?ID=394031) ... and don't believe the ad copy writer either ... "you'll never be left without the right tool for the job" ... that ain't gonna work for emptying the lake. ;)

[Aaron Miller]

@ JP and Wonder Boy: Once the two of you graduate from mere rhetoric and provide the members of the forum something in writing from a person of substance at the TREC supporting your specious theories, I will bow to your superior knowledge. But, until then . . . it is just so much hot air balloon filling. Or, as HG once noted - bilge water.:D

[Jerry Peck]

But, until then . . . it is just so much hot air balloon filling. Or, as HG once noted - bilge water.:D

As are your claims that it is not allowed. :p

[Garry Sorrells]

Moot point. Texas does not license general contractors. Why can't everyone just stop with the lame workarounds and be professional? Oh yes, I forgot. This is the HI "profession". What on Earth was I thinking?:confused:

Did not know Texas does not license contractors. From some of the things posted it should.

Not a lame work around but a point in that if a state requires a contract and a written report to be done by law and all the person has is a license for HI then there is no option under their license but to write a report. If the person also holds a contracting license then they can operate under either license. In MD a contractor can not do a Home Inspection by name, but they can inspect a home for repairs. A Home Inspector can not perform work on a home without a contracting license. The contractor is not obligated to furnish any thing in writing if they are not doing any work on the property. Something of a dichotomy isn't it.

The OP was in Washington state. You are Texas with it set of laws. The interesting thing is how the sates differ.

[Nathan Thornberry]

@ JP and Wonder Boy: Once the two of you graduate from mere rhetoric and provide the members of the forum something in writing from a person of substance at the TREC supporting your specious theories, I will bow to your superior knowledge. But, until then . . . it is just so much hot air balloon filling. Or, as HG once noted - bilge water.:D

You don't seem to know how TREC works...they only issue something in writing when there is a violation. This is the same with many government agencies, you go to your attorney for a compliance statement.

They're aware of it, they're not issuing anything, because there's not a violation. If you read your own posts you can see this isn't a violation of anything- but if you feel it is, don't offer it.

[Aaron Miller]

Did not know Texas does not license contractors. From some of the things posted it should.

Not a lame work around but a point in that if a state requires a contract and a written report to be done by law and all the person has is a license for HI then there is no option under their license but to write a report. If the person also holds a contracting license then they can operate under either license. In MD a contractor can not do a Home Inspection by name, but they can inspect a home for repairs. A Home Inspector can not perform work on a home without a contracting license. The contractor is not obligated to furnish any thing in writing if they are not doing any work on the property. Something of a dichotomy isn't it.

The OP was in Washington state. You are Texas with it set of laws. The interesting thing is how the sates differ.

Yet another thinking individual. Hope springs eternal!:eek:

[Jim Hintz]

Just received this message today from a stranger (referral from ex-client):

"We are going to be selling our current home and we were thinking of having someone do a pre-inspection for us. That is, go through the property as you would with a home inspection, but not do the report - just walk us through the elements that you see that may be red flags when the buyer does a home inspection. Is that something you'd be able to do?"

What comes to my mind when I translate this is "we want to unofficially know what is wrong with the place and have no paper trail to prove what we know/don't know before selling".

Does anyone have experience with this kind of request? It seems like a verbal consultation would insert a whole lot of strange grey areas for liability down the road. I've always kept it linear: Contract - Inspection - Verbal Report - Written Report. Just interested in how y'all might respond.To keep things simple, I never do any work for Sellers, period. Don't trust them to do what is right after giving them the info - kinda like some Realtors !!! :eek:

[BridgeMan]

To keep things simple, I never do any work for Sellers, period. Don't trust them to do what is right after giving them the info - kinda like some Realtors !!! :eek:

Meaning that you do trust all of the Buyers you perform inspections for to do "what is right" for the property (instead of just pocketing the cash they were paid to repair the deficiencies)?

Wow--you're a far better judge of character than I will ever be.

[Aaron Miller]

To keep things simple, I never do any work for Sellers, period. :eek:

Agreed. And, if you perform an in-depth inspection which identify lots of issues on a pre-sale you will not gain a client, but rather an enemy.

[John Kogel]

Agreed. And, if you perform an in-depth inspection which identify lots of issues on a pre-sale you will not gain a client, but rather an enemy.Not so. Maybe in your world, but not in mine.

[Raymond Wand]

John,

That has been my experience as well. But, then again we are in Canada, eh?

[Jim Luttrall]

Agreed. And, if you perform an in-depth inspection which identify lots of issues on a pre-sale you will not gain a client, but rather an enemy.
Well maybe not an enemy but a THOROUGH report can at least spoil their day. I typically talk more folks out of having a pre-sale inspection rather than "closing the deal."
It takes a really honest person bent on FULL disclosure to appreciate the process.

[Aaron Miller]

Well maybe not an enemy but a THOROUGH report can at least spoil their day. I typically talk more folks out of having a pre-sale inspection rather than "closing the deal."
It takes a really honest person bent on FULL disclosure to appreciate the process.

Yes. I have talked many sellers out of pre-inspections. It is just a stupid idea. Why do the buyer's job for them? WTF are they thinking?

And yes, it takes a really honest inspector to admit that too.;)

[Jim Hintz]

Meaning that you do trust all of the Buyers you perform inspections for to do "what is right" for the property (instead of just pocketing the cash they were paid to repair the deficiencies)?

Wow--you're a far better judge of character than I will ever be. I don't care what a buyer does, I did my job, got paid, end of story...Buyers are rarely "paid" anything in lieu of repairs. 99.999% of the time, the price gets reduced or the seller fixes the issues or, the buyers walk because there's a $hitload of problems and the seller won't budge. What does a buyer have to gain by lying, and, how could they "invent" more issues than what is in the report?

[Jim Hintz]

Yes. I have talked many sellers out of pre-inspections. It is just a stupid idea. Why do the buyer's job for them? WTF are they thinking?

And yes, it takes a really honest inspector to admit that too.;)You're a smart man Aaron - I talk people out of a pre-sale inspection everytime I'm asked to do one. :)

[John Kogel]

Yes. I have talked many sellers out of pre-inspections. It is just a stupid idea. Why do the buyer's job for them? WTF are they thinking?

And yes, it takes a really honest inspector to admit that too.;)That is just your opinion, in my really honest opinion. And any fool can nod and agree if they feel so inclined. :confused:

I have helped many home owners sell their homes by doing an Honest pre-listing inspection for them.
It tells them how the place will show to a buyer and His inspector.
They can repair or they can disclose or they can ignore, it is up to them.
When they list the property, it is priced according to what was found in the inspection. No surprises, so no under-cutting of the price.
If there is a repair, they can have it done at their price or do it themselves before the buyers even get involved.
Or they can get an estimate and use that to counter the buyer's inflated estimate.
If there is a hazard, or a serious problem, they can deal with it before it becomes a deal-breaker.
With information at hand, the seller can keep the buyer from stalling the sale, which could turn other potential buyers away.

Pre-listing, Seller's Home Inspection in Victoria BC
(http://www.allsafehome.ca/home-selling-inspection.htm)

[Jim Luttrall]

That is just your opinion, in my really honest opinion. And any fool can nod and agree if they feel so inclined. :confused:

I have helped many home owners sell their homes by doing an Honest pre-listing inspection for them.
It tells them how the place will show to a buyer and His inspector.
They can repair or they can disclose or they can ignore, it is up to them.
When they list the property, it is priced according to what was found in the inspection. No surprises, so no under-cutting of the price.
f there is a repair, they can have it done at their price or do it themselves before the buyers even get involved.
If there is a hazard, or a serious problem they can deal with it before it becomes a deal-breaker.

Pre-listing, Seller's Home Inspection in Victoria BC, For Sale By Owner, FSBO home inspector, Southern Vancouver Island (http://www.allsafehome.ca/home-selling-inspection.htm)

Far be it from me to rain on Aaron's parade by stealing the argument; but I don't question the honesty of the inspector or the client doing the pre-listing inspection. I just find when I explain the process of the report, and the sellers choice to fix or disclose every defect I find, then the glow comes off the pumpkin and the reality sets in for the seller. Yes, I have had several pre-listing inspections that were successful for my clients and helped them sell their homes with no surprises BUT it is not for the faint of heart. It is my opinion sellers need to be forewarned of the ramifications before I show up and tell them about all the defects of which they were blissfully ignorant.
It is impossible to un-ring the bell.

[John Kogel]

No problem, Jim. I can see the point, but Aaron's dishonesty remark ruffled my feathers.

Disclose everything. An open inspection report on the table can help sell the house. The buyer doesn't feel a need to bring in his own inspector. And it gives first home buyers confidence to go ahead.

[Aaron Miller]

Aaron's dishonesty remark ruffled my feathers

Whenever opinions differ, as they always do here, feathers will get ruffled. So what? That's just part of having discussions. Buck up and move on. No one will ever agree with everything another says.

What's honest and what's ethical is a very gray area. Everyone has their own ideas regarding this. I have stated mine. Agree or don't agree, I could not care less. I am not attempting to convince you otherwise.

I can argue the other side of this, or any other, issue just as well. I just don't happen to agree with doing pre-sale inspections. In my experience it accomplishes nothing constructive for the seller of the property, is a waste of his money, and puts the seller in an uncomfortable position in more ways than one.

Additionally, the inspector who performs these types of inspections had damn well better be at the very top of his game. If an extremely thorough inspector follows him as the buyer's inspector he might find himself in very hot water. This I have personally experienced on many occasions.:D

[Raymond Wand]

One persons inspection methods or business decisions are going to fit others inspections methods or business decisions.

Its no different then someone suggesting not to post prices on your website, or not to mention repair costs, or do prelisting inspections, unless of course state licencing dictates otherwise.

What works for someone may not work for me, Curly, Larry or Moe.

[Aaron Miller]

An open inspection report on the table can help sell the house. The buyer doesn't feel a need to bring in his own inspector. And it gives first home buyers confidence to go ahead.

Any buyer who would rely on a seller's inspector's report is a fool.

And, did it occur to you that you are espousing the opinion that we need only half as many inspections and inspectors in this market?:)

[Jim Hintz]

[quote=Aaron Miller;209100]Any buyer who would rely on a seller's inspector's report is a fool.

Exactly Aaron. You never know which inspectors are in the proverbial "back-pocket" of a Realtor !

[John Kogel]

Any buyer who would rely on a seller's inspector's report is a fool.

And, did it occur to you that you are espousing the opinion that we need only half as many inspections and inspectors in this market?:)


[quote=Aaron Miller;209100]Any buyer who would rely on a seller's inspector's report is a fool.

Exactly Aaron. You never know which inspectors are in the proverbial "back-pocket" of a Realtor !My contact info is in the report. The buyer can phone me and ask questions if they wish. They rarely do, but it is an option they can choose. On occasion, when too much time has gone by, and from asking questions, it sounded like repairs were not made, I have advised the buyer to have their own inspection done. Not by me.

I'm not afraid of any inspector coming behind me. I provide an honest portrayal of the house with pictures of the hidden areas. Maybe the housing stock is in better shape in my area. Don't be so quick to judge all from your own bad experiences.

And as far as half as many inspectors go, it is you saying that the seller's inspections are redundant.
Seller's pre-listing inspections provide information that makes the sale of a property less stressful for both sides.

[Aaron Miller]

Seller's pre-listing inspections provide information that makes the sale of a property less stressful for both sides

Take another puff.

[John Kogel]

snide remarkWho made you the go-to guy for real estate transactions? What do you know about my market area, and what have you done to promote the home inspection profession in general anywhere?

Pre-listing inspections are not for you, fine, we've established that. Step aside, then.

[Aaron Miller]

Step aside, then.

Consider yourself side-stepped.:D

[Raymond Wand]

Any purchaser who relies solely on a pre-listing inspection done for the vendor is not exercising due diligence if they go through with the purchase.

No two reports will ever be the same whether its a pre-sale inspection or pre-listing inspection.

[Aaron Miller]

Any purchaser who relies solely on a pre-listing inspection done for the vendor is not exercising due diligence if they go through with the purchase.

No two reports will ever be the same whether its a pre-sale inspection or pre-listing inspection.

Agreed.

[John Kogel]

Agreed.Me too.

[Garry Sorrells]

The problem with a buyer accepting the sellers inspection report boils down to who and how good that report is. I ran across something that exemplifies one problem with who does the report. The veracity of the inspector is ultimately at issue. By example. There is someone that promotes marketing strategies and methods. Here is a quote from him.

"If a consumer calls and tells you that the home they are looking to buy is 95 years old... you should tell the caller that you specialize in historic ("heritage for you Canadians) homes and that you'd like to email them your brochure on older homes."

One question that comes to mind is this an exaggeration by the inspector ?
Since the idea is to push the marketing process to the limit. It will cause those with zeal to hedge a lie to get a job.

[Raymond Wand]

Anyone who claims to be an expert and upon further investigation is not, is falsely advertising in my view. They are leaving themselves wide open on the litigation avenue.

There are also ethical inspectors who don't promote false advertising to gain inspections.

[Aaron Miller]

Anyone who claims to be an expert and upon further investigation is not, is falsely advertising in my view. They are leaving themselves wide open on the litigation avenue.

There are also ethical inspectors who don't promote false advertising to gain inspections.

Amen.