Thread: CSA’s new home inspection standard - REM Article

http://www.remonline.com/csas-new-ho...tion-standard/

I assume CSA didn't want to mention that in order to see that new improved standard you have to pay $50!

Similar Threads:

• CSA Standard on Home Inspection is now available for review
• CSA proposed plan to develop a National Standard on Home Inspection Canada
• Proposed ASHI Home Inspection Standard Improvements Presented for Comment
• NAHI's Position on the Creation of a National Standard for Home Inspection

Originally Posted by Raymond Wand

http://www.remonline.com/csas-new-ho...tion-standard/

I assume CSA didn't want to mention that in order to see that new improved standard you have to pay $50!

Thanks!
One phase in the Real Estate marketing A770 advertisement is bewildering though. "Until now, though, there hasn’t been a consistent set of minimum requirements for Canadian home inspectors to follow or for home buyers to compare services."
Still isn't one if you ask me. Just another SOP written by home inspectors using a mixture of associations SOP's from all I can see.

Pst...You think all agents will push the A770, or the standard, "serviceable or appears serviceable report?"
5 will get you 10 the second part of that question gets the push

This whole cost to view stumps me. How is the consumer the benefactor when they can't even see the standards or know what the standards involve without paying! There is no comparison of apples to apples as there is now with the standards, which are free to view.

CSA sure likes to put their spin on it, making sound like it's the reinvention of the wheel!

Originally Posted by Raymond Wand

This whole cost to view stumps me. How is the consumer the benefactor when they can't even see the standards or know what the standards involve without paying! There is no comparison of apples to apples as there is now with the standards, which are free to view.

CSA sure likes to put their spin on it, making sound like it's the reinvention of the wheel!

Raymond, concur.

Mike Holmes did the same thing mouthing off about what he again did not know about, SOP.
MiKe H. voiced his skewed remarks in front of Ontario's provincial government as he fast tracked a home inspection franchise for his son that he first hand profits from.

SOP is SOP so stop blaming associations for their members actions.
From houses to car manufacturers. They set the standards as associations set the SOP standards for their association members. SOP's are so close you have to use a magnifying glass and ten lawyers to see the differences yet many home inspectors pick at little issues as real estate sits back and evades detection to help insure the inspection and sales contract process is skewed from the beginning.
Too bad.
So sad.

Ray, members, I do not mean to get you going but there is only "one association" I know of, that I will leave nameless, that will buy the home back if the inspector failed his inspection duty. Now that is consumer protection.

Has anyone in Ontario or Canada had their home bought back? And is that aspect put in the contract between the home inspector and client?

Somehow this option of a buyback is causing indigestion for me.

Originally Posted by Raymond Wand

Has anyone in Ontario or Canada had their home bought back? And is that aspect put in the contract between the home inspector and client?

You asked the same question about American home buyers.
I think it is being legally hashed out in canadian provinces.

Ray, from what I know, in Quebec I understand Gill Larin is acting on INACHI behalf through on going discussion.
I am sure Gill L. knows how to navigate with the OACIQ and real estate agents.
There should be an answer shortly.
Whatever shortly means is your guess, for it's as good as mine.

As for Ontario, you will have to ask Len Inkster.
You have heard of him haven't you?

Originally Posted by Raymond Wand

Somehow this option of a buyback is causing indigestion for me.

Ray, I understand completely and even sympathise. Consumer protection is my belief as well, Ray.
All I can say is that it really works, no strings, and is much better than the alternative home consumers must go through when problems arise.
Ray, I would not even go there if I thought something was awry.

All the best and thanks for the post.
Your the king mate!

Sorry for the edits members. I am decaf deficient.

Originally Posted by Raymond Wand

And is that aspect put in the contract between the home inspector and client?

Good point!
It depends upon your PIA.
I use NACHI'S for the most part.
If/When buyback guarantee is allowed in Quebec I will be adding a rider in my PIA.

Thanks for asking.
Everything should be clear for consumers.

I wouldn't trust Inkster with the time!

Originally Posted by Raymond Wand

I wouldn't trust Inkster with the time!

Were's all the love?

I am sure Roy feels the same.

Originally Posted by Raymond Wand

I wouldn't trust Inkster with the time!

I know nothing of this "buy back" program discussed on this thread other than what is freely available on the web.

See links below:

From this information, there appears to be a couple of major concerns to the Buy-Back program, for the consumer, as I they appear to me:

1. The program only pays the client the price of the home. all closing costs etc. are omitted from the program, however, the client has to waive ALL rights to sue the Inspector or InterNACHI from ANY form of costs, damages or other claim with respect to the Inspection/Buy-Back.
2. Anything that is missed that is outside of the scope of an inspection (either the InterNACHI SoP or regulated SoP) is outside of the program. Buyers would revert to the natural law for these areas, and by definition, if the Buy-Back program won't buy the home back, the likelihood of a successful case against the Home Inspector is likely to fail too
3. It is time limited to 90 days after closing. If a problem occurs that the inspector missed after that, it's back to the law.
4. Homes that are FSBO are not covered. I have put an email into Nick to find out if homes listed on ComFree (who are technically a licensed real-estate agent), and other cut-price realtors, would be covered.
5. The venue for any litigation arising out of InterNACHI’s Buy Back Program is required to be in Boulder, Colorado, they would waive any right to trial by jury and would have to agree, up front, to pay InterNACHI’s attorney’s fees, expenses, and costs if InterNACHI prevails.

For the inspector it appears, for US$5 per inspection, to be a bloody great marketing tool.

However, in my opinion, it comes with risks.

1. If a claim is put through the inspector, and the inspector has E&O insurance, they will still have to notify their own insurer of the claim.
2. Most Canadian Insurers will not allow third party intervention in a claim, so if the Buy-Back program fails to kick in, the Inspector could be left hanging.
3. While the program is a contract between the Inspector and InterNACHI, and would have to be identified to insurers, the Inspection agreement is between the Inspector and the Client, and the buy-back is a contract between InterNACHI and the client. I am not aware of any case that has ever had such a convoluted legal relationship, spanning multiple legal jurisdictions, that has every been tried in Ontario, or even Canada. This means the first one could be pricey.

And the time at this moment, according to my computer which is fed by the Microsoft time server, is 10:00 AM, EDT.

Thank God you did not mention the time, some would not believe, as for everything else, much thank's, Len.
Maybe, Lisa could provide some relevant information.