Thread: Deal Killer

Just spoke to one of the top agents in the country today. I am officially know as the deal killer, which means I have achieved Jedi status.

Similar Threads:

• What's the deal with NACHI?
• what a "killer" inspection
• Home warranty company sued by AG: The Real Deal - NewsChannel 9 WSYR
• how to deal with phone solicitations
• Home Inspection Kills Another Deal - Inspector Blamed (As Usual)

Congratulations. That term is usually applied by agents who have the most to lose, most often their commission followed by their reputation over the long term.

These guys are really good agents. It's great working with them. It's the new ones that are a pain.

I have lost a few agents due to through reports. I have also gained more for the same reason. I have done three houses for one lady (not an agent but her mother is) in the past two months and I am her hero.....go figure! She has not bought one yet but before it is over she will be able to do a pretty good inspection on her own!

I have a few agents call be Marc kevorkian. I just tell then their houses kill the deal. I'm just the barer of bad news.

I have never killed a deal, but I have seen many homes commit suicide over the years!

Truth be known it is usually the inexperience or poor training of the agent(s) that kill the deal. They do not know how to set the expectations of the seller or for the buyer, in turn the sale falls apart when everyone gets mad at the other party. Sometimes it is a give and take to make the deal work and this includes the agents getting involved and if needed reducing their commission to make the sale work.

Keep in mind that 10% of the agents sell 90% of the homes! Personally I want to deal with that group that are in that 10%. They did not get to that point by having deals fall through because the home needs a new roof or whatever.

The one thing I remember is a post put out here some years ago. Inspectors don't kill the deal, the home does.

Any inspector representing their client in good conscience will call out the problems required by their personal code of ethics.

I am going to get some shirts printed up. Any thoughts on what to put on them. I like the one, I don't kill deals the home does

We are thorough but not Jack kevorkian.

Originally Posted by mathew stouffer

I am going to get some shirts printed up. Any thoughts on what to put on them. I like the one, I don't kill deals the home does

If the real estate agent says its OK
Then its OK With me

Best

Ron

MAT

top agent in the country??? is that what they advertise? and is that what you really think??? just do your job and they will be back, after they find the the not best inspector in the country. homes kill deals not inspectors

cvf

Charlie,
They are one of the top agents. And we get along very well, they were just busting my balls. I like working with esstablished agents becasue they do care if a deal or two falls apart.

Originally Posted by mathew stouffer

I am going to get some shirts printed up. Any thoughts on what to put on them.

CSI
Who killed
the house?

Or

CSI
Can houses
commit suicide?

Is the opposite of a "Deal Killer," a "Deal Saver?"

Most of my client's are more than willing to continue with a deal. If a deal dies, it is usually the seller that is stubborn.

I do not depend upon agents for referrals. I am very happy not to be beholding to anyone. Most of my agent referrals are for their family members.

You guys are absolutely correct. The house kills the deal...not the inspector. All my work is by referral with few exceptions. The Realtors I deal with know that I am protecting THEIR client. They also know it is their job to make the deal work. The Realtors appreciate the fact that I tell it like it is putting the issues into context. If I didn't report something and the buyers have to deal with an issue after the closing, the buyers will ticked at me and the Realtor.

The inspections where the house "committed suicide", every client called me for their next inspection. I had one Realtor who does a lot of investment properties for clients tell me, "The day you are not doing my inspections is the day I'm at your funeral". I had to laugh. I asked him " Is that a compliment or a threat?" LOL Just did a 7200 sq ft house for his brother. Listed @ 975k....7 bathrooms....geez.

Kevorkian Inspections: "We've never killed a deal that didn't want to die".

Agents just HATE IT when I pull my thermal-infra-inertia-sub-atomic transaction terminator out of my bag:

"I push the black button, hold it down for 10 seconds, wait for the red light to flash twice, then push the red button, AND YOUR DEAL DIES!"

When dealing with real estate agents, you are only as good as your last report. Kill the deal lose the agent.

Bryce Jeffrey

I have had my clients NOT buy a house, and the Realtors still give my name out.
I have had a client not buy a house because the appraisal came in too low, and the Realtor took me off their "list of three".
It doesn't matter either way, since most of my business come from referrals from past clients.
While its nice when a Realtor refers me, I don't count on it for my business, nor change anything I do in my inspection process, or report findings.

Realtors come and go like flies on shirt.
It's the clients that are going to put a curse on you and your family if you missed a spot.

Originally Posted by mathew stouffer

Just spoke to one of the top agents in the country today. I am officially know as the deal killer, which means I have achieved Jedi status.

You've posted some example of those suicidal homes here. They deserved to die.

The scary thing is that the repairs never get done, someone out there eventually buys that POS and the seller and his realtor get a sweet deal.

Around here the term "deal killer" generally refers to inspectors who #1 incorrectly call out problems or #2 grandstand. By grandstanding I mean those inspectors who make a huge deal out of the littlest issues just to make themselves look good and the house bad.

As an inspector it's our job to be an impartial third party. Yes, I'll call out every issue but I stick to the facts and keep my opinions to myself. At nearly every inspection the client will ask, "Why do you think they did the _____ (insert wiring, plumbing, roof etc) wrong". My standard answer is, "I don't know, I wasn't the one who did it". I will not say because the person who did it was stupid, or didn't have a clue as to what they were doing. My clients will never see me act as if the house repulses me (even if it does). My inspections generally end with the clients begging me to give an overall opinion of the house or asking the question, "Would you buy this house". My standard answer is, "Everything in the home can be repaired. Heck, the house could even be turned into a three story apartment building for the right amount of money. There's a reason you chose this one as I'm sure this isn't the only house you looked at. No matter what house I inspect for you I'm going to find issues. They may be better or worse. There's no such thing as a perfect house, not even new construction. Take the time to read my report thoroughly and get estimates for the repairs needed before you make your decision."

In South Florida the real estate agents called inspectors who did a thorough inspection and actually found things of significance "deal killers", they liked the inspectors who rarely, or never, found things of significance.

Thus the house committed suicide, the inspector did not kill it.

We are not deal "killers", we are:

Post Mortem Inspections

Originally Posted by Jack Feldmann

While its nice when a Realtor refers me, I don't count on it for my business, nor change anything I do in my inspection process, or report findings.

Same here. I appreciate the referrals but I don't count on them.

Bearers of bad news

Originally Posted by Ken Rowe

My clients will never see me act as if the house repulses me (even if it does). "

I sometimes have a hard time doing this. I see too much crap and crap work to completely repress my disgust when some sellers try to cover up issues and pass them on to somebody else.

Originally Posted by Nick Ostrowski

I sometimes have a hard time doing this. I see too much crap and crap work to completely repress my disgust when some sellers try to cover up issues and pass them on to somebody else.

What good does it do you or the client for you to express disgust over a house they have chosen to purchase? The only thing I can think of that it may do is make your clients look foolish for choosing that home while making yourself look like a hero on their eyes. We're not there to do that. In fact, we're not there to influence the purchase of the house one way or another. We're there to inform the clients about the home they are purchasing.

Originally Posted by Ken Rowe

What good does it do you or the client for you to express disgust over a house they have chosen to purchase? The only thing I can think of that it may do is make your clients look foolish for choosing that home while making yourself look like a hero on their eyes. We're not there to do that. In fact, we're not there to influence the purchase of the house one way or another. We're there to inform the clients about the home they are purchasing.

.
If The Sellers and or Listing Agent is Not Disclosing Known Issues then My Client Needs to be Aware ( this is a Truthful Issue. )
* they haven't chosen to purchase yet.
.
If They are Deceiving , How can You Trust Them ?
* not influencing just reveling The Facts.
.

Ditto Ken Rowes posts.

Originally Posted by Billy Stephens

.
If The Sellers and or Listing Agent is Not Disclosing Known Issues then My Client Needs to be Aware ( this is a Truthful Issue. )
* they haven't chosen to purchase yet.


.
If They are Deceiving , How can You Trust Them ?
* not influencing just reveling The Facts.
.

Here in MN I generally do inspections AFTER the buyer has chosen to purchase the home. They've already signed a purchase agreement contingent on the inspection. I agree the client needs to be aware and it's our job to point out the issues and give advice.

What does it really matter what the disclosure says? Will that change your report? If the disclosure says they've never had a wet basement but you see evidence of it, so what. I'm going to tell the clients about the issue and give them advise on how to correct it. I won't grandstand and say, "The sellers should have disclosed this". At that point, who really cares?

As home inspectors our job is to inspect and report on the home. It is our client's agent who is responsible for protecting the client from untruthful sellers or listing agents. That's what they're paid their commission for. Here in MN real estate agents are licensed. I don't hold a real estate license. I'm a home inspector. That's exactly why many agents and inspectors don't get along. We don't want them doing our job and we have no business doing theirs.

Originally Posted by Ken Rowe

Here in MN I generally do inspections AFTER the buyer has chosen to purchase the home. They've already signed a purchase agreement contingent on the inspection. I agree the client needs to be aware and it's our job to point out the issues and give advice.

What does it really matter what the disclosure says? Will that change your report? If the disclosure says they've never had a wet basement but you see evidence of it, so what. I'm going to tell the clients about the issue and give them advise on how to correct it. I won't grandstand and say, "The sellers should have disclosed this". At that point, who really cares?

As home inspectors our job is to inspect and report on the home.

It is our client's agent who is responsible for protecting the client from untruthful sellers or listing agents.

That's what they're paid their commission for. Here in MN real estate agents are licensed. I don't hold a real estate license. I'm a home inspector. That's exactly why many agents and inspectors don't get along. We don't want them doing our job and we have no business doing theirs.

.
Now That's So Cute.
* neither one gets paid until The Deal Is Done. ( usually the same Seller & Buyers Agent.
** If we don't speak up for our client then we are enabling the fraud.
*** Gosh one of them Agents Might call us a Name.
**** or worse not refer us to their next victim.
.

Originally Posted by Ken Rowe

Here in MN I generally do inspections AFTER the buyer has chosen to purchase the home. They've already signed a purchase agreement contingent on the inspection. I agree the client needs to be aware and it's our job to point out the issues and give advice.

What does it really matter what the disclosure says?

What does it matter what the disclosure says?

Why EVERYTHING ... the buyer made their choice BASED, in part, ON WHAT WAS (or should I say WAS NOT) DISCLOSED.

Will that change your report?

No, but it may very well have changed they buyers mind BEFORE THE HAD TO SPEND MORE MONEY for an inspection.

As home inspectors our job is to inspect and report on the home.

Yep, and to TELL IT LIKE IT IS, and NOT SUGAR COAT IT either. If the house stinks, say so - get some guts and stick up for the person you are working for ... er ... maybe I should be more clear for you ... for your client ... er ... maybe even more clear than that ... for THE BUYER (presuming the buyer is the one who hired you and not the agent or the seller).

It is our client's agent who is responsible for protecting the client from untruthful sellers or listing agents.

Horse hockey.

The HOME INSPECTOR is the last line of defense for the buyer, the home inspectors client, from the agents and the seller.

That's what they're paid their commission for.

No they don't. They don't get ANYTHING when they do that. They only get their commission when the deal goes through, protecting the buyer from bad agents and sellers does not make the deal go through, it makes deals fall apart, and when a deal falls apart the commission evaporates with the smoke ... think man, think ... to get their commission THEY DEAL MUST GO THROUGH.

Man, there has been a LOT of horse hockey in some of the posts above!

Originally Posted by Billy Stephens

.
Now That's So Cute.
* neither one gets paid until The Deal Is Done. ( usually the same Seller & Buyers Agent.
** If we don't speak up for our client then we are enabling the fraud.
*** Gosh one of them Agents Might call us a Name.
**** or worse not refer us to their next victim.
.

What fraud?

Originally Posted by Ken Rowe

.
What fraud?

.
Gosh Ken,

If Your Selling ( or Assisting ) ( Enabling ) in a Known Defective Product that is not Properly Described ( Real estate calls it Disclosure ) then You are defrauding the Person or Persons that are Buying the misrepresented goods.

* no matter how you sugar coat it.
.

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

What does it matter what the disclosure says?

Why EVERYTHING ... the buyer made their choice BASED, in part, ON WHAT WAS (or should I say WAS NOT) DISCLOSED.



No, but it may very well have changed they buyers mind BEFORE THE HAD TO SPEND MORE MONEY for an inspection.

Apparently you should get your real estate license, since that's the profession you're trying to perform.

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

Yep, and to TELL IT LIKE IT IS, and NOT SUGAR COAT IT either. If the house stinks, say so - get some guts and stick up for the person you are working for ... er ... maybe I should be more clear for you ... for your client ... er ... maybe even more clear than that ... for THE BUYER (presuming the buyer is the one who hired you and not the agent or the seller).

If the house "stinks" I'm sure the client can smell it already. Unless you're talking figuratively then "stinks" is your opinion. What you see as a big problem, they may not. So while you're grandstanding about how, in your opinion, the house "stinks" because of a severe foundation issue and telling them not to buy it, they're thinking, "What a tool" since they're getting the home for $90,000 under value and their father owns a foundation company and they already planned for repairs.

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

Horse hockey.

The HOME INSPECTOR is the last line of defense for the buyer, the home inspectors client, from the agents and the seller.

Wow, you really think a lot of yourself. It's attitudes like this that give home inspectors a bad name.

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

No they don't. They don't get ANYTHING when they do that. They only get their commission when the deal goes through, protecting the buyer from bad agents and sellers does not make the deal go through, it makes deals fall apart, and when a deal falls apart the commission evaporates with the smoke ... think man, think ... to get their commission THEY DEAL MUST GO THROUGH.

Man, there has been a LOT of horse hockey in some of the posts above!

Finally I agree with something you've said there is a lot of horse hockey in some of the posts above.

Originally Posted by Ken Rowe

It's attitudes like this that give home inspectors a bad name.

What gives home inspectors a bad name are those who are mamby-bamby and post 'feel-good' sayings like you have been prone to do, and continue to do, and all the bull-crappy which you lay down trying to justify your 'protect-the-deal' attitude and posts.

THAT is what gives home inspectors a bad name.

Jerry,

I started in the real estate business as a mortgage loan officer in 1972, after two years I became a licensed real estate agent, in 1978 I entered the trades and became a licensed builder/remodeling contractor, in 2005 I joined the ranks of a full time home inspector.

I state the above to illustrate that having been on all sides of a real estate transaction you learn what might be on a buyers mind. Its been my experience that when a buyer makes an offer he/she is aware of the disclosure statement information. The disclosure statement information is NOT as you state, "everything" it is only part of the buying making decision. Our clients are relying on their home inspector to give them an evaluation of the property they want to buy. Our job as Ken Rowe says is to disregard the disclosure and inform the buyer of the conditions as we observe them.

By the way, I didn't catch where Ken Rowe says to "sugar coat it" as you state.

Where did you get the notion that it is our job to protect the buyer? Our job is to report our findings, letting the chips fall where they may. We report, the buyer decides.
How many times does a buyer proceed with a purchase of a property that you or I would run, not walk away from? Even after we have informed and explained to them the extent of our findings? Most of them will proceed against our silent non stated wishes. Who knows the reason why? Again, we report honestly. The buyer will do what the buyer will do.

Maybe the real estate agents you have encountered are more concerned with their commission. Most of the agents I work with want me to fully disclose any issues that I find without regard to how it impacts the buyers decision.

Derek Lewis

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

What gives home inspectors a bad name are those who are mamby-bamby and post 'feel-good' sayings like you have been prone to do, and continue to do, and all the bull-crappy which you lay down trying to justify your 'protect-the-deal' attitude and posts.

THAT is what gives home inspectors a bad name.

Where have I said anywhere that I try to "protect-the-deal"? I neither try to protect the deal, nor stop the deal. In fact, I really don't care if the deal goes through or not and normally have no idea if the purchase went through unless I end up doing another inspection for the client. As I've said before, I remain impartial, stick to the facts and don't offer opinions which I'm not remotely qualified to give.

In general I meet my clients for the first time at the inspection. I don't know their background, financial status or anything unless they offer that information at the inspection. I have no idea what they're paying for the house or what the value is and it's really none of my business. How on earth would I even be remotely qualified to tell them to buy the house or not to buy the house?


Dereck, I agree with everything you've said.

Originally Posted by Ken Rowe

Dereck, I agree with everything you've said.

.
.
More Positive Input for the Public Benefits of HI Licensing.
.

Originally Posted by Derek Lewis

Its been my experience that when a buyer makes an offer he/she is aware of the disclosure statement information.

Yep, and when the disclosure states "no" in all the places, that is ...

The disclosure statement information is NOT as you state, "everything" it is only part of the buying making decision.

Derek, you really need to read what is written and not try to change it to reflect what you are trying to say, here, I will highlight it in bold read larger text for you:

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

What does it matter what the disclosure says?

Why EVERYTHING ... the buyer made their choice BASED, in part, ON WHAT WAS (or should I say WAS NOT) DISCLOSED.

Before you go off half-cocked and try to go against what someone said, you really need to read what was said, understand what was said, then address what was said, not what you skimmed through and wanted it to say.

By the way, Ken was what difference the disclosure makes, I said EVERYTHING, and it does. If the seller had disclosed the bad roof, the bad foundation, the bad whatever, the buyer MAY still have wanted the house, but not at anywhere near market price. Ken was raising the 'well they were getting it cheaper' reasoning and NO ONE SAID ANYTHING ABOUT GETTING IT CHEAPER, we are talking general, typical, purchases, not buying a fixer-upper-at-reduced-cost.

The disclose makes ALL the difference, and, as I said, the disclosure is, IN PART, on what they base their decision.

The home inspectors job is not to sugar coat anything, it is the home inspectors job to INSPECT THE HOUSE AND FIND ANYTHING AND EVERYTHING THEY SEE OR SUSPECT (based on what they see, smell, hear, feel, etc.). It is those findings which the client then uses to proceeded, or not proceed, with the deal.

Are you and Ken just not paying attention to what is being said, or is it your thoughts that home inspectors are not really to inspect for much? I know some inspectors who feel it is there job to NOT inspect for much, and "be fair to the house" and "be non-alarming" ... whatever happened to "being fair to the client" and "telling it like it is"?

I inspected a house last month that was built on the top of a hill and had
about 30 steps from the parking area at the bottom of the hill to the house on the top of the hill. This was the only way to get to the house. The buyer kept asking me would I buy the house. I kept putting her off but at the end of the inspection she asked me one more time would I buy the house if I was her. This time I told her no. She was shocked and asked me why not. I told her that those steps would get old after a few days. She said she liked the privacy the steps provided and didn't bother her. She then understood why my opinion about her buying the house did not mean a thing as long as she liked the house. I had already told her this about five times but it took an example for her to understand and stop asking.

(The steps need a handrail I would think)

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

By the way, Ken was what difference the disclosure makes, I said EVERYTHING, and it does. If the seller had disclosed the bad roof, the bad foundation, the bad whatever, the buyer MAY still have wanted the house, but not at anywhere near market price. Ken was raising the 'well they were getting it cheaper' reasoning and NO ONE SAID ANYTHING ABOUT GETTING IT CHEAPER, we are talking general, typical, purchases, not buying a fixer-upper-at-reduced-cost.

Jerry, "Before you go off half-cocked and try to go against what someone said, you really need to read what was said, understand what was said, then address what was said, not what you skimmed through and wanted it to say."

You really need to practice what you preach.

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

The disclose makes ALL the difference, and, as I said, the disclosure is, IN PART, on what they base their decision.

What I've previously said was, "What does it really matter what the disclosure says? Will that change your report?" So what you've done is conveniently taken one sentence and changed it's meaning by taking it out of context. My contention is the disclosure has nothing to do with the inspection, the report, or what you put in the report.

To give another example, a inspector checks the oven and finds it does not work. They tell the client and the client says, "Yah I know, it was on the disclosure". Me personally, I still write it up even though the client claims to already know about it. It does not matter to me what the disclosure says.

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

The home inspectors job is not to sugar coat anything, it is the home inspectors job to INSPECT THE HOUSE AND FIND ANYTHING AND EVERYTHING THEY SEE OR SUSPECT (based on what they see, smell, hear, feel, etc.). It is those findings which the client then uses to proceeded, or not proceed, with the deal.

Yes, I agree. I notice you did not say it was the inspectors job to offer opinions, which is what you've argued previously.

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

If the house stinks, say so...

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

Are you and Ken just not paying attention to what is being said, or is it your thoughts that home inspectors are not really to inspect for much? I know some inspectors who feel it is there job to NOT inspect for much, and "be fair to the house" and "be non-alarming" ... whatever happened to "being fair to the client" and "telling it like it is"?

Nobody here has said anything remotely close to "home inspectors are not really to inspect for much". You really need to start actually reading what's been written here.

I have no clue what, "be fair to the house" means. But, I can address the "be non-alarming" comment.

I've been around awhile. I've done a lot of inspections. I've seen just about everything. Nothing really surprises me or alarms me anymore. I could see a much less experienced inspector being alarmed over something they come across for the first time and transferring that inexperience to their clients. The seasoned inspectors aren't going to do this because they've seen the same thing 100 times before. Being an alarmist doesn't do anyone any good whatsoever. Simply point out the problem and have them get estimates for the repairs. The client and their agent can discuss what avenue they want to pursue. Maybe the seller will fix it, maybe they'll do a price reduction, maybe the buyer will walk. It doesn't matter to me. Why alarm the client into walking from the purchase? Is it so you can make more money by doing another inspection for them?

Doesn't happen often, but I agree with Jerry on all points.

To the issue of disregarding the seller's disclosure; I think that would be irresponsible. Assuming that Mn and Mi inspections are also visual, nondestructive, non invasive inspections, why would you even start an Inspection without reading the disclosure or notifying your Client that you were not provided a disclosure?

Both Derick and Ken are correct in wanting to report their findings sans melodrama, but IMHO neither understands that they are being paid by the Buyer and therefore have a responsibility to protect the interests of that Client. The usual buyer is not experienced in building science. They hire us (at least those of us who charge appropriately and inspect beyond the State required minimum ) with the understanding that we will record and report what we find and interpret for them what the whole body of the report means in terms of their intended investment.

I've got news for you all. The minute a purchaser hires YOU the SPIS or vendor disclosure becomes moot (absent of fraud of course) and YOU the inspector assumes responsibility to the purchaser for ensuring an accurate and thorough inspection, and it will be YOU sued by the purchaser regardless of the SPIS, absent of fraud by the vendor on the SPIS.

Never ever rely on a SPIS from a vendor.

Originally Posted by John Kogel

Realtors come and go like flies on shirt.
It's the clients that are going to put a curse on you and your family if you missed a spot.

I like That!

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

By the way, Ken was what difference the disclosure makes, I said EVERYTHING, and it does. If the seller had disclosed the bad roof, the bad foundation, the bad whatever, the buyer MAY still have wanted the house, but not at anywhere near market price. Ken was raising the 'well they were getting it cheaper' reasoning and NO ONE SAID ANYTHING ABOUT GETTING IT CHEAPER, we are talking general, typical, purchases, not buying a fixer-upper-at-reduced-cost.

The disclose makes ALL the difference, and, as I said, the disclosure is, IN PART, on what they base their decision.

As an INSPECTOR (this comment to Ken too) do you REALLY care what has been disclosed? Your job is to provide a INDEPENDENT report on the condition of the structure, not to agree or disagree with what has been disclosed in another document. As a BUYER I would look at both documents as sources of information on the structure and would demand that each document not be tainted by the other. In this way I could make an informed decision to buy or not to buy. Ken, who cares if they negotiate a cheaper price based upon your report? Not your job.

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

The home inspectors job is not to sugar coat anything, it is the home inspectors job to INSPECT THE HOUSE AND FIND ANYTHING AND EVERYTHING THEY SEE OR SUSPECT (based on what they see, smell, hear, feel, etc.). It is those findings which the client then uses to proceeded, or not proceed, with the deal.

I agree wholeheartedly.

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

Are you and Ken just not paying attention to what is being said, or is it your thoughts that home inspectors are not really to inspect for much? I know some inspectors who feel it is there job to NOT inspect for much, and "be fair to the house" and "be non-alarming" ... whatever happened to "being fair to the client" and "telling it like it is"?

I don't understand your comment ".... home inspectors are not really to inspect for much?" Do you mean that HIs don't inspect much, don't get paid much, or what?

Originally Posted by Rich Goeken

As an INSPECTOR (this comment to Ken too) do you REALLY care what has been disclosed? Your job is to provide a INDEPENDENT report on the condition of the structure, not to agree or disagree with what has been disclosed in another document. As a BUYER I would look at both documents as sources of information on the structure and would demand that each document not be tainted by the other. In this way I could make an informed decision to buy or not to buy. Ken, who cares if they negotiate a cheaper price based upon your report? Not your job.

As I previously stated. I don't care whats been disclosed. In fact, most of the time I never see a disclosure. As I've previously stated, I don't care what, if anything, they negotiate with the seller after the inspection. It's none of my business and I generally don't know whats happened unless I end up doing another inspection for the client.

Originally Posted by Thom Walker

Doesn't happen often, but I agree with Jerry on all points.

To the issue of disregarding the seller's disclosure; I think that would be irresponsible. Assuming that Mn and Mi inspections are also visual, nondestructive, non invasive inspections, why would you even start an Inspection without reading the disclosure or notifying your Client that you were not provided a disclosure?

Because there is seldom a disclosure at the home and MN disclosure law does not provide for inspectors to be supplied with the disclosure therefore I have no right to even ask for it.

Originally Posted by Thom Walker

Both Derick and Ken are correct in wanting to report their findings sans melodrama, but IMHO neither understands that they are being paid by the Buyer and therefore have a responsibility to protect the interests of that Client. The usual buyer is not experienced in building science. They hire us (at least those of us who charge appropriately and inspect beyond the State required minimum ) with the understanding that we will record and report what we find and interpret for them what the whole body of the report means in terms of their intended investment.

I agree with much of what you're saying except it is not our "responsibility to protect the interests of that Client".

In order to protect the interest of the client we would need to sit down with them and find out what their interests are. Find out where they work, if they want to bike to work, carpool etc. Do they want to live near family or friends, do they want to be in an up and coming neighborhood. What are their financials like. Can they afford the taxes on the property. Can they afford the upkeep of the home. This is the job of their real estate agent. The person they have hired to represent them in the real estate transaction. The person they have given financial statements to. The person who has assisted them in locating a home in their preferred neighborhood. The person who is going to negotiate the transaction. A clients interests in a real estate transaction goes well beyond the condition of the home and there is no way a home inspector can address anything other than the condition of the home.

Originally Posted by Ken Rowe

What good does it do you or the client for you to express disgust over a house they have chosen to purchase? The only thing I can think of that it may do is make your clients look foolish for choosing that home while making yourself look like a hero on their eyes. We're not there to do that. In fact, we're not there to influence the purchase of the house one way or another. We're there to inform the clients about the home they are purchasing.

I'm there to give my opinion Ken and that's what I'm being paid for. If my opinion is that somebody did crap work, then that's my opinion. I often find myself using report verbiage like "improper and unprofessional repairs noted to ...........". Sometimes there's no other way to put it. If I see a house that is lacking in quality, thought, and care during the construction phases and has been built in a manner that poses safety hazards to anybody living in that house, I say so.

If you want to do flatline inspections, have at it. I'm not a robot.

Originally Posted by Nick Ostrowski

I'm there to give my opinion Ken and that's what I'm being paid for. If my opinion is that somebody did crap work, then that's my opinion. I often find myself using report verbiage like "improper and unprofessional repairs noted to ...........". Sometimes there's no other way to put it. If I see a house that is lacking in quality, thought, and care during the construction phases and has been built in a manner that poses safety hazards to anybody living in that house, I say so.

If you want to do flatline inspections, have at it. I'm not a robot.

Your contradicting yourself. If you write in your report, "somebody did crap work", that's an opinion. If you write, "improper and unprofessional repairs", that's not an opinion. Or, do you write, "improper and unprofessional repairs", but turn around to your clients and say, "somebody did crap work". That's grandstanding and being an alarmist and extremely unprofessional.

Originally Posted by Ken Rowe

.
That's grandstanding and being an alarmist and extremely unprofessional.

.
Plus You Might Upset " The Agents. " Client.
* can't be having that now can We Ken.
.

Ken, there is really no other way of saying it. If you are looking at drywall reapirs and it is crap work then it is crap work. If you see in ther attic that ceiling drywall has been replaced and new wire connections are not in junction boxes and the insulation was just pushed aside and never replaced properly and and and and .....there is no other way of saying that the work performed is very unprofessional and extensive work needs to be done to get it right...Is that not saying it is crap work. That is not grand standing. That is telling folks that things were not done correctly and they need a real contractor to finish the job and correct what is wrong.

If I walk into an absolute dump I am not turning to my clients and saying "Folks, you really picked an absolute dump to buy." That is a whole other story. I will tell them that I am not getting into fine detail as they can see the home needs updating. I am just reporting on the major items and throughout my report I will make notes as to the dump home nicely as again, anyone can see it is a dump. I am not going to insult folks for their choice in homes to think about buying. In these cases they know and are willing to buy this dump and slowly fix it over time and or they just cannot afford anything else and have to start somewhere.

There are ways of being direct with out being insulating and also noting things in the report accurately but brief as a blind man can see the filth and updating and cleaning and and and and. I would never insulat a client..........well..I may have just once or twice....on purpose......Somethings just cannot be held back...if yu know what I mean.

Originally Posted by James Duffin

I inspected a house last month that was built on the top of a hill and had
about 30 steps from the parking area at the bottom of the hill to the house on the top of the hill. This was the only way to get to the house. The buyer kept asking me would I buy the house. I kept putting her off but at the end of the inspection she asked me one more time would I buy the house if I was her. This time I told her no. She was shocked and asked me why not. I told her that those steps would get old after a few days. She said she liked the privacy the steps provided and didn't bother her. She then understood why my opinion about her buying the house did not mean a thing as long as she liked the house. I had already told her this about five times but it took an example for her to understand and stop asking.

(The steps need a handrail I would think)

James, I wish I had a dollar for every time a client asked my personal opinion. Most of the time, especially with all the jacked-up foreclosures and crappy re-habs, they wouldn't want it anyway. Somehow if I were to say something, and if it's something they didn't expect or want to hear, they usually go to back their agent, totally distorting and mixing up your words and what I said. Out here in CA, these agents would go crazy if I uttered anything other than the issues. Matter of fact, they go crazy even over that...

I Like! I am a clients dream and a sellers Nightmare.
Want that on a "T" shirt.

Originally Posted by Ted Menelly

Ken, there is really no other way of saying it. If you are looking at drywall reapirs and it is crap work then it is crap work. If you see in ther attic that ceiling drywall has been replaced and new wire connections are not in junction boxes and the insulation was just pushed aside and never replaced properly and and and and .....there is no other way of saying that the work performed is very unprofessional and extensive work needs to be done to get it right...Is that not saying it is crap work. That is not grand standing. That is telling folks that things were not done correctly and they need a real contractor to finish the job and correct what is wrong.

If I walk into an absolute dump I am not turning to my clients and saying "Folks, you really picked an absolute dump to buy." That is a whole other story. I will tell them that I am not getting into fine detail as they can see the home needs updating. I am just reporting on the major items and throughout my report I will make notes as to the dump home nicely as again, anyone can see it is a dump. I am not going to insult folks for their choice in homes to think about buying. In these cases they know and are willing to buy this dump and slowly fix it over time and or they just cannot afford anything else and have to start somewhere.

There are ways of being direct with out being insulating and also noting things in the report accurately but brief as a blind man can see the filth and updating and cleaning and and and and. I would never insulat a client..........well..I may have just once or twice....on purpose......Somethings just cannot be held back...if yu know what I mean.

Ted, Do you actually write in your report, "The drywall has been repaired and it is crap work"? You must since you state, "there is really no other way of saying it".

I would be willing to bet that you don't actually use the word "crap" in your reports and never have. I would also be willing to bet that your written reports and findings are made up actually findings and facts and not based on opinions. Why would you make a report based on facts but verbally give your clients derogatory verbal opinions?

Others have stated here that agents only get paid if the house sells. Well, inspectors only get paid if they do an inspection. Can I assume that by offering derogatory opinions to the clients is an attempt to get them to walk away from the house so the inspector can charge them for another inspection on another home? I really doubt it. Just like most of the agents I know really want a good house for their client. Not a sham inspection so they can get paid. As both you and I know we can be both honest and truthful on the inspection report. So please explain what good it does to offer your clients derogatory opinions of the home?

Originally Posted by Billy Stephens

.
Plus You Might Upset " The Agents. " Client.
* can't be having that now can We Ken.
.

Nice of you to put words in my mouth. Please quote anywhere where I've said I was worried about upsetting the agent. Do you make up things on your inspection reports also, or do you only do it online?

You're so worried about how other inspectors operate their business, that you can't see for forest for the trees. Do you realize that if you put opinions in your report or give opinions to the clients that a reasonable person would interpret as detrimental to the transaction, you can be held financially liable? Why do you think most state and ASHI standards strictly forbid this practice?

Originally Posted by Ted Menelly

There are ways of being direct with out being insulating . . . I would never insulat a client..........well..I may have just once or twice....on purpose......Somethings just cannot be held back...if yu know what I mean.

I would never insulate a client, either. Fiberglass insulation is ITCHY!

ALL

when will you learn to put Ken on the ignore list. i have,but can see that he has posted 12 times to this thread. GLAD I CAN'T READ HIS BRAGGING KNOW IT ALL RANTS and from all your responces indicates he is the blow hole know it all again. today he posted at 8am, 11am,,2pm and who knows when again. this is the guy who claims to do so many inspection a week a year a decade, guess maybe he is only the desk guy.go back and check his bragging on the number of inspections he does.

IGNORE

CVF

I have told people not to buy a particular house when they asked me because they were getting in over their heads financially due to the findings.

Tortious interference?

I liked to see that fly on a foreclosed home that is in a bad state of repair and dependent on the wording of the purchase agreement as per the purchaser and his right to contract with the inspector independent of the Realtor and the purchasers need to excercise due diligence.

Summary judgment proof conclusively establishing appellees' defense of privilege.

The elements of tortious interference with contract are (1) the existence of a contract subject to interference; (2) the occurrence of an act of interference that was willful and intentional; (3) the act was a proximate cause of the claimant's damage; and (4) actual damage or loss occurred. Baty v. Protech Ins. Agency, 63 S.W.3d 841, 856-57 (Tex. App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2001, pet. denied) (citing Powell Indus., Inc. v. Allen, 985
S.W.2d 455, 456 (Tex. 1998)). Even if the plaintiff establishes all the elements of a claim for tortious interference with a contract, the defendant may avoid liability if it establishes the elements of the defense of justification. Id. at 857 (citing Prudential Ins. Co. of Am. v. Fin. Review Servs., Inc., 29 S.W.3d 74, 77-78 (Tex. 2000)). "[T]he justification defense can be based on the exercise of either (1) one's own legal rights or (2) a good-faith claim to a colorable legal right, even though that claim ultimately proves to be mistaken." Fin. Review Servs., 29 S.W.3d at 80. If a trial court finds as a matter of law the defendant had a legal right to interfere with a contract, the defendant has conclusively established the justification defense, and the motive is irrelevant. Id.

Tortious interference with prospective business relations

This court has previously outlined the apparent requirements to succeed on a claim for tortious interference with a prospective business relationship:

(1) a reasonable probability that the plaintiff would have entered into a business relationship;
(2) an independently tortious or unlawful act by the defendant that prevented the relationship from occurring;
(3) the defendant did such act with a conscious desire to prevent the relationship from occurring or the defendant knew the interference was certain or substantially certain to occur as a result of the conduct; and
(4) the plaintiff suffered actual harm or damages as a result of the defendant's interference.

Originally Posted by Ken Rowe

.
Nice of you to put words in my mouth.

.
No Need, Your Doing Great With Your Non Alarmist, Be Fair to The House, The Client Has Someone Else To Look Out For Them Attitude.
.

Originally Posted by CHARLIE VAN FLEET

ALL

when will you learn to put Ken on the ignore list. i have,but can see that he has posted 12 times to this thread. GLAD I CAN'T READ HIS BRAGGING KNOW IT ALL RANTS and from all your responces indicates he is the blow hole know it all again. today he posted at 8am, 11am,,2pm and who knows when again. this is the guy who claims to do so many inspection a week a year a decade, guess maybe he is only the desk guy.go back and check his bragging on the number of inspections he does.

IGNORE

CVF

I love it. Ignore my posts but respond without having a clue what I'm saying. It's really strange how inspectors, who should be sticklers when it comes to facts, really tend to exaggerate and misquote. I do approximately 300 inspections per year. Have so for the past 4 years. It's not bragging at all. It's a fact. We have inspectors in the company who do over 500 a year. It's not me, anymore. It's not bragging, it's a fact. Today was an office day. Spreadsheets and vendor contracts.

Originally Posted by Raymond Wand

I have told people not to buy a particular house when they asked me because they were getting in over their heads financially due to the findings.

Tortious interference?

I liked to see that fly on a foreclosed home that is in a bad state of repair and dependent on the wording of the purchase agreement as per the purchaser and his right to contract with the inspector independent of the Realtor and the purchasers need to excercise due diligence.

Raymond, How exactly did you know what your client's financial status was? Do you have them bring financial statements with them to the inspection? Lenders don't take peoples word as gospel as to their finances. So you must have them bring their portfolio with them? I doubt it. Most home inspectors are barely qualified to inspect homes let alone financial planning.

What would be your liability if the home wasn't foreclosed as most transaction in the past decade?

Originally Posted by Billy Stephens

.
No Need, Your Doing Great With Your Non Alarmist, Be Fair to The House, The Client Has Someone Else To Look Out For Them Attitude.
.

Please explain, what does "be fair to the house" mean? How can someone be fair to an inanimate object?

Originally Posted by Ken Rowe

.
Please explain, what does "be fair to the house" mean? How can someone be fair to an inanimate object?

.
One Of Your Real Estate Proteges Will be Happy to Explain.
.