Inspection contracts...

Joseph Farsetta · 09-28-2009, 07:31 PM

DID YOU KNOW...

...that it is important to have a client sign your home inspection agreement PRIOR to the start of the inspection? It's true. In fact, it is a best practice to make your client aware of your written contract, and to try and provide a copy to the client for review 48-hours in ADVANCE of the inspection time and date. Often, Clients seeking damages from Home Inspectors rebuke the terms and conditions of the inspection agreement, and claim that they were under duress when they signed, or that they had no choice, or that they didn't have time to review all the terms and conditions. Similar to when one purchases a car or refinances a home, there is a 48-hour cooling off period for the client to review what they signed, and walk away from the deal. The problem for home inspectors is that most times, the client and inspector meet at the inspection, and the engagement begins. Though a common business practice for the industry, it can work against the inspector should there be trouble down the road.

Similar Threads:

**Matt Fellman** · 09-28-2009, 09:33 PM

Why couldn't they excercise their 'rights' 48 hours AFTER the inspection?

This country's legal system makes me sick.

A.D. Miller · 09-29-2009, 04:09 AM

Why couldn't they excercise their 'rights' 48 hours AFTER the inspection?

MF: No reason why they could not. Even after three weeks they could always cook up a quasi-plausible excuse for why they were forced to sign the contract "under duress".

This country's legal system makes me sick.

MF: It is extremely disappointing given that the founding fathers intended for the law here to usurp the king.

**Raymond Wand** · 09-29-2009, 05:03 AM

Here we go again. Its old news, sure you should get your inspection signed prior to inspection start, but lets not forget - no stinking contract will protect you from negligence.

Only a short while ago we were all reading about how a Nacho inspector was retained by a purchaser to do a termite inspection even though the inspector was not licenced nor trained to offer such service. So much for that contract!

Joseph Farsetta · 09-29-2009, 08:16 AM

For those asking why I post what I post goes way back to a time when I came to this board multiple times per day. The fact is that there is a lot of knowledge here. I used to come here to learn new things. I enjoyed the banter and occasional hostility. It was fun. The truth is that lots of visitors still come to learn. No matter what you may think, newbies will still go out and inspect... and many times with limited knowledge. So, while my comments may seem quite basic to some, there are others who find them invaluable. And that's why I post what I post. Some disagree with my commentary ( as with the SOP) and in others, my posts may result in assessment and change. Whatever the result, if I help one person, then my posting was successful.

Ted Menelly · 09-29-2009, 09:48 AM

Originally Posted by A.D. Miller

MF: No reason why they could not. Even after three weeks they could always cook up a quasi-plausible excuse for why they were forced to sign the contract "under duress".

MF: It is extremely disappointing given that the founding fathers intended for the law here to usurp the king.

???????????????????????????????

Huh

**Eric Barker** · 09-29-2009, 08:01 PM

Originally Posted by Joseph Farsetta

Often, Clients seeking damages from Home Inspectors rebuke the terms and conditions of the inspection agreement, and claim that they were under duress when they signed, or that they had no choice, or that they didn't have time to review all the terms and conditions.

Do you have any examples of such occurrences where clients were not held to the agreement for these reasons? Our state is pretty good making one accountable once they sign a contract.

**Dan Harris** · 09-29-2009, 08:04 PM

Originally Posted by Joseph Farsetta

The fact is that there is a lot of knowledge here. I used to come here to learn new things..

Joe.. Are you saying that you don't need to learn new things now?

Joseph Farsetta · 09-30-2009, 06:53 PM

Eric,

One of the cases where these and other factors were used to overturn certain contract clauses, including an arbitration clause, is available for review on line. I discuss it in my article on the Arbitration Clause deemed unconscionable on appeal. Issues involving the enforceability of an inspection agreement were reviewed and overturned on appeal by the Mississippi Supreme Court

Dan,

I learn every day. I learn from everyone. I may have learned something from Aaron today. In his example, GAF does mention the installation of their timberline Product over existing shingles. However, it also mentions that it falls under the terms of GAFs limited warranty. their limited warranty contains a caveat using verbiage akin to "good standard roofing practices". So, what does this mean? I think I'll try and find what they mean...

**Jim Luttrall** · 09-30-2009, 07:02 PM

Joe, one thing to note as you look into this is that GAF has different levels of warranty. Their basic manufacturer's warranty just like everyone else, and then you move up into their super, duper, gold plated warranty with more and better coverage depending on the use of a "certified installer" and the use of their underlayment, and other products. Don't let the terminology from the sales and marketing team cloud the thinking.
GAF and every other manufacturer out there would love for you to use their products exclusively but very few times is it required.