Thread: who owns your inspection report

guys--this should be interesting---i just had a new client request a copy of my inspection report because the last transaction fell thru and new client wanted to pay me for that report. in my inspection agreement and inspection report-signed by my client it states that report is property of client and myself and any transaction upon termination of sale must be cleared thru me and cannot be given to another buyer without being paid for.what is your policy on this--thanks cvf

Similar Threads:

• Inspection Report Illustrations
• Which Inspection Report?
• Inspection Report Format
• Inspection Report Verbiage
• Inspection report writing

Good on you.

In my PIA its written, The report is my copywriter and for the clients use only.
I had a broker asking me, "How can you put that in your report.""You do not know how it works!"
My reply, "I certainly do. It appears you do not know how it works sir."

Originally Posted by ROBERT YOUNG

Good on you.

In my PIA its written, The report is my copywriter and for the clients use only.
I had a broker asking me, "How can you put that in your report.""You do not know how it works!"
My reply, "I certainly do. It appears you do not know how it works sir."

The inspection report from a practical sense will be passed along but you have a written agreement that the reprt is for the exclusive use of the person who paid you your client and if you break this agreement you have violated your contract so once again sorry stupid realtor

- - - Updated - - -

Originally Posted by ROBERT YOUNG

Good on you.

In my PIA its written, The report is my copywriter and for the clients use only.
I had a broker asking me, "How can you put that in your report.""You do not know how it works!"
My reply, "I certainly do. It appears you do not know how it works sir."

The inspection report from a practical sense will be passed along but you have a written agreement that the reprt is for the exclusive use of the person who paid you your client and if you break this agreement you have violated your contract so once again sorry stupid realtor

Once you produce the report for the client and collected the fee, the inspector no longer owns the report nor has copyright protection. You were commissioned by the client to produce the work. No different than a artist retained to produce a painting. The client now owns the rights.

In this case I would refuse to sell the report without the original client signing off. Alternatively I would tell the new client you would only do a complete new inspection and report.

Originally Posted by Raymond Wand

Once you produce the report for the client and collected the fee, the inspector no longer owns the report nor has copyright protection. You were commissioned by the client to produce the work. No different than a artist retained to produce a painting. The client now owns the rights.

In this case I would refuse to sell the report without the original client signing off. Alternatively I would tell the new client you would only do a complete new inspection and report.

Knowing you are versed in legal matters, from what I understand continuity writers, are used to help create direct mail pieces, taglines, jingle lyrics, web page content. If my narratives, as well as anyone else's, is distinct, than would that not fall under the publisher is a continuity writer?

Awaiting your reply.

Copyright Law of the United States of America
and Related Laws Contained in Title 17 of the United States Code

§ 201 . Ownership of copyright1

(a) Initial Ownership. — Copyright in a work protected under this title vests initially in the author or authors of the work. The authors of a joint work are coowners of copyright in the work.

(b) Works Made for Hire. — In the case of a work made for hire, the employer or other person for whom the work was prepared is considered the author for purposes of this title, and, unless the parties have expressly agreed otherwise in a written instrument signed by them, owns all of the rights comprised in the copyright.

(a) Article I, § 8, cl. 8, of the Constitution mandates originality as a prerequisite for copyright protection. The constitutional requirement necessitates independent creation plus a modicum of creativity. Since facts do not owe their origin to an act of authorship, they are not original and, thus, are not copyrightable. Although a compilation of facts may possess the requisite originality because the author typically chooses which facts to include, in what order to place them, and how to arrange the data so that readers may use them effectively, copyright protection extends only to those components of the work that are original to the author, not to the facts themselves. This fact/expression dichotomy severely limits the scope of protection in fact-based works. Pp. 344-351.

The client can sell the report all he wants, I'm just not going to answer any questions about it. My contract, and the report clearly state the report is for this one client, for this inspection only, no one else has rights to it.

Copyrighter laws in Canada governs the legally enforceable rights to creative and artistic works under the laws of Canada.
First colonial copyright statute in 1832.
Then imperial copyright law was established by Britain until 1921.

Copyright provides protection for literary, artistic, dramatic or musical works (including computer programs) and other subject-matter known as performer's performances, sound recordings and communication signals.

Copyright applies to all original literary.

In the case of a work where the identity of the author is unknown, copyright in the work exists for whichever is the earlier of:
The remainder of the calendar year of the first publication of the work plus 50 years, or
the remainder of the calendar year of the making of the work plus 75 years.

Benefits of registration.
The Copyright Act states that a certificate of registration of copyright is evidence that copyright exists and that the person registered is the owner of the copyright.

Copy writers do not have to be registered but it would be prudent to do so.

Originally Posted by Raymond Wand

Once you produce the report for the client and collected the fee, the inspector no longer owns the report nor has copyright protection. You were commissioned by the client to produce the work. No different than a artist retained to produce a painting. The client now owns the rights.

In this case I would refuse to sell the report without the original client signing off. Alternatively I would tell the new client you would only do a complete new inspection and report.

A home inspection report is not like a painting one does and gives to the client ... if it was ... the home inspector would no longer have a copy to sell.

Getting past the question to actual fact is that the inspection represented the conditions found on the day and time of the inspection. Those conditions may have changed.

Getting back to the question - it is somewhat like an author writing a book, except that while the inspector owns the copyright, the information is confidential for the client and it is up to the client as to whom they share the information with.

In Charlie's case he could tell the new client that he will contact the previous client to ask the previous client if they are open to having the new client call them.

That puts it between the party who paid for the report and the party who wants the report.

And it gives Charlie the opportunity to explain to his previous client why they should not want to sell the report.

You are selling, not giving, either way rights are transferred.

Originally Posted by frazier jeffery

The inspection report is for the exclusive use of the person who paid you.

Frazier, I do not think most REA are stupid. On the contrary. In my province of Quebec REA are required to write examines be fluently bilingual and pass a real estate broker's license.
The caveat is that all real estate agents were grandfather in as real estate brokers in 2013. The following year less than 20% pass the examination. Leave you wondering sometimes about the grandfathered real estate agents.
Too bad.
So sad.

That being said; what if the broker or reality pays for the report?
I do at least 10 inspections a year where the reality pays for the report. Everyone understands the report belongs to the client and I am happy everything is transparent.

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

Getting back to the question - it is somewhat like an author writing a book, except that while the inspector owns the copyright, the information is confidential for the client and it is up to the client as to whom they share the information with.

In Charlie's case he could tell the new client that he will contact the previous client to ask the previous client if they are open to having the new client call them.

That puts it between the party who paid for the report and the party who wants the report.

And it gives Charlie the opportunity to explain to his previous client why they should not want to sell the report.

Jerry, your ability to break down a sentance and uncover all the questions is astute, A well played hand all around.

Thanks Charlie and Jerry. I will be modifying my PIA.
Have a great day everyone. I am off the marina and prepare my boat for another season.

Originally Posted by Raymond Wand

You are selling, not giving, either way rights are transferred.

Incorrect.

A author retains the rights unless they specifically give those rights up.

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

Incorrect.

A author retains the rights unless they specifically give those rights up.

That's what I said, "either way rights are transferred." I am not disagreeing. And I am approaching this from a complete new inspection and report, rather than Charlies approach or your approach.

My own opinion would be the option to have a new inspection. I wouldn't want to rely necessarily on a report that may be stale dated.

Also propriety software in compilation of reports adds another dimension copyright/licencing/rights, conditions.

However; I did like your suggestion to contact the first client.

Originally Posted by Raymond Wand

That's what I said, "either way rights are transferred."

Which is not what I said.

The rights to the copyright ownership are NOT transferred.

The inspector DOES have a contractual agreement with the client to not disclose the information in the report without the client's permission.

California is, as often is the case ... on its own planet.

Originally Posted by Raymond Wand

Also propriety software in compilation of reports adds another dimension copyright/licencing/rights, conditions.

Not really for the above.

The software is copyrighted and protected for the owner of that copyright.

The report which is produced from the inspector's information that the inspector gathered and entered makes the individualized report copyrightable by the inspector who collected, complied, composed, and entered that information into the software.

To think otherwise is like saying Microsoft owns the copyright to all documents typed/entered into Microsoft Word.

Originally Posted by Raymond Wand

However; I did like your suggestion to contact the first client.

Some ofethe reasons for the above are:
- get the inspector out from between the two clients
- let the first client know the reasons not to
- include the reasons the inspector doesn't want it (within the above reasons)

For your delectation.

http://www.dol.wa.gov/business/reale...ion-report.pdf

Originally Posted by Raymond Wand

For your delectation.

http://www.dol.wa.gov/business/reale...ion-report.pdf

Very enjoyable (fugetabout the big words).

Good read.
Thanks, Ray.

The Myth of the Free Range Home Inspection Report
written by Paul Duffau.
6 International Code Council Certifications, 4 WAQTC certifications, 1 ACI certification, ASHI Certification, NACHI Certification, RESnet Certification/Energy Rater with the State of Idaho, Structural Pest Inspector for State of Washington, Certified Thermographer.

"Understand, Iam not a lawyer, but I am a published author and, as such, have studied some of the ins and outs of thesubject."

"If, on the other hand, the inspector uses a narrative report orprovides commentary on the items he has inspected, the work is protected."

With the subject material narratives I delve into combining my literary license I think I covered my bases. Ha ha ha.

My understanding in IL is that it is the property of the client but I've never spent to much time looking into it. I don't care. As far as I'm concerned the client paid for it, its theirs, they can do as they choose. I wouldn't sell a copy, they can if they want.

Originally Posted by Markus Keller

My understanding in IL is that it is the property of the client but I've never spent to much time looking into it. I don't care. As far as I'm concerned the client paid for it, its theirs, they can do as they choose. I wouldn't sell a copy, they can if they want.

I doubt IL can override federal copyright law ...

I suspect that if the question was asked properly in CA, they would have to change their law - we've been through this before, and (as I recall) it was challenged in CA, but the wording of the challenge did not ask the right question.

He did explain it with a lot more words than I did, but said the same basic things I said.

If the inspector is using a checklist report with little or no wording of the inspector's own - not copyright protected. Most inspectors nowadays use computer reports, and, again, if all they do is use canned comments - it is not their own, not copyright protected.

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

Most inspectors nowadays use computer reports and canned comments.

Yes and most client's receive a serviceable report in good condition.
Too bad.
So sad.

Originally Posted by CHARLIE VAN FLEET

guys--this should be interesting--.....in my inspection agreement and inspection report-signed by my client it states that report is property of client and myself and any transaction upon termination of sale must be cleared thru me and cannot be given to another buyer without being paid for.......

Originally Posted by ROBERT YOUNG

.....my PIA its written, The report is my copywriter and for the clients use only.
..........

Originally Posted by frazier jeffery

...... have a written agreement that the reprt is for the exclusive use of the person who paid you your client and if you break this agreement you have violated your contract .........

<<<< <<Depends on the terms of the sale/contract ??? >>>>>

Originally Posted by Raymond Wand

Once you produce the report for the client and collected the fee, the inspector no longer owns the report nor has copyright protection. You were commissioned by the client to produce the work. No different than a artist retained to produce a painting. The client now owns the rights..................

<<<< <<Depends on the terms of the sale/contract ??? >>>>>

Originally Posted by Raymond Wand

Copyright Law of the United States of America
and Related Laws Contained in Title 17 of the United States Code

§ 201 . Ownership of copyright1

(b) Works Made for Hire. — In the case of a work made for hire, the employer or other person for whom the work was prepared is considered the author for purposes of this title, and, unless the parties have expressly agreed otherwise in a written instrument signed by them, owns all of the rights comprised in the copyright..................

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

A home inspection report is not like a painting one does and gives to the client ... if it was ... the home inspector would no longer have a copy to sell.
........................

<<<<< Unless the HI stipulates that the HI is forbidden by written agreement or state law to make any copies. Liken to prints made from an original painting. >>>>>>

Interesting how the discussion goes in a circle, everyone making an argument for the other person.

The ownership of the report like a painting can be bound by a written agreement. Bound by the terms of that agreement and can be anything that is not illegal. So long as the parties are in agreement and have a meeting of the minds for those terms.

If the report is a narrative the facts such as the size or location of the house can not be copyrighted. The narrative sections like a book can be copyrighted.

If I commission a painting and have the painter sign over all rights to the painting I can make copies, such as prints, and sell them without any further consent of the artist by virtue of the contract.

Does it not boil down to basic contract law???

If someone sells your report you cold spend the money and go to court to recover the lost earnings. But would you not then have taken on new liability of the new owner also?? Providing you had contract terms.

I have a painting, book or a HI report. Unless cloaked in terms, such as found in a non disclosure agreement, that prevented me from allowing others to see those works I can do so. The ability to rely on the HI report and making someone liable for what is contained int he HI report is a different issue. UNLESS IN CALIFORNIA WITH ITS' HISTORICAL DOCUMENTS ISSUES.

Bottom line is ist about money or liability??? Which is more important???

The bottom line - reports get passed along. No one would sue because the costs alone would be significant versus the cost of the report. So home inspectors can huff and they can puff all they want.

Does anyone have any info to show that an inspector has been successful in enforcing copy right?

Originally Posted by Garry Sorrells

a meeting of the minds

Garry, contract law stipulates, a contract is completed when a meeting of the minds exists.
Therefor, by the singing of the PIA, the contract has to meet its obligations.
Can the contract be poorly constructed or in bad faith? We all know the answer to that I hope.

Originally Posted by Garry Sorrells

Bottom line is ist about money or liability??? Which is more important???

Both.

Originally Posted by Garry Sorrells

<<<<< Unless the HI stipulates that the HI is forbidden by written agreement or state law to make any copies. Liken to prints made from an original painting. >>>>>>

The home inspection agreements state that the home inspector will not share the information ... the home inspector may make as many copies as they want ... such as backup copy here, backup copy here, and backup copy here (electronic or paper).

With a painting, the original is gone ... the person who bought it has it (or has given/donated it to someone else - but the artist no longer has the original ... unless, as I said, they were selling 'limited edition copies' ... still nothing like a home inspection report).

If the report is a narrative the facts such as the size or location of the house can not be copyrighted.

That is not "a narrative the facts", that is a list of the facts - date, time, address are just listed facts.

If I commission a painting and have the painter sign over all rights to the painting I can make copies, such as prints, and sell them without any further consent of the artist by virtue of the contract.

When you buy the painting you get the painting, and, yes, you can burn it, roll it up, and make copies - but if you try to sell the copies as originals ... that is where the problem comes in as there is only one original.

Does it not boil down to basic contract law???

I have a painting, book or a HI report.

It first boils down to copyright law.

And that boiled down residue is then addressed by contract law - you are only allowed to sell what you own, which is addressed by the copyright law, and if you own something, then you can sell it (some come with titles such as cars, some come with nothing more than the item itself, not unlike a bearer bond - if you are holding it, it is presumed that you own it).

Bottom line is ist about money or liability??? Which is more important???

Isn't "liability" about the money too?

My reports go to the buyer and buyers agent. If they send it to the sellers agent with their amendment then the seller is obligated disclose that they had the inspection and to provide my report to any potential buyer who asks for it. Selling agents try to talk the buyer agent out of sending the full inspection report for this reason. If it is sent and the agent deletes or does not open the email, I have been told, this violates their ethics agreement. When I am called to do a pre-inspection for a potential listing I always warn the person that they are obligated to provide my report to any buyers and sometime advise against it. They say they don't want surprises and I tell them it will be a surprise no matter who or when the issue is found. I have had people over the years call me with questions about one of my inspections and I always answer to the best of my recollection. I have been provided with previous inspection reports when inspecting homes and am always amazed at the stuff that I find that wasn't reported two weeks earlier. Hope the guys that get mine don't feel the same way!!

Short version - Once I hit the send button it's history!

Originally Posted by Gary Burnett

My reports go to the buyer and buyers agent. If they send it to the sellers agent with their amendment then the seller is obligated disclose that they had the inspection and to provide my report to any potential buyer who asks for it.

You sure?

"Required" to provide "the entire report"?

Is that in Texas statute somewhere?

In most states the only requirement for a seller disclosure is information ... I.e., the seller can provide just information that they gleaned from your report.

Additionally, I've been told by some attorneys that just because a report contains information and the seller has that report does not (so their argument goes) mean that the seller "know" the information ... not until that information is confirmed by their inspector or contractor ...

Which, the argument goes, that without such confirmation - the seller "knows nothing" and has nothing to disclose to a future buyer.

I'm not saying that I think their argument holds water, so to speak, but the argument presents an interesting concept of dumb and dumber and who is the dumbest.

I wouldn't be surprised if one equally dumb 'attorney' who appears to do a lot of work with one particular association jumps on that bandwagon ... all the better for the others who recognize the sham that it is.

It is in the disclosure statement required by the state... mostly. Actually, I believe there are two different disclosure statements in current use, one provided by TREC (Texas Real Estate Commission) and another with all the TREC required verbiage plus things added by the TAR (Texas Association of Realtors) lawyers. It has been a while since I checked so it may have changed again, typically the forms change almost annually.
Bottom line for me, I don't care. I report for my client, what happens after I hit "send" is out of my control. I don't answer questions for new parties to the dance.

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

..................
..........seller disclosure is information ... I.e., the seller can provide just information that they gleaned from your report.

Additionally, I've been told by some attorneys that just because a report contains information and the seller has that report does not (so their argument goes) mean that the seller "know" the information ... not until that information is confirmed by their inspector or contractor ...

............without such confirmation - the seller "knows nothing" and has nothing to disclose to a future buyer.

I'm not saying that I think their argument holds water, so to speak,........

It is my understand that if the seller provides a disclosure, the seller has to inform of all defects that they are aware of. If the seller is made aware of a defect via a HI report (offered by the presumed expert) the seller then would have to have another "expert" provide an opinion that contradicts the first HI's/expert's assertion/observations contained in the HI report or that part provided to the seller.

If the seller receives part or all of a report he can not disclose only what the seller picks and chooses to disclose.

In many states I believe they are going to mandating that the seller provide disclosure documents by Law. With only banks/lenders who acquired the property by foreclosure to be exempted and sell the property in "as is" condition of sale with no disclosures. But even they will have to disclose facts that be come relicant to the sale. Such as finding out that the well for the house is not on the deeded property property and not known until a survey was done by a buyer under contract that then backed out of the sale. Which was a resent case to a nearby property.

The days of old when the seller could retreat to the position of " I see nothing, I know nothing" the property is a "as is" sale have passed. Pay your money take your chances has changed.

Originally Posted by Raymond Wand

Once you produce the report for the client and collected the fee, the inspector no longer owns the report nor has copyright protection. You were commissioned by the client to produce the work. No different than a artist retained to produce a painting. The client now owns the rights.

In this case I would refuse to sell the report without the original client signing off. Alternatively I would tell the new client you would only do a complete new inspection and report.

I agree with you