Thread: Inspector missed termites....

Local story here in Orlando, inspector reported "no damage" on the WDO report.

Dom.

Originally Posted by Dom D'Agostino

Local story here in Orlando, inspector reported "no damage" on the WDO report.

Dom.

Check it out! A Pillar to Post add right in this thread. LOL!

P2P has a quite a poor reputation in my opinion. Many court cases against them over the years up here.

I have been retained on two different occasions by clients who had negligent inspections carried out by P2P inspectors.

http://homestars.com/companies/27640...ome-inspection.

You really can't blame the franchise, it's the inspectors. Blaming P2P for what an inspector did is akin to blaming McDonalds for brewing hot coffee!

Originally Posted by Scott Patterson

You really can't blame the franchise, it's the inspectors. Blaming P2P for what an inspector did is akin to blaming McDonalds for brewing hot coffee!

Maybe, but do you see a pattern developing here?

Ripoff Report | pillar to post Search of Complaints & Reviews

Pillar To Post The Home Of Home Inspection has 14 reviews and average rating of 0.857143 out of 10 Toronto area

Pillar to Post Home Inspection -

Granted, the franchise business model is significantly flawed, if excellence is the goal. No one actually believes that one can purchase an ersatz reputation and experience, (or do they?) That said, they should bear some responsibility for their franchisees.

Besides, Scott, the McDonalds incident was the customer's fault for spilling the coffee. It only blew back on McDonalds because we have such a fine, upstanding legal system here. They could also be franchisees . . .

P2P, NACHI
Sams Cola, Winn Dixie Cola (or other store brand cola)
not much difference.

Part of the problem is training and the fact you pays your money you are a franchisee.

When you research case law at least in Canada, you will come to the conclusion that P2P heads the pack with lawsuits.

Originally Posted by Scott Patterson

You really can't blame the franchise, it's the inspectors. Blaming P2P for what an inspector did is akin to blaming McDonalds for brewing hot coffee!

I think you actually can blame the franchise. The franchise controls the brand and all of the franchisees and how and what they work under the franchise brand.

MC D controls raw product, advertisement, preparation, location, daily supplies and so on. If the coffee is bad at one location the franchise suffers as well as every other franchise's location. Quality, uniformity and consistency is the backbone of the concept. Be confident that MC D's watches how the franchisees are performing.

Not knowing the particulars of the P2P franchise system I would think that they maintain control of their franchisees and are therefore are responsible for the franchisee's actions. There comes a point that the head of the franchise will act due to a concern for loss of revenue. They may not care about anything else, but the DOLLAR will motivate them to take action.



In the Florida case it seems it was attitude, ego, laziness that created the situation.

Originally Posted by Raymond Wand

Part of the problem is training and the fact you pays your money you are a franchisee.

When you research case law at least in Canada, you will come to the conclusion that P2P heads the pack with lawsuits.

Ok, who is the largest franchiser in Canada? It is all relative.

I'm not a fan of the franchise model either but I don't think the brand is the problem. Honestly, in all of the EW work I do with defendants(home inspectors) and plaintiffs(consumers) I might have 2 out of 10 cases involving a franchise operation or one of their inspectors. I have had one on the books since mid 2013 involving a franchise where the inspector did nothing wrong, reported everything that was needed and still is being sued along with everyone else involved in the transaction. It is scheduled for court in April 2015.

The only one to blame is the inspector that showed up to do the work. It matters very little what franchise he owns, the software he uses, or where he got his training. The franchise has little or no control over what he does on the job.

Originally Posted by Jack Feldmann

The only one to blame is the inspector that showed up to do the work. It matters very little what franchise he owns, the software he uses, or where he got his training. The franchise has little or no control over what he does on the job.

While I completely disagree with all of the franchise apologist on this thread, I fully concur with Scott's choice to compare them with a fast food joint. In the end the product is the same: cheap crap that is not good for you.

Having been involved with two cases involving P2P and my experience only I blame the corporate entity. Also don't like the Canadian corporate offices interference and conflicts of interest at the association level. Call me jaded.

Like I said you can buy into the franchise without the necessary background the buck stops at the corporate level in selling as many franchises as possible.

Originally Posted by Raymond Wand

Call me jaded.

Me too.

The article headline said botched home inspection. Then it said a termite inspector missed the problem. Seems like there's a discrepancy somewhere.

- - - Updated - - -

The article headline said botched home inspection. Then it said a termite inspector missed the problem. Seems like there's a discrepancy somewhere.

Originally Posted by Eric Barker

The article headline said botched home inspection. Then it said a termite inspector missed the problem. Seems like there's a discrepancy somewhere.

- - - Updated - - -

The article headline said botched home inspection. Then it said a termite inspector missed the problem. Seems like there's a discrepancy somewhere.

I think the HI did both inspections . . .

Originally Posted by Eric Barker

The article headline said botched home inspection. Then it said a termite inspector missed the problem. Seems like there's a discrepancy somewhere.

Originally Posted by Aaron Miller

I think the HI did both inspections . . .

The home inspector likely did both inspections as that is quite common in Florida.

Many inspectors carry a WDO (Wood Destroying Organism) ID card and are employees of a terminte company so they can do their own termite inspections. Some, as I was, were fully Certified Pest Control Operators themselves and carried their WDO card under their own termite company.

Not sure how the rules have changed since I retired in 2006, but if that home inspector also did the termite inspection ... I hope he is properly licensed / has a proper WDO card as an employee / etc as the state may now require - maybe Dom or another inspector will address current Florida requirements for WDO inspectors. That inspector could be in one heap o' trouble with the state if his pest control activities do not meet current requirements - Florida is (at least was) tough on that stuff.

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

The home inspector likely did both inspections as that is quite common in Florida.

Many inspectors carry a WDO (Wood Destroying Organism) ID card and are employees of a terminte company so they can do their own termite inspections. Some, as I was, were fully Certified Pest Control Operators themselves and carried their WDO card under their own termite company.

Not sure how the rules have changed since I retired in 2006, but if that home inspector also did the termite inspection ... I hope he is properly licensed / has a proper WDO card as an employee / etc as the state may now require - maybe Dom or another inspector will address current Florida requirements for WDO inspectors. That inspector could be in one heap o' trouble with the state if his pest control activities do not meet current requirements - Florida is (at least was) tough on that stuff.

Termite inspectors are regulated by the Department of Agriculture, according to his website he is a termite inspector. The main thing that bugs me is if he did not inspect the attic for termites what else did he miss. The attic is so important when doing an inspection. Here in Florida I will not do an inspection in summer in the afternoon just because of the heat in the attic.

Wood damage on doors, windows and baseboards in the video is visible. We do not do termite inspections but I would have call out the damage and recommended a WDO Inspection.

Home Inspection Training and Certification - Pillar To Post Home Inspectors

http://www.freshfromflorida.com/cont...tewdo_0910.pdf

Originally Posted by Frank Carr

Here in Florida I will not do an inspection in summer in the afternoon just because of the heat in the attic.

I used to inspect in South Florida and inspecting attics in the summer was a necessary part of the job - and many of my attics took a long time due to the sizes of the houses.

Not inspecting an attic in the summer is not, to me, a good plan.

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

inspecting attics in the summer was a necessary part of the job -....
Not inspecting an attic in the summer is not, to me, a good plan.

Originally Posted by Frank Carr

I will not do an inspection in summer in the afternoon just because of the heat in the attic.

I think what he said is: Due to the high temperature of the attic, he does not do home inspections in the summertime afternoons.

Several years ago I stopped doing work that required going into an attic in the summertime afternoon.
Now, during the summer, I only enter attics in the morning hours.

Best thing for hot attics: ARCTIC HEAT USA - Cooling Vests Ice Vests Body Cool vest Jackets

Originally Posted by Rick Cantrell

I think what he said is: Due to the high temperature of the attic, he does not do home inspections in the summertime afternoons.

Several years ago I stopped doing work that required going into an attic in the summertime afternoon.
Now, during the summer, I only enter attics in the morning hours.

Maybe I was a glutton for punishment and took advantage of the free sauna each time.

Originally Posted by Rick Cantrell

I think what he said is: Due to the high temperature of the attic, he does not do home inspections in the summertime afternoons.

Several years ago I stopped doing work that required going into an attic in the summertime afternoon.
Now, during the summer, I only enter attics in the morning hours.

We do not schedule (or try not to) inspections after 11AM in the summer months. Yesterday at 9:45 it was 80 degrees outside and already 114 in the attic and 10:15 it was 128. Soffit vents with only 3 ridge vents.

Really appreciate the cool vest link.

Originally Posted by Frank Carr

Yesterday at 9:45 it was 80 degrees outside and already 114 in the attic and 10:15 it was 128. Soffit vents with only 3 ridge vents..

Something wrong with that attic, Frank.

I was in 2 attics yesterday, same general area as you, and one of them was in the early afternoon; neither were that hot. Uncomfortable somewhat, but manageable.

I tried a "cooler vest" for a whole season back in 2006, it was a bit restrictive. It's hard enough moving like a ballet dancer over and around the usual attic obstructions without the additional padding and protrusions from a vest.

Dom.

I owned a P2P franchise for 10 years and now work with my son in his company. My experience with P2P is that on the technical side they tried very hard to make certain their inspectors were well trained and motivated to do an outstanding inspection. When I left it was over some health issues not any technical disagreement or dissatisfaction with their standards of practice.

They were very big on declaring and following your standard of practice and not spending time exceeding it. Their skin in the game was based on your gross income and wasting time and money on law suits was not part of the plan. You inform you client of what you do, and you do it.

In this particular case, it appears that for what ever reason, she/he deemed the attic access too small for safe access. If he/she disclosed to the client that that was the case then it would seem there is no legal case. My son's philosophy in issues like this is to inform the client that if safe access is provided we will return, at no charge,and inspect the area in question.

I would hazard a guess that if it were practical to compare inspectors in franchise arrangements with those who were not the results would be very similar in terms of quality of inspections and legal entanglements.

- - - Updated - - -