Thread: Strange turn of events

Got a call this evening from a client I did an inspection on Feb 1. It seems gas utility came out today to turn on the gas, and red tagged the water heater, and told them it was a regular water heater connected to a direct vent flue, and was not to code.
I told them that if I did make that mistake, then I would make it right (not sure how I would have missed that).
In the course of our conversations, I asked him to measure the tank (so I could get one that fit), and he sent me a photo of the tag.
Here is the kicker. The unit I inspected (and documented) was a State unit, mfg 2011, and the one in the house is a Rheem, mfg 2015. Thinking that I might have inserted the wrong photo in the report, I pulled up the RecallChek report, and it verified it was a State unit.
So clearly, its not on me, and it appears the homeowner switched out the water heaters. My wife is kinder than I am, and suggested that maybe it failed recently, and they replaced it with a new unit. I thinking something else took place.
The drama will continue tomorrow.
While this is going to suck for my clients, the fact that I take photos of labels, and use RecallChek saved me a pile of money.

Similar Threads:

• Additional source of income for inspectors. Come to one of our upcoming events.
• Free ReportHost Events in Seattle Sept. 14, 2012
• Computer turn it off, or leave it on?
• Gas Turn-key Valves for Fireplaces
• Should I turn the water on??????

Jack, Happy you used Recall check!
Now it is a means to insure that you documented, and photo graphed the appliances in question.
Seems like I will be using it again.
Mr. Thornbeery is a very savvy entrepreneur.

Originally Posted by Jack Feldmann

While this is going to suck for my clients,

Explain to your client's they can seek restitution through the vendor, unless it was duly noted in the sales agreement contingency.
Happy for you!

Had a Seller years ago switch out a nice newer tank on a deal and put in an older one. Guess they wanted to take their pretty new tank with them. Client called me when they did their day before closing walk through. Their contractor was with them to look at doing various rehab work and told them they'd need a new water tank because the old POS probably wasn't going to last much longer.
So they call me and ask: Why didn't I tell them, I should have known, etc. You the phone call. I had pictures of the nice new tank and label both close and wide showing the basement so it was obvious where the pictures were from.
Busted Seller comes back with some nonsense about it was a 'misunderstanding' by one of their family members, so sorry'. Yeah right.

Originally Posted by Markus Keller

I had pictures of the nice new tank and label both close and wide showing the basement so it was obvious where the pictures were from.

That wide overall view is likely the photo most home inspectors fail to take.

With digital cameras there is no such thing as 'too many ' photos and wide view photos showing what Markus described can be butt savers.

While I do not use RecalChek, I do take pictures of data plates and wide shots of mechanicals and all sides of the home. I don't put them in the report unless it shows an issue, but I do hang onto the photos. You just never know…

Apparently, the homeowners thought that something was wrong with the water heater, or it was acting up, so she had it replaced. The husband was out of town. It appears the plumber they used didn't know the difference, or just bought the cheapest unit he could find.

From what I hear, the sellers are going to take care of it (they seemed like nice people when I did the inspection, and came back to pick up radon monitor).

I just relieved that I wasn't the one buying a new direct vent water heater, and I'm also relieved that I did not make the error.

Originally Posted by Scott Patterson

While I do not use RecalChek, I do take pictures of data plates and wide shots of mechanicals and all sides of the home. I don't put them in the report unless it shows an issue, but I do hang onto the photos. You just never know…

Scot, I fully concur. I take upwards of 250 per photo's per home.
Might be an idea to inquire into Mr. Thornberry's Recall Check.
This entrepreneur family provenance goes back to when home inspections were in infancy.
Also Recall Check is widely accepted and sure takes the time off of looking up appliance recalls if you fit them into your clients reports.
As with you camera pole, a WOW factor is present as well.

I forget the front man to reach out to but it might be worth your while looking into Recall Check as well as be complementary to your business/marketing.

Here is a link. RecallChek

Originally Posted by ROBERT YOUNG

Scot, I fully concur. I take upwards of 250 per photo's per home.
Might be an idea to inquire into Mr. Thornberry's Recall Check.
This entrepreneur family provenance goes back to when home inspections were in infancy.
Also Recall Check is widely accepted and sure takes the time off of looking up appliance recalls if you fit them into your clients reports.
As with you camera pole, a WOW factor is present as well.

I forget the front man to reach out to but it might be worth your while looking into Recall Check as well as be complementary to your business/marketing.

Here is a link. RecallChek

I know about RecalChek, I just do not like how they farm out/sell your clients contact information and how you are locked into them and can't change to another provider or company that does the same thing. If you do violate the contract they can sue and have done so. It's in the fine print that nobody reads... If Nathan would stop doing that, I would sign-up.

Scott,
I have not had one client complain about being spammed, called, or unwanted email from RecallChek. I have had tons that tell me how much they like it.

There are several services the business offers.
I have only heard that one, and only one, of the (4) four service offered were solicitors from other companies target past inspector clients.
Alarm leads is what I am referring to..

Scot, I have a lot to say about this so called breach of confidentially.
A hell of a lot.
A known agitator at one of the associations I belong to, which I will leave unmentioned due to his/her stake holdings, willingly and purposely targeted Nathan LONG before any such event ever happened.
It got so out of control Nathan used legal means to address the combative instigator.

Several well known agitators at this association even created a business Fidelity logo and pledge to quicken the pace to hasten his leave from the message board, all out of the unsubstantiated stories.

No one knows how any information was passed, but in today's internet world, plus the right internet hack, 5 will get you 10 it was cooked up by minds thinking alike.

Too bad.
So sad the association code of ethics committee has no bite.

We work in an industry where individuals sing mud to see if it sticks. If it does, there will be 10 fold awaiting the next accusation. Sad but true.

I will be using his services again. 2 years and not one incident.

Originally Posted by Scott Patterson

you are locked into them and can't change to another provider or company that does the same thing. If you do violate the contract they can sue and have done so.

Scot, if you have a copy I would appreciate you emailing it to me please.

I went for a short look to find a Recall Check contract and came up empty but will admit, I did not spend a good amount of time.

I will ask Nathan, or a front man, personally if this is the case.
Regards.

Originally Posted by Scott Patterson

I know about RecalChek, I just do not like how they farm out/sell your clients contact information and how you are locked into them and can't change to another provider or company that does the same thing. If you do violate the contract they can sue and have done so. It's in the fine print that nobody reads... If Nathan would stop doing that, I would sign-up.

I agree with Scott. Perhaps it's also a what is the accepted norm in your area, but I certainly do not agree with disclosing any information about a home or client other than directly to the client.

This type of business practice was one of the concerns raised by the licensing panel in the Province of Ontario. Perhaps not all consumers of home inspection services have an issue with it, but it seems there's enough to voice that there's a concern.

Terms and Conditions
RecallChek

Non-Competition Inspector will not create, nor cause the creation, of any product or service offered by RWS- including RecallChek, RecallTrak, 90-Day Warranties, The Call Centre, or any other product or service offerings of RWS, nor shall inspector offer a similar product to RecallChek or any other product or service offerings of RWS for a period of at least two years following the expiration of this agreement.

Claude if ReCallchek is taking information from inspection report, and not disclosing to the client their info is being passed on to third parties, does this not fly in the face of established COE? If the inspector informs his/her cleint that collected info from inspection will be passed on would this satisfy the COE requirements below?

ASHI COE

2C. Inspectors shall not disclose inspection results or client information without client approval. Inspectors, at their discretion, may disclose observed immediate safety hazards to occupants exposed to such hazards, when feasible.

Originally Posted by Claude Lawrenson

1: I agree with Scott. Perhaps it's also a what is the accepted norm in your area

2: I assure you this type of business practice was one of the concerns raised by the licensing panel in the Province of Ontario. Perhaps not all consumers of home inspection services have an issue with it, but it seems there's enough to voice that there's a concern.

Claude, what an outlandish statement!
I work on my own merits alone.
I thought your mother brought you up better than that.
Shame on you for even going there.

What other astute concerns where brought up.
Please fill us in or is it confidential?

I am positive client confidentiality is on everyone's mind.

What about inspectors confidentiality including their reports?
Only two individuals have the report yet I can find them freely offered by agents.

Learn to promote the industry without conflicted interests.
What about associations openly inviting in members while promoting a national standard that is not there own?

Having personally succumbed to Identity Theft from a past employee I totally understand confidentiality ramifications more than what is being discussed here.

Sorry for the edits member. I was editing my settings.

Raymond, if ReCallchek is taking information from inspection report,
1: If
2: This information pertains to an appliance or system only. The report is not included.
3: Recalls are open to all homeowners regardless of a transaction as mandated under industry regulations.
4: Company information is breached and outsourced regularly. Am I now lead to believe they are guilty as well?
If so I must lead a very sheltered life. I was always lead to believe the law presumes one's innocence until prove guilty.

The bottom line remains true, if you bother reading the contract then you can make up your own mind to sign it or pass.

Originally Posted by Raymond Wand

Terms and Conditions
RecallChek

Non-Competition Inspector will not create, nor cause the creation, of any product or service offered by RWS- including RecallChek, RecallTrak, 90-Day Warranties, The Call Centre, or any other product or service offerings of RWS, nor shall inspector offer a similar product to RecallChek or any other product or service offerings of RWS for a period of at least two years following the expiration of this agreement.

Claude if ReCallchek is taking information from inspection report, and not disclosing to the client their info is being passed on to third parties, does this not fly in the face of established COE? If the inspector informs his/her cleint that collected info from inspection will be passed on would this satisfy the COE requirements below?

ASHI COE

2C. Inspectors shall not disclose inspection results or client information without client approval. Inspectors, at their discretion, may disclose observed immediate safety hazards to occupants exposed to such hazards, when feasible.

Raymond,
When I signed on with RecallChek I was given exact wording and instructions to place an time in my pre inspection agreement that notifies my clients that some info will be going to a third party. It in all caps and stands out. There is no mistaking there is something important there.

I also inform my clients how the RecallChek process works, and explain it fully. Like I said before, I have never had a client complain about being spammed, or harassed by an outside vendor. I only had one client tell me he didn't want the RecallChek. In fact he didn't want to even give me his email. I had to have him sign a paper contract, and I gave him his report on a CD. I'm pretty sure he had tin foil under his hat as well.

Thanks Jack, that's the way I read the COE. Full disclosure.

Thank you for the information, Jack.

Originally Posted by Raymond Wand

Terms and Conditions

ASHI COE
2C. Inspectors shall not disclose inspection results or client information without client approval. Inspectors, at their discretion, may disclose observed immediate safety hazards to occupants exposed to such hazards, when feasible.

Raymond, I do not hold much weight in parts or phrases of contracts or SOP.
I wish to read the full meaning of what is reprieved as "a meeting of the minds" and will seek help with the use of a notary or lawyer when/if needed.

When the clients sign my PIA they express consent allowing myself to discuss the information as I see fit.

3. The inspection and report are for the use of (CLIENT) only.
The CLIENT gives INSPECTOR permission to discuss observations with real estate agents, owners, repair-persons, and other interested parties.
The INSPECTOR shall be the (sole owner) of the report and all rights to it. It is a copywriter of the inspector Robert Young or inspectors employed by Robert Young's Montreal Home Inspection Services Inc.
a. The INSPECTOR accepts no responsibility for use or misinterpretation by third parties.
Any third parties who rely on it in any way do so (at their own risk) and release INSPECTOR, (Including employees and business entities) from any liability whatsoever.

I think there are assumptions being made that are incorrect.

From their web site:
recall search
"* On-site, you will copy the manufacturer and model numbers of your home appliances, water heaters and HVAC systems.

* You will submit your appliance data by fax, email, online at RecallChek.com, or through your inspection software."

They are not asking for the entire report to be sent to them. I would think that they would need name, address, phone and email as part of the process.

The other products they offer would be another story. The 90 day warranty that is valid for 22 days after settlement may require more information than just property identification. This warranty covers only what the inspector found to be in good condition at the time of the inspection and appliances less than 10 years old, also from the warranty itself

"3. A copy of your home inspection must be submitted with the repair estimate, or at least those pages pertaining to the affected items. "


Where Recallcheck sells the customer information/base is a vastly different story. To be fair most states Dept of Motor Vehicles, Banks, Credit Card Companies, Insurance Companies, Grocery Stores and others sell their customer base information in some form or another. But then the HI is paying for the service and it is a mater of conscience what they promote.

PS; Almost forgot all of the info that is captured by your "Smart Phone"..

Originally Posted by Jack Feldmann

Got a call this evening from a client I did an inspection on Feb 1. It seems gas utility came out today to turn on the gas, and red tagged the water heater, and told them it was a regular water heater connected to a direct vent flue, and was not to code.
I told them that if I did make that mistake, then I would make it right (not sure how I would have missed that).
In the course of our conversations, I asked him to measure the tank (so I could get one that fit), and he sent me a photo of the tag.
Here is the kicker. The unit I inspected (and documented) was a State unit, mfg 2011, and the one in the house is a Rheem, mfg 2015. Thinking that I might have inserted the wrong photo in the report, I pulled up the RecallChek report, and it verified it was a State unit.
So clearly, its not on me, and it appears the homeowner switched out the water heaters. My wife is kinder than I am, and suggested that maybe it failed recently, and they replaced it with a new unit. I thinking something else took place.
The drama will continue tomorrow.
While this is going to suck for my clients, the fact that I take photos of labels, and use RecallChek saved me a pile of money.

Back to the original post, we had a seller replace a side by side with bottom freezer stainless steel frig with a 30 year old white frig. Luckily for us and the buyer and their agent we had pictures of all the appliances not just a "includes refrigerator" clause in the sales contract. A picture is worth a thousand lawyers.