HI's not liable for anything above their fee?

[tom daley]

Fine Homebuilding magazine, summer 2014, #243 p.16 article by Gary Katz:

Katz wrote:
"my attorney stated that Home-inspection companies are not liable for anything in excess of their home inspection fee."

Katz had bought a house in Oregon and later found defects missed by the pre-purchase HI.
The HI had been recommended by the realtor.

Opinions please?

Similar Threads:

• Can Professional Associations Be Held Liable in Negligence?
• Rotted joist ends into the wall - Is the inspector liable?
• Ontario court: Buyers, Realtor, Inspector all liable for house damage, not the seller
• Lying Seller Found Liable for Hiding Mold
• Home inspector only liable for intentional damage - Kitsap Sun (Subscription)

[Dom D'Agostino]

Complicated issue, and you need to supply substantially more data to render an opinion.

Dom.

[Bruce Ramsey]

Common component of many HI contracts is a limit of loss to the amount of the inspection fee. It is generally not a defensible legal position. It does help to persuade many unhappy buyers to settle with a return of their fee and sign a release of any future damages.

This is a legal question that is best answered by legal experts and not home inspectors.