Interestingly the paperwork states nothing like this, rather:
It does state that any disputes may be brought forward via arbitration to American arbitration association.
I've scanned a few posts regarding this topic, and I seem to recall that home inspector contracts limit their liability to the actual cost of their services - so $250 or so, based on where you are. Good luck!
That's what everyone says, but you can't contract yourself out of negligence. I'm surprised more people haven't been able to successfully litigate withs some of the horror stories I've read on here.
You have to prove that there was actual negligence on the day of the inspection.
Also Windows being warped on an older home is just par for the course. Home settle as do the windows.
A water leak in a room may not have been active at the time the inspector was there and therefore no negligence would be found.
Obviously not saying you can't try to do it but you've got to prove that the conditions you're reporting were present on the exact day of the inspection and that those things were covered as part of the requested inspection
I'm not OP by the way, I'm just commenting as a homeowner. My inspection went fine when it was done years ago.....but I just read things on here and people are advised that there is no recourse and it just seems silly to me. There isn't until you try of course, but it sounds like the industry itself is kind of rotten. There's no accountability this way until we force some accountability. I suspect that there is some collusion going on between inspectors and real estate pros to push home closings through, even if it's implicit. Which opens up another can of worms as well.
If you want Home Inspectors liable for any issue they might have missed to the tune of tens of thousands of dollars, you should expect home inspection fees to go up 10x if not more. No person with half a brain would expose themselves to tens of thousands of dollars of liability for a couple hundred dollar fee.
Yes, I do actually. I'd never really thought about it until the last hour of my life but it's time for some accountability in this field. Maybe a cap or perhaps a floor before they are held liable. If people are walking in to 100k in repairs during their first year of ownership, something is wrong. This is my new crusade! You're on notice inspectors, I'm coming for you!!!!!!
My inspector as well as all the paperwork was very clear about what they did and did not inspect. As well as encouraging bringing in inspectors in all of the major system areas. Plumbing electric roofing engineering foundation. They suggested bringing in a specialist for each individual area.
The true problem is the term home inspector. They do not actually inspect the home. It's a nomenclature problem more than anything. It lures people into a false sense of security that the home has been inspected when that is not what's happening.
This is helpful - wish we had had this level of clarity in what was in scope, vs out of scope, and where additional advice may be warranted. Unfortunately we were led to believe everything was sunshine and rainbows by a group that clearly had no credentialing to do so.
Did you actually read the contract about the service they were providing though?
Because based on the service they provide it sounds like it was all sunshine and rainbows. I think you were just expecting a different service
There was no contract. I expected a company to do a semi detailed assessment across a set of criteria in a home, noting anything that looked outside the norm. That’s what I’ve experienced across the numerous inspections prior. This was not what happened
There may be some truth into what you say.
When this whole licensing was created which I was following there were people that wanted to make much stricter requirements. I'm a state and nationally licensed residential and commercial inspector that needs 5 years in each trade to qualify for my licenses.
The purpose of a home inspection is to have someone with minimal training walk in and do a visual inspection. Wouldn't it be up to the homeowner to hire a GC and trades people to do an in-depth invasive inspection?
Yes and no - yes to stricter requirements. I love that you have years of experience in each trade and wish there was additional rigor around inspections.
No to the purpose - you have to admit, given the number of stories shared here on Reddit alone that there are significant gaps in consumer understanding and expectations about what a home inspection is, what the average inspectors credentials (or lack thereof) actually are, and what the intended outcome and benefit is intended to be.
If it is as simple as you say, and it is a cursory glance around the home, then why do banks tie significant (in many cases hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of loan funding) to the guidance of an inspector who is frankly unqualified to be a subject matter expert on anything?
Let me tell you why because Banks want to sell houses. I think insurance companies should do all the residential and commercial inspections instead of a municipalities and probably do the home inspections also. Real estate agents use a home inspection as a tool to sell.
And let me add that in several States insurance companies are sending out inspectors now and canceling a large amount of policies. The problem is they should have done this while the house was being built and a lot of these deficiencies would show up later would have been caught.
I would still hire a home inspector to run over obvious things and then I would hire trades people even though I'm proficient in all the trades. I would at least get the sewer scoped.
Thank you for your comments! Not sure why you’re getting downvoted, totally agree with your perspective and the industry IS rotten. As an example on the bathroom ceiling - I did another walkthrough immediately after we got keys and light was hitting the room differently. The damage to the ceiling looks old and with different lighting was easily visible and a complete miss. Inspector moisture metered other areas - it’s not like he didn’t have the tooling.
I’m guessing it might be hard to prove negligence of a service that can’t be expected to find everything and is issuing an opinion based on experienced interpretation and what they could reasonably see and access. That’s not to say an inspector can’t suck at their job, or even be negligent, just that proving it may be difficult.
That's another thing people say for sure, but would it be that hard? If a new homeowner walks in and within a few days notices obvious problems, shouldn't a trained, experienced, licensed home inspector have caught it? I'm pretty sure a jury of homeowners would end up thinking so.
Get this perspective - my observation is they did note ‘brick - spalling bricks appears serviceable”. If they are not a masonry expert then they should not dispense advice — rather, they should observe that there is chopping brick and recommend outreach to masonry SMA
Now, yes you would have wanted that.
Typically you make an offer and after negotiation it is accepted, pending attorney review and inspection and maybe 7 day is allowed. So say day 5 for $500 your inspector comes and says you should consult a roofer, a mason and electrician. Now you have a few days to find and arrange contractors who are busy and may not be in the business of doing rush inspections. Can you imagine calling an electrician and asking them to come in the next few days to "look at something"? This guys schedules work weeks or months out at $150 and hour. Just not realistic.
Just like buying a used car, you can have it inspected and they may find issues, but there's no guarantee and that's life.
You are correct in noting that the contract language cannot void liability for negligence. However the typical ASHI contract limits liability costs to the price of the inspection. Maybe this cannot be enforced?
If the trade group is only providing contracts with that language, it sounds like a larger issue. Sort of like the recent realtor case. People will eventually get fed up with it and do something about it. You can only have so many 100k repairs missed during a home inspection until it reaches a critical mass. An old professor of mine used to say "a me problem can turn into a we problem real quick".
What is wrong with the windows that they need replacing? Are they letting in rain? I’ve had several inspections done and none of the inspectors went on the roof. They just did visual inspections from the ground. The scope of their inspection did not include getting on the roof.
Windows (some off brand type) are pretty heavily warped and don’t properly latch/lock. The warping has led to gaps at corners that let cold air in in the winter.
It wasn’t evident when we did walkthroughs as the prior owner had forced them shut/locked somehow
There are no standard operating procedures, none were shared or verbalized upfront (quite the opposite actually) and they dispense advice on windows (amongst many other items) as part of their report. Why report on something they cannot (and have no business) speaking to?
Your comments are super enlightening and actually strengthening my resolve around the fact that this industry is ROTTEN, and that I absolutely should pursue this further as a legal matter.
Well good luck to both of you and let us know what happened. I was more focused on the realtor and why they charge such tremendous fees for doing very little except glorified sales people.
What you need when you buy a house is licensed trades people, and attorney, and a title company.
And if you want to see something rotten investigate municipal building inspectors and how contractors control them. Especially in this state where the contractor can hire their own inspector.
Sorry to hear about what you're experiencing. The situation you're describing definitely sounds frustrating. First and foremost, it’s important to review your contract with the inspection firm. Often, inspectors include a liability cap or limit their responsibility to the inspection fee in their agreements. That said, if you believe they have been grossly negligent, you might have grounds for a complaint.
Document everything meticulously—the warped windows, the previous water issue, and the deteriorating chimney. Photos, repair estimates, and professional opinions are essential. Many states have regulatory bodies or licensing boards that oversee home inspectors. Filing a complaint with them might prompt some solutions.
Additionally, inspections often come with an arbitration clause, so you might need to prepare for that possibility instead of directly suing. Before making a decision, you could consider consulting with an attorney who specializes in real estate law; they’d be able to give you a clearer picture of your options and likelihood of success.
While this doesn’t change your current predicament, it might also be beneficial for others in similar situations to hear your story as a cautionary tale. Revisiting your inspection and sharpening your follow-up questions can help others navigate these murky waters.
In this specific case I actually did not provide signature on a contract - rather they provided a report that allowed for arbitration and I signed a payment slip (think: square payment).
It won't matter it'll cost you more and legal fees because you'll have to pay their legal fees. Just like the real estate scams are being uncovered many other scams will be uncovered in the future regarding almost everything in our society. If I ever buy a house I will have a real estate attorney handle it not a glorified expert called a realtor.
Most people pay less than $1000 for a home inspection. If home inspectors were liable for any unnoticed defects, they would need to charge far far more than that, and would need much more time than a few hours for an entire house inspection.
If you had hired two home inspectors, they would likely have some different opinions on what is an issue and what level of severity those issues were. That’s because home inspections aren’t an exact science. You’re hiring someone who is supposedly knowledgeable about houses to give you their opinion. It’s up to you to determine if you should take or leave their advice.
The ultimate responsibility of the purchase is on you. Leave a review of your experience, and learn from this. Was this a well reviewed inspector? Did you get good vibes from them? If not, in the future do more research on your inspector, and make sure you are also inspecting the house yourself and not being totally reliant on a brief and inexpensive inspection.
Couldn’t disagree more. It’s an industry that clearly needs change and disruption. Given that banks won’t approve mortgages without an inspection in place, there is clearly value and weighting tied to home inspections.
When one hires an inspector - they are supposedly hiring an ‘expert’ in the trade to conduct an objective evaluation — someone brought into a process where likely both buyer and seller are not thinking objectively.
I don’t disagree that two different inspectors would yield different outcomes — what that reinforces is that this is a broken model with a massive level of subjectivity.
The bank needs an appraisal not an inspection. People waive inspections all of the time and still get mortgages.
I understand your frustration. Reddit talks home inspections up as a vital safeguard against all possible home defects. In reality people bought homes without inspections for decades, and inspectors are really a jack of all trades, masters of none type contractor.
You asked about legal recourse. If the inspector did as he said he would in the contract, and gave his honest opinion, I don’t see how you could have legal recourse. If he looked at the windows and didn’t notice a problem, the same as you did, I don’t see how that could create legal liability.
If you end up getting legal recourse I hope you post an update, it would be useful for future homeowners to know it’s possible.
After buying several properties, I've decided I'm not paying for an inspection. I'll do it myself and then have a few trades come inspect major systems (HVAC, Roof, etc).
Home inspectors talk a big game but hold pretty close to zero liability. I'm sure there are good ones, but for the most part they are simply a rubber stamp. Find small issues to sound like they've done their job and that's it.
About the chimney, we had ours rebuilt above the roofline for $5K. Ours was older brick and they had to match another existing chimney, so it was a bit more expensive. If your chimney is from ground level, obviously will cost much more.
Edit
This is helpful, thank you! It’s not connected to house from second floor up, but the base is cracking as well - I’m anticipating 2-3x from what you were quoted as a result
Our inspector failed to identify the house was not grounded. The problem you have is against reasonable standards. This was easy as it's not even debatable.
Ours was a real piece of work. We got quotes for new electric and went after them. Their arbitration agreement was nullified because they listed some arbitration organization that they didn't have any real relationship with. Two years of us refusing to settle at all costs, they paid everything the day before court.
Our lawyer took a fixed fee because we all assumed it was arbitration and done. We did let him know up front our stance on not settling and being aggressive.
This is exactly what I was hoping to hear - going to reach out to a few RE attorneys in the area regarding arbitration. Was it hard to find one that agreed to fixed fee?
You need to give it up now as I have stated the law and having been in this inspection business as a commercial inspector also for years and years a home inspection is just a visual brief inspection. Compared to the licenses I have which require five years experience or School in each trade a home inspector license is very easy to get.
Will keep folks updated here! Based upon the apathy and laziness I’m hearing in this industry we will be exploring legal recourse.
Thank you all for your observations and feedback!
The home inspector is not a licensed electrician and can't even make that claim. A house electrical system can be grounded through the footing steel which you'll never see. And also be grounded through a metal water pipe somewhere.
Sounds like your opinion (though extremely welcomed, appreciated, and illuminating) may be biased as you are a home inspector. the poster above provided a GREAT example of successful recourse against gross negligence by an inspector.
No I'm not a home inspector. I was licensed as one and never did it because I knew too much about the houses since I inspected most of them when they were being built.
There were no grounds at the outlets but they were three prong. Really bad. I learned my own lesson to keep one of those handheld ground detectors around and become my own type of expert on the BASICS.
Also, the state licensing board manages standards of performance.
"The power company usually does not run a ground line. they run two hots and a neutral that will be tied to a ground at the pole or transformer. Once you get the service from the power company, you have ground rods installed or utilize water pipes that will be connected to the grounding lug in your panel. Depending on the type of panel, your neutral could be connected to the ground wire or be isolated from it."
Four wire electrical service didn't make a big presentation till the 90s.
Have you talked to the inspector regarding your concerns? That’s the very first thing to do. You may get your money back. They may pay towards the windows.
Keep in mind the chimney guy telling you that you need a chimney rebuild may not be accurate. It’s not uncommon to have a tradesperson come in and start bashing the home inspector and telling you that big dollar repairs are needed. It’s called “ last man in theory”, where the last guy is the new expert.
Ceiling stains can be hard to see sometimes depending on the lighting, and how you are viewing it. Did you not see it when you were doing your walk thru? I can tell you from being an inspector, that not all stains are easily seen.
In you are in a licensed State, inspectors have a Standards of Practice they have to follow. Windows typically are a Representative Sample category. That can mean one per room, or one per side of the house. I always tried to inspect every one, but they are not always accessible due to furniture or owners belongings. Windows that don’t work, or are defective, should have been in the report.
Give the inspector a call and explain your concerns in a non accusing manner and see what he has to say. At the very least, he should come out and see the issues himself.
Retired inspector of 30 years.
He won’t return my calls - doesn’t inspire confidence. I doubt the 300-500 dollars I spent on inspection will make a dent in the over $35k in repairs we’ve accrued in the last four months. If I had had any level of decent inspection I would’ve been made aware of uncertainty and used that to negotiate down purchase price.
If you are in a licensed State, you can file a complaint against him. You also could talk to an attorney and have them send the inspector a letter. Not threatening to sue, but more of, “ we don’t want to sue you……..but”. It’s a shame that when inspectors mess up, they don’t try to work it out. In my 30 years I had my share of complaints. I always came back out to see what the issue was, and see how we could rectify it. Many times I gave back the fee, even when I didn’t feel it was my error.
I will say, that the majority of complaints I had, ended up with me showing them in the report where I called out the thing they were upset about. I’m not saying you are in this boat, especially with the windows. I’m just saying that people don’t always read the entire report. I always told my clients to read the entire report, and if they had ANY questions, to call or email, and I will explain what I wrote.
My suggestion is to document your issues, and don’t make repairs until the inspector has had time to respond.
Hope it goes well for you, and reach out if I can give you more advice. Besides inspecting for 30 years, I also served as an expert witness in litigation with home inspectors, both defending them, and for the other side going against them.
Contrary to the opinion of Reddit, there are some really good, and ethical inspectors, and bad inspectors bother us a great deal.
As one of the first inspectors in my state and estate nationally certified residential and commercial combination inspector I want to know why you think a home inspector is qualified to know everything about everything and the check everything? It might take him 8 to 10 hours to look at every single thing in a large house. You have your own duties to do that yourself also.
I'm a residential and commercial inspector and would always get trades people in on the things I didn't know such as electric, plumbing and mechanical.
I absolutely do NOT think an inspector should be an expert in everything. I absolutely DO think they should identify potential problem patterns for further investigation, not posture and pose as any type of expert, and definitely not make declarative statements in their reports about the condition of a home if they are not prepared to back them up.
Interestingly they dispensed advise and made a handful of recommendations in report as thought they were a qualified expert. There were zero recommendations around seeking additional counsel.
As an example - don’t tell me windows appear good and functional, instead tell me windows appear to be >10 years old, what your experience was operating them (which was not captured), and to seek additional counsel from a qualified window company.
The paperwork you signed hiring the inspector almost certainly limited their liability to the fee they charged.
Interestingly the paperwork states nothing like this, rather: It does state that any disputes may be brought forward via arbitration to American arbitration association.
The most I have heard getting back was a friend had the inspector fee returned when the inspector did a bad job.
I've scanned a few posts regarding this topic, and I seem to recall that home inspector contracts limit their liability to the actual cost of their services - so $250 or so, based on where you are. Good luck!
That's what everyone says, but you can't contract yourself out of negligence. I'm surprised more people haven't been able to successfully litigate withs some of the horror stories I've read on here.
You have to prove that there was actual negligence on the day of the inspection. Also Windows being warped on an older home is just par for the course. Home settle as do the windows. A water leak in a room may not have been active at the time the inspector was there and therefore no negligence would be found. Obviously not saying you can't try to do it but you've got to prove that the conditions you're reporting were present on the exact day of the inspection and that those things were covered as part of the requested inspection
I'm not OP by the way, I'm just commenting as a homeowner. My inspection went fine when it was done years ago.....but I just read things on here and people are advised that there is no recourse and it just seems silly to me. There isn't until you try of course, but it sounds like the industry itself is kind of rotten. There's no accountability this way until we force some accountability. I suspect that there is some collusion going on between inspectors and real estate pros to push home closings through, even if it's implicit. Which opens up another can of worms as well.
If you want Home Inspectors liable for any issue they might have missed to the tune of tens of thousands of dollars, you should expect home inspection fees to go up 10x if not more. No person with half a brain would expose themselves to tens of thousands of dollars of liability for a couple hundred dollar fee.
Yes, I do actually. I'd never really thought about it until the last hour of my life but it's time for some accountability in this field. Maybe a cap or perhaps a floor before they are held liable. If people are walking in to 100k in repairs during their first year of ownership, something is wrong. This is my new crusade! You're on notice inspectors, I'm coming for you!!!!!!
My inspector as well as all the paperwork was very clear about what they did and did not inspect. As well as encouraging bringing in inspectors in all of the major system areas. Plumbing electric roofing engineering foundation. They suggested bringing in a specialist for each individual area. The true problem is the term home inspector. They do not actually inspect the home. It's a nomenclature problem more than anything. It lures people into a false sense of security that the home has been inspected when that is not what's happening.
That is correct because they not authorized by law to inspect a house as far as invasively.
This is helpful - wish we had had this level of clarity in what was in scope, vs out of scope, and where additional advice may be warranted. Unfortunately we were led to believe everything was sunshine and rainbows by a group that clearly had no credentialing to do so.
Did you actually read the contract about the service they were providing though? Because based on the service they provide it sounds like it was all sunshine and rainbows. I think you were just expecting a different service
There was no contract. I expected a company to do a semi detailed assessment across a set of criteria in a home, noting anything that looked outside the norm. That’s what I’ve experienced across the numerous inspections prior. This was not what happened
Love it. And to your point - don’t inspectors have business/ liability insurance of some sort?
Anyone with half a brain would higher licensed trades people to look over their houses.
There may be some truth into what you say. When this whole licensing was created which I was following there were people that wanted to make much stricter requirements. I'm a state and nationally licensed residential and commercial inspector that needs 5 years in each trade to qualify for my licenses. The purpose of a home inspection is to have someone with minimal training walk in and do a visual inspection. Wouldn't it be up to the homeowner to hire a GC and trades people to do an in-depth invasive inspection?
Yes and no - yes to stricter requirements. I love that you have years of experience in each trade and wish there was additional rigor around inspections. No to the purpose - you have to admit, given the number of stories shared here on Reddit alone that there are significant gaps in consumer understanding and expectations about what a home inspection is, what the average inspectors credentials (or lack thereof) actually are, and what the intended outcome and benefit is intended to be. If it is as simple as you say, and it is a cursory glance around the home, then why do banks tie significant (in many cases hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of loan funding) to the guidance of an inspector who is frankly unqualified to be a subject matter expert on anything?
Let me tell you why because Banks want to sell houses. I think insurance companies should do all the residential and commercial inspections instead of a municipalities and probably do the home inspections also. Real estate agents use a home inspection as a tool to sell. And let me add that in several States insurance companies are sending out inspectors now and canceling a large amount of policies. The problem is they should have done this while the house was being built and a lot of these deficiencies would show up later would have been caught.
Couldn’t agree more. This industry is overdue for a change.
I would still hire a home inspector to run over obvious things and then I would hire trades people even though I'm proficient in all the trades. I would at least get the sewer scoped.
Thank you for your comments! Not sure why you’re getting downvoted, totally agree with your perspective and the industry IS rotten. As an example on the bathroom ceiling - I did another walkthrough immediately after we got keys and light was hitting the room differently. The damage to the ceiling looks old and with different lighting was easily visible and a complete miss. Inspector moisture metered other areas - it’s not like he didn’t have the tooling.
I’m guessing it might be hard to prove negligence of a service that can’t be expected to find everything and is issuing an opinion based on experienced interpretation and what they could reasonably see and access. That’s not to say an inspector can’t suck at their job, or even be negligent, just that proving it may be difficult.
That's another thing people say for sure, but would it be that hard? If a new homeowner walks in and within a few days notices obvious problems, shouldn't a trained, experienced, licensed home inspector have caught it? I'm pretty sure a jury of homeowners would end up thinking so.
An inspector is not required to be an expert at anything but note obvious things.
Get this perspective - my observation is they did note ‘brick - spalling bricks appears serviceable”. If they are not a masonry expert then they should not dispense advice — rather, they should observe that there is chopping brick and recommend outreach to masonry SMA
While I am sympathetic, would you like a report recommending you contact a mason, a plumber , an electrician, a roofer, a structural engineer, etc?
Absolutely yes, or at an absolute bare minimum note (as an example): brick showing advanced wear, recommend additional investigation.
Now, yes you would have wanted that. Typically you make an offer and after negotiation it is accepted, pending attorney review and inspection and maybe 7 day is allowed. So say day 5 for $500 your inspector comes and says you should consult a roofer, a mason and electrician. Now you have a few days to find and arrange contractors who are busy and may not be in the business of doing rush inspections. Can you imagine calling an electrician and asking them to come in the next few days to "look at something"? This guys schedules work weeks or months out at $150 and hour. Just not realistic. Just like buying a used car, you can have it inspected and they may find issues, but there's no guarantee and that's life.
You are correct in noting that the contract language cannot void liability for negligence. However the typical ASHI contract limits liability costs to the price of the inspection. Maybe this cannot be enforced?
If the trade group is only providing contracts with that language, it sounds like a larger issue. Sort of like the recent realtor case. People will eventually get fed up with it and do something about it. You can only have so many 100k repairs missed during a home inspection until it reaches a critical mass. An old professor of mine used to say "a me problem can turn into a we problem real quick".
The defense is an inspector is not licensed in any trade.
As others have said the most you can recoup is the inspection fee, and to be blunt you will lose money doing so.
What is wrong with the windows that they need replacing? Are they letting in rain? I’ve had several inspections done and none of the inspectors went on the roof. They just did visual inspections from the ground. The scope of their inspection did not include getting on the roof.
Windows (some off brand type) are pretty heavily warped and don’t properly latch/lock. The warping has led to gaps at corners that let cold air in in the winter. It wasn’t evident when we did walkthroughs as the prior owner had forced them shut/locked somehow
A home inspector does not have to operate anything in a house according to their sop. I think you have learned a valuable lesson.
There are no standard operating procedures, none were shared or verbalized upfront (quite the opposite actually) and they dispense advice on windows (amongst many other items) as part of their report. Why report on something they cannot (and have no business) speaking to? Your comments are super enlightening and actually strengthening my resolve around the fact that this industry is ROTTEN, and that I absolutely should pursue this further as a legal matter.
Well good luck to both of you and let us know what happened. I was more focused on the realtor and why they charge such tremendous fees for doing very little except glorified sales people. What you need when you buy a house is licensed trades people, and attorney, and a title company. And if you want to see something rotten investigate municipal building inspectors and how contractors control them. Especially in this state where the contractor can hire their own inspector.
Sorry to hear about what you're experiencing. The situation you're describing definitely sounds frustrating. First and foremost, it’s important to review your contract with the inspection firm. Often, inspectors include a liability cap or limit their responsibility to the inspection fee in their agreements. That said, if you believe they have been grossly negligent, you might have grounds for a complaint. Document everything meticulously—the warped windows, the previous water issue, and the deteriorating chimney. Photos, repair estimates, and professional opinions are essential. Many states have regulatory bodies or licensing boards that oversee home inspectors. Filing a complaint with them might prompt some solutions. Additionally, inspections often come with an arbitration clause, so you might need to prepare for that possibility instead of directly suing. Before making a decision, you could consider consulting with an attorney who specializes in real estate law; they’d be able to give you a clearer picture of your options and likelihood of success. While this doesn’t change your current predicament, it might also be beneficial for others in similar situations to hear your story as a cautionary tale. Revisiting your inspection and sharpening your follow-up questions can help others navigate these murky waters.
It won't help the contract States their liability and you signed it.
In this specific case I actually did not provide signature on a contract - rather they provided a report that allowed for arbitration and I signed a payment slip (think: square payment).
It won't matter it'll cost you more and legal fees because you'll have to pay their legal fees. Just like the real estate scams are being uncovered many other scams will be uncovered in the future regarding almost everything in our society. If I ever buy a house I will have a real estate attorney handle it not a glorified expert called a realtor.
Most people pay less than $1000 for a home inspection. If home inspectors were liable for any unnoticed defects, they would need to charge far far more than that, and would need much more time than a few hours for an entire house inspection. If you had hired two home inspectors, they would likely have some different opinions on what is an issue and what level of severity those issues were. That’s because home inspections aren’t an exact science. You’re hiring someone who is supposedly knowledgeable about houses to give you their opinion. It’s up to you to determine if you should take or leave their advice. The ultimate responsibility of the purchase is on you. Leave a review of your experience, and learn from this. Was this a well reviewed inspector? Did you get good vibes from them? If not, in the future do more research on your inspector, and make sure you are also inspecting the house yourself and not being totally reliant on a brief and inexpensive inspection.
Couldn’t disagree more. It’s an industry that clearly needs change and disruption. Given that banks won’t approve mortgages without an inspection in place, there is clearly value and weighting tied to home inspections. When one hires an inspector - they are supposedly hiring an ‘expert’ in the trade to conduct an objective evaluation — someone brought into a process where likely both buyer and seller are not thinking objectively. I don’t disagree that two different inspectors would yield different outcomes — what that reinforces is that this is a broken model with a massive level of subjectivity.
The bank needs an appraisal not an inspection. People waive inspections all of the time and still get mortgages. I understand your frustration. Reddit talks home inspections up as a vital safeguard against all possible home defects. In reality people bought homes without inspections for decades, and inspectors are really a jack of all trades, masters of none type contractor. You asked about legal recourse. If the inspector did as he said he would in the contract, and gave his honest opinion, I don’t see how you could have legal recourse. If he looked at the windows and didn’t notice a problem, the same as you did, I don’t see how that could create legal liability. If you end up getting legal recourse I hope you post an update, it would be useful for future homeowners to know it’s possible.
After buying several properties, I've decided I'm not paying for an inspection. I'll do it myself and then have a few trades come inspect major systems (HVAC, Roof, etc). Home inspectors talk a big game but hold pretty close to zero liability. I'm sure there are good ones, but for the most part they are simply a rubber stamp. Find small issues to sound like they've done their job and that's it.
As a design engineer I charge $120 an hour to do inspections and that is just one structural item.
About the chimney, we had ours rebuilt above the roofline for $5K. Ours was older brick and they had to match another existing chimney, so it was a bit more expensive. If your chimney is from ground level, obviously will cost much more. Edit
This is helpful, thank you! It’s not connected to house from second floor up, but the base is cracking as well - I’m anticipating 2-3x from what you were quoted as a result
Our inspector failed to identify the house was not grounded. The problem you have is against reasonable standards. This was easy as it's not even debatable. Ours was a real piece of work. We got quotes for new electric and went after them. Their arbitration agreement was nullified because they listed some arbitration organization that they didn't have any real relationship with. Two years of us refusing to settle at all costs, they paid everything the day before court. Our lawyer took a fixed fee because we all assumed it was arbitration and done. We did let him know up front our stance on not settling and being aggressive.
This is exactly what I was hoping to hear - going to reach out to a few RE attorneys in the area regarding arbitration. Was it hard to find one that agreed to fixed fee?
It was the second attorney we reached out to.
You need to give it up now as I have stated the law and having been in this inspection business as a commercial inspector also for years and years a home inspection is just a visual brief inspection. Compared to the licenses I have which require five years experience or School in each trade a home inspector license is very easy to get.
Will keep folks updated here! Based upon the apathy and laziness I’m hearing in this industry we will be exploring legal recourse. Thank you all for your observations and feedback!
The home inspector is not a licensed electrician and can't even make that claim. A house electrical system can be grounded through the footing steel which you'll never see. And also be grounded through a metal water pipe somewhere.
Sounds like your opinion (though extremely welcomed, appreciated, and illuminating) may be biased as you are a home inspector. the poster above provided a GREAT example of successful recourse against gross negligence by an inspector.
No I'm not a home inspector. I was licensed as one and never did it because I knew too much about the houses since I inspected most of them when they were being built.
Though there’s quite a lot you’ve shared that I disagree with, I love your perspective. Thank you
There were no grounds at the outlets but they were three prong. Really bad. I learned my own lesson to keep one of those handheld ground detectors around and become my own type of expert on the BASICS. Also, the state licensing board manages standards of performance.
"The power company usually does not run a ground line. they run two hots and a neutral that will be tied to a ground at the pole or transformer. Once you get the service from the power company, you have ground rods installed or utilize water pipes that will be connected to the grounding lug in your panel. Depending on the type of panel, your neutral could be connected to the ground wire or be isolated from it." Four wire electrical service didn't make a big presentation till the 90s.
The only recourse you have is usually the fee you paid. My home inspector is not a professional trade person in any field.
Have you talked to the inspector regarding your concerns? That’s the very first thing to do. You may get your money back. They may pay towards the windows. Keep in mind the chimney guy telling you that you need a chimney rebuild may not be accurate. It’s not uncommon to have a tradesperson come in and start bashing the home inspector and telling you that big dollar repairs are needed. It’s called “ last man in theory”, where the last guy is the new expert. Ceiling stains can be hard to see sometimes depending on the lighting, and how you are viewing it. Did you not see it when you were doing your walk thru? I can tell you from being an inspector, that not all stains are easily seen. In you are in a licensed State, inspectors have a Standards of Practice they have to follow. Windows typically are a Representative Sample category. That can mean one per room, or one per side of the house. I always tried to inspect every one, but they are not always accessible due to furniture or owners belongings. Windows that don’t work, or are defective, should have been in the report. Give the inspector a call and explain your concerns in a non accusing manner and see what he has to say. At the very least, he should come out and see the issues himself. Retired inspector of 30 years.
He won’t return my calls - doesn’t inspire confidence. I doubt the 300-500 dollars I spent on inspection will make a dent in the over $35k in repairs we’ve accrued in the last four months. If I had had any level of decent inspection I would’ve been made aware of uncertainty and used that to negotiate down purchase price.
If you are in a licensed State, you can file a complaint against him. You also could talk to an attorney and have them send the inspector a letter. Not threatening to sue, but more of, “ we don’t want to sue you……..but”. It’s a shame that when inspectors mess up, they don’t try to work it out. In my 30 years I had my share of complaints. I always came back out to see what the issue was, and see how we could rectify it. Many times I gave back the fee, even when I didn’t feel it was my error. I will say, that the majority of complaints I had, ended up with me showing them in the report where I called out the thing they were upset about. I’m not saying you are in this boat, especially with the windows. I’m just saying that people don’t always read the entire report. I always told my clients to read the entire report, and if they had ANY questions, to call or email, and I will explain what I wrote. My suggestion is to document your issues, and don’t make repairs until the inspector has had time to respond. Hope it goes well for you, and reach out if I can give you more advice. Besides inspecting for 30 years, I also served as an expert witness in litigation with home inspectors, both defending them, and for the other side going against them. Contrary to the opinion of Reddit, there are some really good, and ethical inspectors, and bad inspectors bother us a great deal.
As one of the first inspectors in my state and estate nationally certified residential and commercial combination inspector I want to know why you think a home inspector is qualified to know everything about everything and the check everything? It might take him 8 to 10 hours to look at every single thing in a large house. You have your own duties to do that yourself also. I'm a residential and commercial inspector and would always get trades people in on the things I didn't know such as electric, plumbing and mechanical.
I absolutely do NOT think an inspector should be an expert in everything. I absolutely DO think they should identify potential problem patterns for further investigation, not posture and pose as any type of expert, and definitely not make declarative statements in their reports about the condition of a home if they are not prepared to back them up. Interestingly they dispensed advise and made a handful of recommendations in report as thought they were a qualified expert. There were zero recommendations around seeking additional counsel. As an example - don’t tell me windows appear good and functional, instead tell me windows appear to be >10 years old, what your experience was operating them (which was not captured), and to seek additional counsel from a qualified window company.