Never Skimp on the Home Inspection
Robin, a 22-year-old single mom, just purchased her first home to raise her young daughter.
Robin wanted to hire a home inspector, but the sellers had already hired some one to perform a home inspection and Robin’s real estate agent recommended that she keep the $300 and just use the seller’s inspector’s findings. Robin followed her agent’s advice.After moving in, Robin decided that she wanted to change the base boards in the den and main hallway, so she began removing baseboards from the walls. While doing this, she noticed mold on the Sheetrock. As she removed more baseboards, she found more mold.
Because of this gruesome discovery, Robin tore a portion of Sheetrock from the wall. At that point, she found even more mold and mold on the back of the wall in an adjoining room. Before she knew it, Robin had completely gutted her newly purchased house; mold was everywhere. Moral of the story: hire your own home inspector.
This became a $45,000 mistake.Under most states’ laws, the seller of a house has a duty to disclose all de fects known to the seller at that time. The problem is that the seller can use the dumb defense and claim that he/ she did not know of the defect at the time of the sale. The defects are typically found after the new buyer has already moved into and becomes familiar with the home.
However, by that time, the buyer has no recourse against the seller because most houses are purchased “as is.” This makes a home inspector extremely important. There are many different types of home inspectors available. And, you want to make sure that the home inspector is thorough and knowledgeable in construction.
Robin’s inspector either didn’t know, didn’t care or just wanted to move on to the next job.As with anything, you get what you pay for. Don’t skimp on a house inspector.
You have just committed to one of the larger purchases in life. Why would you not research home inspectors and hire a good inspector?
Learn from Robin’s mistake, don’t repeat it.
- Michael Brandner is an attorney with Brandner Law Firm in Metairie, Louisiana.
While I agree with the premise of this article, I must point out that “Robin” discovered mold by removing parts of the structure. Most general home inspectors will not do this (Many people watch “Holmes Inspection” on HGTV and think that is what a home inspection is. It isn’t.) Hidden defects such as mold may require additional testing to detect. Not all inspectors are equipped to do this and in many cases, buyers are unwilling to pay for the specialized inspection. But I would advise anyone to hire their own inspector and not use a report from either the seller OR a previous buyer. You may not be getting what you think!
I also agree that every buyer should get their own home inspection. There is so much that a buyer can learn during the process when they spend time in the home with their own inspector. I also take from this story that the mold may have not been readily visible, making the probability that this defect would have been found unlikely. I am pretty sure most “Mold Inspectors” will even disclaim concealed mold in their inspection contracts. An inspector can only find what is readily visible.
In Texas as well as most areas of the country, I would also have to agree that “removing things attached to the structure” is not something the inspector can do by law, the inspections are visual in nature only. Your inspector does not have X-Ray vision.
The more common issue: Repairs
Homeowner had their own inspection (Pre-Sale) or they received a copy of an inspection that was performed for a previous buyer, then the homeowner either did some repairs themselves, or used the least expensive contractor they could find, in some cases the report is old by several months, here in Texas with the weather we get, that can be a huge difference with roofs alone.
In most states anything they (the sellers or sellers agent) acquire knowledge of in the report (however they received it) is supposed to be outlined on an updated “sellers disclosure”.
While I sympathize with many buyers that later may later discover issues, many times the new issue was brought about by poor or incomplete repair work and not something the original inspector “did not catch”. In some instances the issues were never disclosed, even if they were supposedly “fixed”, in most instances the issues would have needed to have been disclosed regardless.
This is misleading and not necessarily the inspectors fault. Inspectors cannot go about tearing up moldings and trim and because of that the possibility of hidden conditions will always be present. The author needs some education before passing judgement.
I aggree with David. Being a home inspector. There is invasive and non-invasive inspections. We inspect many aspects but usually we don’t tare walls down unless we have permission or we are doing an inspection where the buyer wants us to look over the structure.
Home inspections are great to find leaks and structural problems. I just did an inspection where there was a 30 foot retaining wall that was about to collapse. I advised the home buyer of the problem and referred a structural engineer to them. To me the price of the home they wanted to purchase would not be worth it when they would have to repair that wall. We found other problems as well. The buyer was very relieved. Even though no mold we uncovered enough to help them not get stuck in a money pit.
I find it interesting that most of the comments are “don’t blame the home inspector.”
The truth is we don’t have enough information to know if the inspector made a mistake or not. With $45,000 in damage, I am guessing there were signs that the inspector should or could have picked up on. You do not get that much mold without a moisture source.
True, the buyer should have hired her own inspector and they may have offered thermal imaging or mold testing, and the inspector could have used that to locate an issue, but they just as easily could have seen damage. The story says the damage was in the den and in a hall, so these are likely interior walls. Did the inspector check the standing water pressure to look for leaks, did they check the walls by the toilets and showers, did they look in the attic?
The truth is we, as home inspectors, tend to get a little overly defensive when someone points out something. I prefer to spend a little more time on the inspection and a lot less time defending myself.
I have been an expert on home inspection cases for both the plaintiff and the defense. It has been my experience that the inspector needs to set the expectations right up front do the best job they can and if they are not able to inspect something they should, they need to explain why and tell the client what they should do about it.
Of course, all of this does not matter in this case as the buyer choose to rely on a previous report instead of having her own.
If you are in the Phoenix area and would like a home inspector that works for you, please look us up.
While I agree there are sometimes cases where a previous inspection report can be viewed, it should never take the place of a buyer’s own inspection being performed. The older report can be a guide as to some previous issues and these can be inspected as to the quality of the repairs, if any, that were performed. Expectations to the buyer are critical in the entire inspection process.