What seems like only a few years ago, but was probably longer, the State of Texas Real Estate Commission did a very bright thing: It instituted a license requirement for a new category called Home Inspectors.
Prior to that, prospective home buyers would drag about anyone who had ever held a hammer in his hands, to look at their purchase to determine if there were needed repairs. On top of that, clients often thought their agent should provide them personal expert opinions about the home's condition, when we had no formal training to do so.
Bad feelings and law suits were always on the tight rope ready to fall.
But what has evolved is a serious number of Licensed Home Inspectors whose verbosity, especially in areas where they have no expertise at all, cause massive problems to all of the parties.
In Texas, for an example, you can no longer pour or set a foundation that has not been designed by a licensed engineer or licensed architect. And before the house can be framed, the foundation must be inspected and stamped as compliant.
This one change in the law has made a significant difference, for an example, in Dallas, a town that has had an over supply of foundation failures throughout the years. As Tom Tynan, an architect, says, the failures were primarily caused by improperly designed and engineered foundations, not by what they were sitting on.
But now we have a multitude of Licensed Home Inspectors, who are not structural engineers or architects, who are opining that a particular foundation looks to have problems. And everyone knows when you say those two words -- foundation and problems -- adjacent to each other, your deal is probably going to "go south."
The inspector has just made a total train wreck out of what should have been a solid real estate transaction, and he got paid to do it.
So I'm tired of all of this, even to the point that I wrote the commission and the commissioners last year, giving them specific examples of reports that, when reviewed on site by an architect or engineer, were stated to be totally incorrect.
No one with the commission responded to my letter and examples. And I've just had another deal fall apart because the buyer believed his inspector's opinion over that of the structural engineer.
So I have a new rule, and I'm positive I can make it stick. No Licensed Inspector is going to represent my clients -- whether buying or selling -- who isn't on my approved list. If you want to add one to my list, fine...you can after I check his references with agents who have worked with him.
Maybe others, including sellers themselves, will follow suit.
Meanwhile, I'm packing up all of the documents related to my latest misfortune, and sending them with a formal complaint to the Commission. Perhaps one day they'll see a trend here.
BILL CHERRY, REALTORS
DALLAS-HIGHLAND PARK
SINCE 1964
214 503-8563
It is bad when inspectors overstep their qualifications and bounds. I have been there!
You are right. Not all are qualified for what they try to evaluate.
I approve of your list. I kinda do that already. There are 2 inspectors in our town who have also "found" problems that thankfully they "fix" as part of the inspection negotiation. Those 2 have been off my list for several years now. Low and behold, one of them no longer has a "fixed wing" of his business that involves inspection repairs he was finding. I know there's a "code" to prevent this, but I don't think we have a "law".
Gary, I guess they're everywhere, One inspector whom I had never met, told me he was an engineer who had worked for a big company, and had been laid off. Consequently, he had gotten licensed as an inspector.
When he turned in his report, it was so outrageous that I asked him to give me the specifics of his education and his license. He then told me that I had misunderstood him...he had no engineering education or training. By then what he had or didn't have made no difference. The deal had cratered. I understand he charged $650 for his "services," almost twice what the going rate is around here.
Wanda, fascinating! I'm soooo into thinking everyone's probably good until they prove otherwise, that I had never considered the extra money they can make by 1) doing repairs 2) sharing the repair profits with those contractors who do them.
Gee wiz. Thanks for your experience.
Bill, not to be perceived as an inspector with ruffled feathers:) but why would a buyer believe an inspector over an engineer?
It's so hard when an engineer or an AC guy or an electrician come in and say the inspector was wrong. The buyers don't want to believe it because what else in their report is going to be wrong?
Bill,
I had a similar discussion the other day with a professional structural engineer who ends up getting the majority of the local calls on foundations, cut trusses, etc. He says, and I agree, that it all has to do with the way it is written by the inspector.
Fact is, the inspector is hired to look for clues to problems and then send them on to the professional specialists with the expertise to evaluate and/or resolve them. So, not being the person who can make the final determination on engineering issues, which the engineer can, the inspector needs to report the problem as he or she sees it, explain why it might be a problem and then suggest a visit by the engineer who figures out what, if anything, should be done.
If the inspector starts using words like the foundation is shot, failing, structurally compromised, that is usually poor wording, although there could be some instances where the problem is so obvious that it might be correct. The recommendation by the inspector should be written so that it defers the final determination to the engineer. Then, if the engineer states the foundation is okay, then the inspector is not on record as being in a pi--ing match with the engineer and the buyers realize that the inspector has deferred to the engineer. No conflict! Buyers need not worry that inspector is insisting there is a problem, when in fact he or she is chasing windmills.
We have a local inspector who is often embarrassed about this very matter. In several foundation situations, he makes these bold statements about all this work that needs to be done to a "failing" foundation. When the PE has looked, the inspector has been wrong each and every time. Since he made these rash, stupid and bold statements, now he is stuck bristling like a porcupine and saying he is right, the engineer wrong. It is getting him a reputation not unlike what you are talking about.
Citing a potential problem or a serious problem, and being right, is one thing. Being wrong is yet another. If there is doubt, but worry on the part of the inspector that something could be a problem of consequence then, by all means, send it on to the engineer. But do not, first, fill the report with catastrophic possibilities, repairs and incorrect pablum. It is all about wording and having the judgment to not turn a mole hill into a mountain in the buyer's mind. A mountain on the other hand, may still be reported as a mountain.
If you are in a licensed state, chances are, the law does not allow the conflict of interest of your inspectors then doing repairs on properties inspected. Also, most realtors I know do as you say. Even with licensed inspectors, they give out four or five names of people they suggest. The client, of course, may pick their own inspector from online or whatever but, from what I see, the bulk of buyers go from the realtor list. The idea seems to work as long as the realtor, also, has the buyer's interest in mind and is not simply pushing inspectors who he or she knows will ignore real problems simply to speed a deal to closing. That is not a service to clients either.
Hi Bill... the bottom line is that home inspections add only as much value as the qualifications of the inspector will allow. And if the inspector really isn't well qualified, could cause more harm than good.
Steve, we definitely see eye to eye on this.
By the way, I've found two inspectors I think are especially good and balanced....Bart Bradberry and Frank Zak with Crest Home Inspections. 817 230-4038. They do the Metroplex.
Which is certainly not to say there aren't many others.
Bill here in Georgia the Gov vetoed a bil to liscense inspectors. Maybe he had family doing this stuff who could not pass the tests. (Sorry to be unkind) But both Realtors and inspectors of ASHI were for the bill.
The only concern I have about your post is if you recommend the inspector and they mess up aren't you on the hook too? What we do is give them the AShi list and tell the biuyers who we have worked with beofre. We try to limit our liability that way. I would be interested to know your thoughts as we are taught a bit differently
Darned, Charlie, I don't know. What I do know is I'm not going to let ANYONE run over my clients. Period. The day I don't have the guts to control that is the day I'm not going to renew my license.
Years ago I got tired of title companies not following the contract when they were holding escrow funds and one party or the other defaulted. So I stopped agreeing that they could hold funds pertaining to my contracts. Instead, I demanded that the contracts specify that the funds be held in my trust account. Then if there is a default, I do what the contract orders!
I've sense modified that position a bit since the good title companies cleaned up their acts.
I've never been threatened with a law suit resulting from my real estate brokerage dealings, much less actually had a suit filed. And I carry E&O insurance so they can handle the problem if someone ever gets a wild hair and comes after me.
So, I've made up my mind that I'm going to do my best to keep incompetent home inspectors from getting involved with my transactions. We'll see if it causes trouble. If it does, I'll find out if I'm the better fighter. I'll let you know.
I do know I can line up prior clients forever who'll testify in my behalf.
Bill,
Regarding Charlie's comment: Around here the realtors always give a list of a few -- three to five. There are a handful of exceptions who only refer a favorite. But, as far as covering yourself, I think you need a list and many realtors than have the client sign a paper that says that he or she did choose their own inspector, just in case.
As a fairly experienced remodeler and handyman, I volunteer to accompany Inspectors for my colleagues when the "other side" picks the Inspector and we know not what he/she might do or say. When I do so I have 2 screw drivers and Channel-Lock wrench in my pocket to 'instantly' tighten a door strike, hinge, etc. to keep them off the list. Sellers and Buyers alike easily 'freak-out' when the list is too long, even when the items are minor to me and fixed on the run!
Moreover, I follow them to do what discussing is desirable. By my presence, the Inspectors don't get carried away and feel like they have to present a long list to justify their $300 or so bill. I have seen, too, that Agents are not always present...BAD!
We are asking for a potentially 'destroyed' deal when we don't cover the Inspection process THOROUGHLY!
Jim, for whatever the reason, the inspectors here in Dallas all but bar the agent representing the seller from accompanying them on the inspection. Of course they encourage the participation of the buyer. Often times, the buyer's agent does not show up.
So unlike you, the Seller's agent is not there to hear the verbose pontifications of the inspector, and they often make certain that all of the opinions the expressed verbally don't appear in the report. Consequently, the report can look rather mundane, but what was told the buyer may have been quite incendiary.
So my plan is simply this: I'm going to either know the inspector or have positive references about those I don't know, or they aren't going to be allowed to make the inspection for the buyer. Period. And I'm going to make no bones about why that's my position.
Your thought of bringing along screw drivers and channel locks, however, is brilliant, and I'm going to start doing that immediately.
Bill, I must say, your passion in protecting your clients in this process is admirable, good job.