real estate inspections Archives - Charles Buell Consulting LLC

Imagine I have a layer cake made of alternating layers of Termite infested wood, Moisture Ant carton, and wood decay/rot. Imagine that I then deliciously frost this entire cake with new siding and trim, and paint it up as nice as lipstick on a pig. Imagine now, a for sale sign planted as alluringly as Kate Winslet, wearing the Heart of the Ocean, next to the cake.

What we have here is bacon flavored lemon cake–NOT Kate Winslet!

Next you decide, since lemon and bacon are your favorite flavors, that you would like to own this nice cake and so you hire your favorite cake inspector to check it out.

The inspection is cruising along just fine except for one very tiny area, hidden in the shadow of the for sale sign, where the inspector finds some minor evidence of some past decay/rot—nothing major mind you—but worthy of note—so in the report it goes.

Fast forward a year, as the whole family makes a game of counting sow bugs and vacuuming frass pouring out from under the baseboards and falling out of the ceiling tiles. The Cake inspector is called back to evaluate further and, since we now own the cake, the investigation becomes more aggressive and invasive. Of course the evaluation is totally effortless–because all that beautiful siding and trim is nailed into—-well—basically NOTHING! The boards peel away and the termites and moisture ants tumble out and begin to panic under the bright light of day.

Of course we are all panicking now as we discover our cake is not all it was purported to be. It turns out it is not even a descent pig with its lipstick all asunder!

We decide to discuss our findings with the cake seller, only to learn that sure—they knew about it all along. They had even paid people to put the lipstick on the pig fully knowing that there was nothing substantial to attach the lipstick to. Magic and caulk work wonders in desperate situations. All the cake had to do was look edible enough, and last long enough, to keep the critters in the walls and not raise red flags too high.

Naturally the cake seller (who also happened to be one-and-the-same as the selling agent) had no interest in taking the cake back for a refund. In fact they would be getting additional money from the cake buyer to cover the cost of having to defend themselves against the cake buyer’s frivolous claims–seems only fair after all.

If the above little satire seems all too implausible to ponder, check out this recent decision handed down by the State of Washington, Disctrict 1, Court of Appeals.

http://www.courts.wa.gov/index.cfm?fa=controller.managefiles&filePath=Opinions&fileName=672428.pdf

In their infinite wisdom, the court of appeals seems to say that a buyer’s “duty to make further inquires” regarding issues found, somehow outweighs a seller’s outright lies about stuff they knew and deliberately concealed (according to court documents).

I wish in their infinite wisdom that had gone on to explain exactly what “pursuing additional information” “looks like.” I think we all know what would happen if the buyer says to the seller, “would you mind opening up that wall, taking down that ceiling and removing that entire floor covering so I can see how much you have tried to hide from me?”

I think this is going to make the already useless seller disclosure statement even more irrelevant. But I guess if the courts can grant corporations personhood, anything is possible. This job is hard enough without making it “legal” to lie about conditions one damn well knows about. Money ultimately defines all.

I for one will be content to remain poor.

Charles Buell, Real Estate Inspections in Seattle

If you enjoyed this post, and would like to get notices of new posts to my blog, please subscribe via email in the little box to the right. I promise NO spamming of your email

Who pays for the unnecessary re-inspection?

There has been many discussions on the Internet about the duties of the home inspectors, the real estate agents, and how important it is for each to not do the other’s job. There have even been discussions about the liability involved when either one crosses the line drawn in the sand.

There is one issue that occasionally comes up involving the inspection report that to me crosses this line—-where the real estate agent is crossing over into the inspector’s realm.

My beef involves “rewriting,” or “reinterpreting” the inspector’s written recommendations.

I have seen the Report Summary (or portions thereof) rewritten and used in negotiating the deal. This rewritten list is then given to whoever is called to do the repairs. Sometimes I am called to re-inspect those repairs. When this happens the “adjusted” summary is barely recognizable from what I originally wrote and usually repairs are NOT satisfactory because the “interpretation” of what I have called out is so different from my original report.

When this happens I then have to call for proper repairs again—-and sometimes get called for a second re-inspect. Who pays for this second re-inspection, and why should it be either the seller or the buyer?

It would seem that there would be incredible liability for changing even one word of what the inspector has written. If the deal went south and lawyers got involved, I would have to think that the inspector would just be able to say, “Well that isn’t what I wrote.”

Why would any agent do this—-risk this?

One of the things quite commonly edited-out is who I have recommended to do the repairs. Now, let me first say that I am very careful about whom I recommend to do repairs and do my best to leave as much leeway as possible so as to not create scenarios that would make the process difficult for anyone. For example, some issues, I could care less who makes the repairs—-as long as they are done “properly” and by “qualified” persons. Sometimes I specify that the work be done by a Licensed XYZ—-if I want to improve the likelihood that it will be done properly—-not a guarantee—just raise the odds.

Some things, such as electrical repairs, are generally required to be done by a Licensed Electrical Contractor and require permits. (Sometimes homeowners can do the work if they draw the permits and get the work inspected. This would not likely be applicable in relation to repairs involved with a real estate transaction because these permits are issued under the assumption that the owner is going to live in the home for two years before they can sell the home—-at least in Seattle—I have often wondered how they police this.)

Sometimes what I have written is “rewritten” to ask for repairs to be made by a “qualified repair person”—–even electrical issues. Why would I, when called back to do a re-inspection of electrical repairs, not be expected to see the permit and the work order with the name of the licensed electrical contractor? (Both of which would be required of a “qualified repair person.”)

Why not leave the recommendation as written?

Of course another reason the inspectors recommendations get rewritten is because the inspector can’t write—-and that is an issue that can only be addressed by better education of inspectors and specific training in Inspection Report writing.

Charles Buell, Real Estate Inspections in Seattle

If you enjoyed this post, and would like to get notices of new posts to my blog, please subscribe via email in the little box to the right. I promise NO spamming of your email