TRUMAN HOMES leaves home owner on their own...

[speede5]

I'm not ripping inspectors. Anyone who wants to take the course can be an inspector, some retire from the trades and some are just people who want to do it.

It is up to the company doing the inspections to decide how intrusive they get.

A home inspection can be anyone from your dad coming to have a look to a full on certified inspection. The seller is removing the condition so it is on them to be satisfied with the level of that inspection. For what my friend was concerned with I was fine, I didn't and wouldn't inspect the furnace and I didn't dig into the electrical, I could see what I needed to see from what was exposed. This house was mid renovation so that concerns of the purchaser were addressed.

Where a seller could argue is if the buyer tried to alter conditions based on my un-qualified opinion.

I'm glad home inspections are getting better and people are being trained better. I haven't paid for one about 12 years and back then they were fairly high level.

That form you posted is interesting, the otp's i have seen do not have an inspection in the text, it's a condition you add. The buyer can remove conditions any time they want. There is no law saying they have to have an approved inspector do anything.

[speede5]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

I take issue with your car comparison. If you take a vehicle in, they will remove wheels to check brakes, remove brake drum, possibly remove a spark plug, or several. A good inspection will take all sorts of stuff off and put them back on.

Their is a reason the inspector carries liability insurance. If I was selling, I'd have no issues with an inspector taking covers off.

Your right some level of inspection is acceptable.

If that mechanic tries to remove a spark plug and it break in the head whose paying to fix it?

[Hockeyguy15]

Originally Posted by speede5

I'm not ripping inspectors. Anyone who wants to take the course can be an inspector, some retire from the trades and some are just people who want to do it.

It is up to the company doing the inspections to decide how intrusive they get.

A home inspection can be anyone from your dad coming to have a look to a full on certified inspection. The seller is removing the condition so it is on them to be satisfied with the level of that inspection. For what my friend was concerned with I was fine, I didn't and wouldn't inspect the furnace and I didn't dig into the electrical, I could see what I needed to see from what was exposed. This house was mid renovation so that concerns of the purchaser were addressed.

Where a seller could argue is if the buyer tried to alter conditions based on my un-qualified opinion.

I'm glad home inspections are getting better and people are being trained better. I haven't paid for one about 12 years and back then they were fairly high level.

That form you posted is interesting, the otp's i have seen do not have an inspection in the text, it's a condition you add. The buyer can remove conditions any time they want. There is no law saying they have to have an approved inspector do anything.

I'm actually pretty sure that if you include the home inspection clause in the purchase agreement that it has to be a licensed inspector, it cannot be just anyone off the street. The BUYER is the one removing the condition, not the seller.

And you are correct, if your friend tried to get out of the sale or alter it based off your opinion they wouldn't be able to as you are not a licensed inspector.

The form I linked to is a schedule you fill out if you have included the condition of a home inspection in your offer. Yes the buyer can remove it any time they like (regardless if they decide to inspect or not), however if they choose to not remove the condition they must provide the report a licensed home inspector has given. It says right on the schedule the inspector must be licensed in Alberta, so I'm not sure why you think the buyer can have an unlicensed friend or family member do the inspection.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by speede5

Your right some level of inspection is acceptable.

If that mechanic tries to remove a spark plug and it break in the head whose paying to fix it?

The mechanic or is this a trick question?

[speede5]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

The mechanic or is this a trick question?

No trick question. If something is damaged during an inspection who pays?

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by speede5

No trick question. If something is damaged during an inspection who pays?

I stand by my answer.

Who do you think should pay?


As an aside, this is why I was present when the inspection took place at my property.

[speede5]

Originally Posted by Hockeyguy15

I'm actually pretty sure that if you include the home inspection clause in the purchase agreement that it has to be a licensed inspector, it cannot be just anyone off the street. The BUYER is the one removing the condition, not the seller.

And you are correct, if your friend tried to get out of the sale or alter it based off your opinion they wouldn't be able to as you are not a licensed inspector.

The form I linked to is a schedule you fill out if you have included the condition of a home inspection in your offer. Yes the buyer can remove it any time they like (regardless if they decide to inspect or not), however if they choose to not remove the condition they must provide the report a licensed home inspector has given. It says right on the schedule the inspector must be licensed in Alberta, so I'm not sure why you think the buyer can have an unlicensed friend or family member do the inspection.

Because a buyer just needs to satisfy themselves to remove a condition. As far as I am aware the buyer, who pays for the inspection, is under no obligation to provide the results to anyone.

Again removing and altering are two different things. If you try to alter the sale based on results they can be challenged by a seller, but regardless of who provided the observation if they are true they are valid.

[speede5]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

I stand by my answer.

Who do you think should pay?


As an aside, this is why I was present when the inspection took place at my property.

I don't know, if you took my car away for an inspection I would not feel I should pay for it, as it was working when I had it, and your guy broke it. The guy paying for the inspection will say it's not his problem, that either the mechanic did something wrong or the car was to blame, and the inspector, or mechanic in this case will not want to eat the bill.

[Fighting Banana Slug]

Originally Posted by speede5

Because a buyer just needs to satisfy themselves to remove a condition. As far as I am aware the buyer, who pays for the inspection, is under no obligation to provide the results to anyone.

Again removing and altering are two different things. If you try to alter the sale based on results they can be challenged by a seller, but regardless of who provided the observation if they are true they are valid.

I don't think that is typically true. If the sale is conditional upon an acceptable home inspection, the potential buyer can waive the condition, in which case the contract is final, or rely on the condition to back out of the deal.
I suppose the buyer could try and renegotiate a better deal, but the vendor would be under no obligation to do so.

[Hockeyguy15]

Originally Posted by speede5

Because a buyer just needs to satisfy themselves to remove a condition. As far as I am aware the buyer, who pays for the inspection, is under no obligation to provide the results to anyone.

Again removing and altering are two different things. If you try to alter the sale based on results they can be challenged by a seller, but regardless of who provided the observation if they are true they are valid.

Yeah maybe you should PM Travis and have him give you the answer to all your questions since you don't seem to agree with me.

I really think you are just basing your opinion off out dated information and being a little stubborn about it.

Bottom line I am pretty confident you need to use a licenced inspector to have any ability to alter or terminate a purchase contract. If you have someone else do it you have no leg to stand on as a buyer if you find something you don't like.

[speede5]

Originally Posted by Fighting Banana Slug

I don't think that is typically true. If the sale is conditional upon an acceptable home inspection, the potential buyer can waive the condition, in which case the contract is final, or rely on the condition to back out of the deal.
I suppose the buyer could try and renegotiate a better deal, but the vendor would be under no obligation to do so.

Agreed.

I have only a couple scenarios running through my head.

My first home inspection we used the results to knock the price down to cover repairs we didn't anticipate on the initial offer.

I hadn't thought of just backing out entirely as I've never seen that happen.

[speede5]

Originally Posted by Hockeyguy15

Yeah maybe you should PM Travis and have him give you the answer to all your questions since you don't seem to agree with me.

I really think you are just basing your opinion off out dated information and being a little stubborn about it.

Bottom line I am pretty confident you need to use a licenced inspector to have any ability to alter or terminate a purchase contract. If you have someone else do it you have no leg to stand on as a buyer if you find something you don't like.

I don't think I'm being stubborn, I'm just not articulate enough to explain my position.

[Hockeyguy15]

Originally Posted by speede5

I don't think I'm being stubborn, I'm just not articulate enough to explain my position.

Well you were worried about the sellers rights because you thought people were saying inspectors were ripping houses apart. You also said that inspectors weren't qualified to look at electrical, plumbing, furnaces ect. I provided you a link showing you what licensed inspectors look at.

You also said that a buyer can have anyone do an inspection. I also provided a schedule you fill out as a buyer when you submit a purchase offer, showing that the inspector has to be licensed.

You were also talking about liability if something gets damaged. A licensed inspector likely has insurance, I highly doubt a dad or friend doing an inspection has insurance.

[Flamenspiel]

Originally Posted by Hockeyguy15

Yeah maybe you should PM Travis and have him give you the answer to all your questions since you don't seem to agree with me.

I really think you are just basing your opinion off out dated information and being a little stubborn about it.

Bottom line I am pretty confident you need to use a licenced inspector to have any ability to alter or terminate a purchase contract. If you have someone else do it you have no leg to stand on as a buyer if you find something you don't like.

Speaking from experience, that is not correct, the buyer only needs to let the deadline on the inspection condition expire. At that point the deal is off.

Its different if the buyer wants to knock the price down, then expert opinions should be documented and that would not need to be exclusive to the home inspector, you can include electrician, roofer comments and quotes and so on. I have been involved in both these scenarios and have never had a problem.

[OMG!WTF!]

Originally Posted by speede5

Because a buyer just needs to satisfy themselves to remove a condition. As far as I am aware the buyer, who pays for the inspection, is under no obligation to provide the results to anyone.

Again removing and altering are two different things. If you try to alter the sale based on results they can be challenged by a seller, but regardless of who provided the observation if they are true they are valid.

Altering a contract is rendering the initial contract null and void and creating a new contract. And to do that based on a home inspection requires the buyer to give the home inspection to the seller. The buyer is essentially not removing the home inspection condition. The seller can agree to it without requiring a copy of the inspection.

[Fighting Banana Slug]

Originally Posted by OMG!WTF!

Altering a contract is rendering the initial contract null and void and creating a new contract. And to do that based on a home inspection requires the buyer to give the home inspection to the seller. The buyer is essentially not removing the home inspection condition. The seller can agree to it without requiring a copy of the inspection.

Again, not waiving the condition means there is no contract. Can't create a new contract without the seller agreeing to it. He or she is under no obligation to do so and the buyer is under no obligation to provide the report.

[Hockeyguy15]

Originally Posted by Flamenspiel

Speaking from experience, that is not correct, the buyer only needs to let the deadline on the inspection condition expire. At that point the deal is off.

Its different if the buyer wants to knock the price down, then expert opinions should be documented and that would not need to be exclusive to the home inspector, you can include electrician, roofer comments and quotes and so on.

Yeah there are a few different ways a deal can die, but I was just focusing on either signing off on the condition, altering, or terminating.

Not sure if you know or not, but out of curiosity though aren't you in danger of losing your deposit if you just let condition days pass without giving sign off or not?

[Hockeyguy15]

Originally Posted by Fighting Banana Slug

Again, not waiving the condition means there is no contract. Can't create a new contract without the seller agreeing to it. He or she is under no obligation to do so and the buyer is under no obligation to provide the report.

In the case of the inspection if you are not waving the contract you are required to provide the inspection report.

[OMG!WTF!]

Originally Posted by Fighting Banana Slug

Again, not waiving the condition means there is no contract. Can't create a new contract without the seller agreeing to it. He or she is under no obligation to do so and the buyer is under no obligation to provide the report.

You really do have to give the report to the seller like by 9pm the next day. Otherwise why even have a contract. The home inspection condition would become the "we just don't really want to buy your house after all" condition.

[Flamenspiel]

Absolutely not, if the condition is not satisfied, you are out. Plainly; "The contract is subject the buyers satisfaction with the property inspection...".

The contract can require a "licensed inspector", however there is nothing that says you have to provide that report to anyone. You paid for it, it is to the advantage of the buyer to keep it private unless they want to disclose it.

In fact, the reverse is true; withholding the deposit would be a violation of the contract.