Alaska Home Inspectors

Carol Perkins · Posted: Fri Feb 01, 2008 5:31 pm Post subject: Report used as Disclosure

I went out to look at a house today and on the counter was a Realtors packet which included a disclosure. Guess what it was our full report that we did for another client. I think I am going to the lawyer. I don't think i would be as mad if they had just used the summary. I do have a disclaim stating that the report is solely for the use of the client. Mad

What do you guys think?
_________________
ASHI=Ask, Share, Help, Inform

Kevin Jones · Posted: Fri Feb 01, 2008 9:43 pm Post subject:

Carol,

Was your disclaimer with the report they had in the disclosure packet? Either way it is irritating. On the other hand as long as the information is current it does help ensure potetial buyers have the complete scope of condition. They would have to disclose the information on a regular disclosure form anyways. I do understand though, as I find this irritating.

Kevin

Carol Perkins · Posted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 6:31 pm Post subject:

I went to see my lawyer over this and a few other items that I wanted advice on. He said the clause in the 'multilist' requiring the buyer to give a copy of the report to the seller and their agent could be fought in court as the inspector is not a party to that contract. We could spend a little bit of money, OK A LOT OF Money, fighting it in court so the best thing would be to wait until one of us gets sued over a report used by another buyer then get our insurance company to go for it. The other option is to get a law change. Mad

_________________
ASHI=Ask, Share, Help, Inform

Patrick Hartshorn · Posted: Thu Feb 07, 2008 5:22 pm Post subject:

Definetly a concern for me also, I will check with our franchise office on how they handle this elsewhere in the U.S., I am discusted also.

I can remember atleast twice getting a call about my report paid for by another buyer that did not buy and the report was sitting out on the counter of the home for all new buyers and realtors to see? I had asked a popular broker about it and he felt that the reports were owned by the client but once shared with the seller, the entire package became disclosure???

I will let you know what our farnchise lawyer thinks.

Pat.

Jim Foss · Posted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 7:51 am Post subject: Release of reports to new buyer

The statue (08.18.152) states that "a home inspector may not ...without written consent ... disclose information from a home inspection...unless disclosure is made to a subsequent client who request a home inspection of the same premises."
The statue is written suggest that we are required to provide the information to all subsequent buyers.
Furthermore, we don't get paid for it. P#5 states "without written consent...accept compensation from more than one interested party for the same home inspection services;"
So, we cannot re-inspect a property for a new party and collect a fee without the first client signing off on our being paid by the new buyer.

Patrick Hartshorn · Posted: Tue Feb 19, 2008 8:38 pm Post subject:

On the first part of statute interperitation, I think that means that we are required to inform a new client that you are inspecting the same home you already inspected for another but you can not tell them anything from the first inspection without prior conscent from the first client. This would prevent an inspector from talking of any issues that may have been on the first report and have since been remmedied. These items should no longer be an issue since they would have never been noted if this was the first time of your inspecting the residence. The fact it is after someone did repairs should not be an issue, basically you would have never known of them. Also, the homeowner probably has the right to not have issues that have been remedied and were not required in disclosure to never be mentioned to a new client. Does that make sense??

As for the second part of your statute interp's, I read it that we can inspect the same home as many times as needed with seperate clients each time as long as we porperly complete an entirely new inspection without transfering any information to the new clients report from an old report. There must be all new photo's, time spent on scene, etc.???

I also feel that if the issues we find are required in disclosure then so be it, we probably don't have a leg to stand on there. But having our entire report on the counter is just wrong, there are lots of non-disclosure items in there that are property of us and the client, the new lookers can pay for a new report if they want to see all the "other" things outside disclosure. Does anyone agree???

John H Cooper · Posted: Fri Feb 22, 2008 11:23 pm Post subject:

What if it is a seller's inspection. Yes, I know I haven't done many of those. Maybe two. But I purchased one from Troy before I sold my house in Eagle River! And I provided a copy to the buyer. They ended up purchasing a second inspection. So that house, in effect, was inspected by three different licensed inspectors! I think we had it covered. However, who gets sued? Well, in effect all three of us. I get sued because I sold the house. The inspector they hired would get sued because the buyers have a signed contract with him. And, I in turn am going to turn around and sue Troy for leaving something out. I did NOT provide written consent by the way to the buyer, and it has been over a year so I think all three of us are off the hook.

When I do a seller's inspection part of my sales pitch, if you will, is that they can take the inspection, get everything taken care of, then put it out on the counter for all the potential buyers to see that their home was inspected and has no issues that haven't been addressed. In that case, I am doing one inspection and there will be one sale. There may be three potential buyers before the sale goes through, but if they are willing to live by what was found in my report and not request an independent set of eyes, as long as the seller gave them written consent, I am on the hook for a year from the inspection.

Same with the buyers. According to the statutes even if the report was left on the counter, if the sale to the original buyer's fell through, they would have to give the eventual buyers written consent to use the inspection that they paid for or the new buyers would have no legal rights. Granted I think the sellers should have to pay for the report if they are going to put it on the counter, but I think the only thing we have going for us is that if the sellers didn't pay for it, they can't give consent for the report to the buyers, and the buyers will have no legal rights.

You will not get any more money unless the new buyers who saw the report in the first place, hire you again. I did have one house where a seller's inspection was done and the eventual buyers wanted to go over the inspection with me. I charged them an hourly fee to go through the report with them and show them what I found with the sellers consent.

Even if I were hired to go over a buyers report that was left on the counter from a deal that fell through, unless I redid the inspection, had them sign a written agreement, and produced a new inspection report for them, I don't think they would have any legal rights. But, I won't go over an existing report they haven't paid for. Wink

Jim Foss · Posted: Sat Feb 23, 2008 6:36 am Post subject: The statue

We are making circles around the same statue. The reality is that the statue was written by a Realtor, and it favors the real estate transaction. As an inspector, it give us few rights, and the transaction is king. The statue says that we have to discuss details of the inspection with subsequent buyers, and we can't charge with out written permission of our original client. My opinion is that it does not say we have to give a new buyer a copy, or that the new buyer has the right to use our material for financial gain. (Not paying for a new inspection) But, you should ask a lawyer if you need clarification.

David Mortensen · Posted: Sat Feb 23, 2008 1:39 pm Post subject:

Has anybody been sued yet? If your reporting language states that particular report is only for your client's usage AND you inform the subsequent buyer that you have no contractual liability with them and it is in their best interest to purchase another report, it seems to me to CYA.

Jim wrote-