[Don Chapman]

Might not be able to attend the inspection. Dont know if I would gain much if I did attend. My realtor is my sister in laws friend and picked the inspector based on their thoroughness and experiences they have had over the years with them. The realtor and her husband own the realty company and are active in the buying and selling and not just sitting at home(20 yrs exp), so I would they know who is bad and who is good.

[Keith Seymore]

I'd go. The time spent interacting and exchange of information with the home inspector could be valuable.

On the other hand, I've bought probably 8 or 9 homes in my life and I don't think the things the home inspector pointed out ever became issues, and the things that became issues were never caught by the home inspector.

Just a formality, IMO. That said....I'd still go.

K

[400 4spd.]

I would not use an inspector suggested by a realtor with a financial interest in the sale. Think about it.
And like Keith, I would go.

[Pearlbluebird]

I would show up towards the end of the inspection. That way you will not interfere and the inspector will stay focused on the inspection. If there's anything serious he will be able to show and explain at the end. I much preferred this when I was conducting inspections.

[Old Blue 66]

per Keith's first line in his post. Yes, Id go

[Jagtec1]

You should be at the inspection.

[T A 70]

Originally Posted by Jagtec1

You should be at the inspection.

Most definitely.

[Don Chapman]

Sounds unanimous. Est time about 2 1/2 hrs is what they emailed. If there I will probably ask a lot of questions.

[Chris65LeMans]

Yes - go to the whole thing. That way - the inspector can point out any problems to you; then you can decide to amend the contract in detail to make the seller fix them.

Before we were married, my wife was buying a house. We skipped the inspection because I was working on my car. Now that I live in that house; it's a mistake I paid substantially for.

[JLHarper]

See if you can get a copy of the agreement up front, then read the fine print.

The fine print is where they will state the "real picture" of what they will do and then you can decide if that is satisfactory for your situation.

If its an older home, you might want to go up to the next level and get someone experienced in structures; a Building Engineer for home inspection.

Google has pages of this topic..pros and cons, and nightmares.

These home inspections are all over the spectrum and yes there are many good ones out there. Experienced inspectors can be good at spotting where problems "may" occur but then some are good for finding broken stove hinges, bad outlets and cracked tub caulking, easy fixes...but its the big problems (often unseen) that will turn into a nightmare.

Its in the fine print.

An investment house I bought few blocks from the Chesapeake Bay had an underground fuel tank that wasn't picked up on inspection, though a capped set of oil lines was hanging from the ceiling, and a contractor buddy who was there on site asked specifically about them and was told that no tank was present, "they are just old lines not removed" (seller checked no tank also on Listing agreement).

Guess what...underground tank half full of heating fuel....leaking and neighbors well had "three arm" causing agents in water. "Someone" had taken time to hide the fill cap.

Cost me a ton of $ and a long time to get that straight with the State.

Everyone in that deal ran for the hills....all in the fine print.

[T A 70]

Originally Posted by Don Chapman

Sounds unanimous. Est time about 2 1/2 hrs is what they emailed. If there I will probably ask a lot of questions.

Yep, and they'll look over the pest report and follow up with that as well. As said, any issues found will give you posture on what the sellers will/won't address. Some of the stuff may be "petty" but really that is up to you as the buyer.
Good luck!

[BB70]

X2 on the independent building engineer, sure wish I had done it.

John

[Cerberus]

I did on my second house. Worth the time - I learned a lot from it.

[Deadhead]

Great advice on the non-realtor person. Get your own if you care. I have seen more bozo home inspectors with 0 knowledge of anything than I care to remember. Most places they do not have to be licensed or have any qualifications whatsoever.

That said, I have made some money repairing "issues" they have pointed out that were ridiculous and nothing, so I should not complain.

If you go, do your own personal assessment and at the end point out any issues YOU saw to the inspector and get his input. It may be the only way they make it into the report.

[carcrazy]

As the owner of a Home Inspection company I would strongly recommend you attend. In addition to inspecting for issues, a good inspector will also make it an educational process. That being said, you should NOT be on the guys shoulder the whole time asking a constant barrage of questions as you could impact his routine and if he is in the electrical panel-his safety. You should make yourself available when he wants to put your eyes on an issue. It is often easier to understand the problem when you see it vrs reading it on a report.

The quality of inspectors can vary significantly. Some are also licensed general contractors (like myself) some are engineers (like myself) and others just managed to pass a test and have never swung a hammer in their life!!!! I would suggest you interview the inspector to determine his level of expertise and experience.

In NC I have no problem with a realtor suggesting the inspector and have NEVER seen an indication than an inspector was in cahoots with a realtor. There are very specific state laws against it and there is far too much financial liability-perhaps it is different in other areas of the country!

Having inspected nearly 30k houses I can tell you that new construction is often full of issues. Had one last week with a sealed crawlspace that was full of mold!

[sdbob]

I was a contractor did inspections as a 'favor' for friends.Does that quaify me? Maybe not but I have seen many things throughout the yrs. The one home we were working at a inspector came and walked around the home and 'never' put a ladder up to check the condition of the roof! I would definitely be liery of an inspector who won't go up on the roof to check age -condition of shingles and flashing.My 2cts. I would go and make sure you get final condition from his inspection. Like others have said do not be pia but get final details on condition.

[TheSilverBuick]

Definitely be there. A co-worker here just recently bought a house and could only attend half the inspection. Stuff they identified as deficient while he was there suddenly were fine on the final report.

He called the inspector afterwards to call BS and the inspector thought it was fine. He reported the guy to the BBB and was fairly pissed about having to get work done on the house after moving in when he felt the seller should of taken care of the issues or at least agreed on a price split of the cost.

[carcrazy]

Originally Posted by sdbob

I was a contractor did inspections as a 'favor' for friends.Does that quaify me? Maybe not but I have seen many things throughout the yrs. The one home we were working at a inspector came and walked around the home and 'never' put a ladder up to check the condition of the roof! I would definitely be liery of an inspector who won't go up on the roof to check age -condition of shingles and flashing.My 2cts. I would go and make sure you get final condition from his inspection. Like others have said do not be pia but get final details on condition.

No disrespect but you don't always have to go on the roof to check/verify its condition! Many defects can be easily spotted from the ground! In fact, some defects are easier to see from the ground than when you are on the roof. The condition of the shingles/flashings can often be observed from windows or by using binoculars. The roof decking and some flashings are observed from the attic areas for evidence of leakage and deterioration. My inspectors often go on roofs (probably about 20% of the time) when they think the condition is marginal and/or feel it would be beneficial to the client. Many inspectors will not. One of the main reasons (other than personal safety) is this: The owner of the home will file a complaint saying: "My roof didn't leak until you walked on it!!!!" Been down that road! Keep in mind that if the shingles are older they are brittle and walking on them can indeed cause leakage when it wasn't leaking before. Here in NC we typically get 16-18 years from a 20-year shingle and a few more for a 25-year shingle (with a few exceptions). Quite frankly, if we are inspecting a 20-year old house it is pretty easy to tell if it is the original roof or a new one! If it is original, it is most certainly at or near the end of its useful life and should be reported as such.

[carcrazy]

Originally Posted by TheSilverBuick

Definitely be there. A co-worker here just recently bought a house and could only attend half the inspection. Stuff they identified as deficient while he was there suddenly were fine on the final report.

He called the inspector afterwards to call BS and the inspector thought it was fine. He reported the guy to the BBB and was fairly pissed about having to get work done on the house after moving in when he felt the seller should of taken care of the issues or at least agreed on a price split of the cost.

That makes no sense to me! Perhaps I am missing something but if the inspector had identified it as deficient, why would he not put it on the report? Inspectors are typically only concerned about things functioning the way they are supposed to. Many clients have a misconception about what should be on the report and that is the inspectors fault as he should clearly convey the scope of the inspection such that they have a clear understanding of the process. For example, my clients will often be more concerned about cosmetic issues than functional ones.

If there was significant repair cost incurred why would he not take the inspector to small claims court????

By the way, the BBB will be of little help to the consumer!

[Deadhead]

Originally Posted by TheSilverBuick

Definitely be there. A co-worker here just recently bought a house and could only attend half the inspection. Stuff they identified as deficient while he was there suddenly were fine on the final report.

He called the inspector afterwards to call BS and the inspector thought it was fine. He reported the guy to the BBB and was fairly pissed about having to get work done on the house after moving in when he felt the seller should of taken care of the issues or at least agreed on a price split of the cost.

Should be covered under home warranty offered by home inspector?

I have seen thousands of them, and most in my area are not very professional inspections. I would inquire as to the experience of the inspector. Was he a contractor and for how long? If you are going to rely on one - make sure there is a home warranty connected with it. Otherwise, there is no culpability and the results are meaningless. If you are going to inspect but don't stand behind your results what's the use?