| HawthorneVillager.com http://www.hawthornevillager.com/phpbb/ |
|
| Home inspector liable for cost of removing mould http://www.hawthornevillager.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=47450 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | Batman B [ Sat Jun 09, 2012 2:24 am ] |
| Post subject: | Home inspector liable for cost of removing mould |
Wow, this has to be a landmark ruling. Ive never heard of this before. Now what they say is enforceable. http://www.miltonlifestyle.com/threads/ ... mould.881/ |
|
| Author: | Halton Home Inspector [ Sat Jun 09, 2012 4:14 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Home inspector liable for cost of removing mould |
Question - It looks like you wrote that article. Do you have a link to the source of that information? Courts in Canada recognize our "Standards of Practice" and this decision does not seem to acknowledge that. It's kind of like someone successfully suing their doctor for a new wart that they did not have months ago when the doctor checked them out. Should the doctor have said - You may get a wart. Just as some judges give repeat violent offenders house arrest for a sentence, others like this judge, and the other board also make foolish mistakes. The lady with the mould allergy will likely never find a perfect home that is 100% mould free because even new homes have some mould. These judges have been watching too many Mike Holmes shows. After all, he is the only person that I know that has X-ray vision and who can predict all occurrences in the future and past. If a client told me she had a mould allergy and was looking at buying a 50 year old home, then I would have just said that there is likely mould in the home and to have a specific mould inspection. If this case sticks then Home Inspectors will just need to get clients to read and initial the clause in our "Standards of Practice" where it specifically states that inspections are not required to identify hidden issues that are not visible. For me, this is clearly noted and I read it to every client before they sign. Every "home inspection" is a visual inspection intended to identify issues that are visible "at the time of the inspection". Air samples are not taken and analyzed in a lab. |
|
| Author: | Country [ Sat Jun 09, 2012 6:50 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Home inspector liable for cost of removing mould |
Here's a link to the article which includes a reference to the actual author of the article. Any time an article includes an advertisement it loses all credibility in my mind (kind of like a person who cuts and pastes an article without acknowledging the author). http://www.moneyville.ca/article/120672 ... ving-mould |
|
| Author: | savard1234 [ Sat Jun 09, 2012 7:33 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Home inspector liable for cost of removing mould |
Hee hee hee. Yes, that's exactly what judges based their decision on. T.V. shows Hee hee hee hee hee |
|
| Author: | Halton Home Inspector [ Sat Jun 09, 2012 7:55 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Home inspector liable for cost of removing mould |
It appears that this sentence reveils the key problem for that home inspector - Quote: From the article - "I think the buyers were fortunate in the case that the court found that the inspector did not properly explain the limitation of liability clause." In my contract - if it is a Pre Purchase Inspection of a resale home, then before the inspection starts I read to the client the notes below that are on the contract and I get a signature. The contract clause says - Quote: The inspection of this property is subject to the Limitations and Conditions set out in this agreement. The report is based on a visual examination of the readily accessible features of the building.
The inspection is performed in accordance with the Standards of Practice of the American Society of Home Inspectors / Canadian Association of Home Inspectors and a copy of these standards is attached for your reference. The Home Inspectors report is an opinion of the present condition of the property. It is not a guarantee, warranty or an insurance policy with regards to the property. I have read, understood and accepted the terms of this Agreement including the Limitations and Conditions of the home inspection. Date __________________________ Client Signature ________________________ |
|
| Author: | Halton Home Inspector [ Sat Jun 09, 2012 8:08 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Home inspector liable for cost of removing mould |
savard1234 wrote: Hee hee hee. Yes, that's exactly what judges based their decision on. T.V. shows Hee hee hee hee hee Well savard, this home inspector did lose this case because of a technicality, IE, he did not explain the limitations of the home inspection to the client. But, regardless of what you think, the Holmes Inspection show attempts to tarnish the whole industry and not address the real problems like the symbiotic relationship between home inspectors and Realtors that encourages minimum quality inspections. This reminds me of a case where a landscaper was successfully sued because someone tripped on a walkway he had installed years before. Hopefully this kind of activity is limited to a few dunce caps. |
|
| Author: | dtc [ Sat Jun 09, 2012 8:59 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Home inspector liable for cost of removing mould |
I think this all goes back to the fact the government needs to regulate/insure/protect the entire industry. Licenses, training and certifications. I don't understand how the government gets involved with expensive programs that drain tax payer money and then give up on the ones that are needed and could be cash positive. I still find it amazing I can slap a magnet on the side of my truck that says "Acme Foundations & Concrete" then walk up to a house and cut in a side entrance, alter the structure and foundation of a home without ever having any training or engineering background. Same for home inspectors. I'm not knocking anyone specific because I'm sure there are lots of VERY experienced individuals who are really good at what they do, but there are others who again, slap a magnet on the side of their truck with ZERO experience. You should be licensed and certified to provide home inspections. |
|
| Author: | Chuck Barkley [ Sat Jun 09, 2012 11:13 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Home inspector liable for cost of removing mould |
Country wrote: Here's a link to the article which includes a reference to the actual author of the article. Any time an article includes an advertisement it loses all credibility in my mind (kind of like a person who cuts and pastes an article without acknowledging the author). http://www.moneyville.ca/article/120672 ... ving-mould Are you suggesting that RichardTNC is a content stealer and just posts stuff on his own website where he has conversations with himself? I would have liked to have seen a link to the actual article as well, or at least all the information or a Source note from where it came from. It didn't talk about the extent or severity of the allergy, so who knows if this person is just a whiny little baby, but I also wish sometimes I had become a judge, so that I could tell someone who actually did have a mould allergy... may you shouldn't have bought an 80 year old house!!! I don't see how the home inspector is responsible for this... just a classic case of some jerkoff abusing the legal system because of their own stupidity and bad luck. I wish them both the worst luck. |
|
| Author: | Batman B [ Sat Jun 09, 2012 1:47 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Home inspector liable for cost of removing mould |
sorry, added the link. it was emailed to me from my brother. |
|
| Author: | HaltonPeelHomeInspection [ Sat Jun 09, 2012 3:28 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Home inspector liable for cost of removing mould |
dtc wrote: I think this all goes back to the fact the government needs to regulate/insure/protect the entire industry. Licenses, training and certifications. I don't understand how the government gets involved with expensive programs that drain tax payer money and then give up on the ones that are needed and could be cash positive. I still find it amazing I can slap a magnet on the side of my truck that says "Acme Foundations & Concrete" then walk up to a house and cut in a side entrance, alter the structure and foundation of a home without ever having any training or engineering background. Same for home inspectors. I'm not knocking anyone specific because I'm sure there are lots of VERY experienced individuals who are really good at what they do, but there are others who again, slap a magnet on the side of their truck with ZERO experience. You should be licensed and certified to provide home inspections. Couldn't agree more...I'd love to see home inspection Licensed. It would get rid of the fly-by-nighters. John Allingham, Professional Engineer Owner & Certified Home Inspector Halton-Peel Home Inspection (416) 254-5869 inspect@peelhomeinspection.com http://www.peelhomeinspection.com |
|
| Author: | marathonman [ Sat Jun 09, 2012 3:55 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Home inspector liable for cost of removing mould |
When I bought my first house, we had our agent tell us, he had a bombshell to drop, the night before we were to move in...the inspection had failed to notice the wood stove was not to code and would need to be removed or we could not get home insurance. It actually worked out to my advantage b/c I asked for a $5000 rebate or there would be no closing. When I moved in, I gutted the entire room myself. I tore out all the walls and chimney to find a nightmare of blackened insulation and speaker wire used to hook up the lighting in that room. I was completely surprised that house had not burnt to the ground, before we moved in. That was just the beginning... |
|
| Author: | Hawthorny [ Sat Jun 09, 2012 4:15 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Home inspector liable for cost of removing mould |
Chuck Barkley wrote: Are you suggesting that RichardTNC is a content stealer and just posts stuff on his own website where he has conversations with himself? Pure gold!! |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC - 5 hours |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group https://www.phpbb.com/ |
|