It's a great day here in Orem, Utah! I can't believe that the previous year is over. We now get a chance to start all over and reset our business and personal goals. I look forward to the challenges that the new year has to offer. We hope that your New Year is a prosperous one and that you have the strength to overcome any of the hurdles that life will place before you.
New Year's Eve brought about a great celebration in the Leavitt household. Our daughter Haily turned "a whole hand." That's right, she is now five. When you ask her how old she is, she just raises her whole hand with all of the fingers and thumb sticking up in the air. Her birthday cake was a tribute to Arial from "The Little Mermaid." ....... I get the credit for decorating this cake. Haily had a wonderful birthday celebration, but she couldn't stay awake for the banging of the pots and pans at midnight. In fact, only her sister Jessica, her Aunt Sherri, her Grandma Carolyn, and myself were awake to hear the noise and watch the midnight celebration fireworks. Mommy, Adam, Haily, Aaron, and Grandma Patti could not be stirred for the ushering in of the new year. I hope that your New Year's celebration was safe and fun.
http://152.52.16.193/standing/help/tools/_scripts/friendly-print.cgi
Published: Friday, December 29, 2000 4:54 a.m. EST
By ANDREA WEIGL, Staff Writer
A federal judge has authorized North Carolina homeowners to proceed with a class-action lawsuit against a manufacturer of a synthetic stucco product.
Senior U.S. District Judge W. Earl Britt certified the class this month for owners of an estimated 300 to 500 homes across the state who claim the exterior material traps water inside the walls, rotting wood structures.
A majority of the affected houses are located in the Triangle, especially Durham and Cary, because one of the main companies to use the product was based in Durham, say lawyers for a few local families who initiated the litigation.
"It's not a victory, but clearly it's a significant step toward victory for these people," said Raleigh lawyer Gary Jackson, who represents the homeowners.
Synthetic stucco first surfaced as a widespread problem in 1996 in New Hanover County, where the first class-action lawsuit was filed in the state court system. Since then, the state Attorney General's Office has called it perhaps the most serious consumer problem ever in North Carolina.
The federal lawsuit involves a different type of stucco product than the class-action lawsuit filed in state court, which was settled in January, allowing homeowners to receive $6 per square foot of damaged exterior.
Lawyers estimated the five major synthetic stucco manufacturers that were defendants in the state suit would pay out tens of millions of dollars under the settlement agreement. The manufacturers didn't admit liability and blamed the problems on building contractors.
The state court suit involved a stucco application process called "exterior insulation finish system," commonly known as EIFS, where the stucco is applied to an insulation material and then affixed to the house. More than 15,000 homes were treated with EIFS in North Carolina when it became a popular home exterior in the 1990s.
In the federal suit, the stucco application is called "direct exterior finish system," or DEFS, and the stucco is applied directly to the wood sheathing of a house. Jackson said the federal lawsuit helps those homeowners who believed they could file claims in the statewide EIFS lawsuit but were rejected because they actually had DEFS on their homes.
In the Triangle, Jackson said, a DEFS product called Fastrak System 4000 was used by American Drywall and Southern Synthetic and Plaster, a Durham-based company that has since filed for bankruptcy.
The federal suit was filed against Dryvit Systems Inc., a Rhode Island company that manufactured Fastrak System 4000. Lawyers representing Dryvit in the suit couldn't be reached for comment this week.
In other stucco litigation, manufacturers have contended the product isn't faulty and blame any problems on shoddy workmanship by contractors. Builders, in turn, blame stucco applicators, window installers, roofers and other subcontractors.
In the federal DEFS suit, lawyers point to internal Dryvit reports that say the DEFS product was too risky to recommend. Specifically, the report concluded it wasn't an effective weather barrier and was extremely sensitive to applicator error.
In response, Jackson said Dryvit lawyers say the product was improved and modified since those internal reports were published.
Staff writer Andrea Weigl can be reached at 829-4848 or aweigl@nando.com
Your Name: Please include your name or else I don't know who it is from.
I want to say a farewell to you all as my term as President of the American Institute of Inspectors has ended. There is really no way to summarize what the year or the experience was for me. Overall, it was a very positive experience. I would say there were things that got done as well as I imagined, and there were things that I intended to do that ended up not getting my attention. As a well trained and diligent Home Inspector, it is tough leaving a job knowing there is unfinished business. It would never happen that way in my day to day operations, but it is a different set of circumstances in the position of President of this association. There is always more that can be done.
The year 2000 has a fair share of highlights for me. Working with our Chairman, Brent Foster, was the best. I really didn't know going in what this position held for me, and the association was experiencing some challenges on a few levels when I took office. Brent's combination of clear decision making ability, spirit of doing what is necessary, and good humor made even the toughest challenges easier and almost pleasant. We worked well together, and it felt good to have the chance to do this stuff with him. Combining our efforts to put the Spring Conference together was an experience I wouldn't trade.
Betty Buckley took on the Executive Director position following that conference. I want all the credit for that move. Years from now, when this association's membership is nationwide and thriving due to Betty's talent and hard work, I want you to remember the guy who got her into the position. I want all the credit. (Oh, it doesn't work that way?) The thing about having Betty step in when she did is a great example of getting the right person into the right position just when it is needed most. She literally had a van load of file boxes delivered to her doorstep one day and was told to get started getting us "executive directed." She has done a tremendous job.
A number of other things have happened over the course of the year that bode well for our future, including:
The needs and priorities of the Association are quite different now than they were 12 months ago. That's good on one level, because it means we've worked through some things. But it also means there are new challenges for the new officers of the association to answer to. One thing this experience has taught me is to appreciate the efforts of those who served before me and to be respectful and thankful for Bill Schwahn and Ron Cloyd as they take over the President and Chairman positions. Bill is going to work hard and make some major improvements to A.I.I. In talking with him, it is clear that he is anxious to get moving on some things.
And now for a short sermon by your out-going President:
Many of us call what we do a Home Inspection Service. That word "Service" is really the foundation of what we do. Each of us were likely attracted to this profession because of our desire to be of service. It is a natural characteristic of successful people in this line of work. In the region I work, the home inspectors who neglect that aspect of their job description are the ones that don't last long.
That sense of service is also what attracts members of this association to take on positions of leadership. It is real clear to me in talking with Brent, Michael, Bill, Ron, and others that they share this interest in service, even if it isn't verbalized that directly. For myself, it has been part of a natural progression from thankfulness to love to service. It worked this way: I was very Thankful for the opportunity to become a home inspector, finding a career that suited my abilities and interests so well. I soon found that I loved my work, looking forward to each day with enthusiasm and eyes wide open. (My wife Julie is cackling as she reads this over my shoulder! I pause to remind her she only hears about the "unusual" experiences). The next logical step was to give back to the association that made this possible, and that opportunity was realized by Serving as President. It is a selfish thing, really. I feel good for doing it.
I encourage each of you to consider the prospect of allowing yourself the chance to feel good in the same way. We have a lot of capable people in this group. There is a surprising diversity of personalities and talents. This association is developing a growing number of people that are willing to be of service, and that is a very good thing. My time as President has brought me in contact with many of you in ways that I wouldn't have otherwise, and it has been a wonderful experience. Please consider for yourself getting more involved.
Thanks to all of you, and may 2001 be a great year on many levels. Enjoy every inspection! (Julie is laughing again. I don't get it). Scott Merritt - AII™ President 2000
EDITOR'S NOTE: Scott, your dedication and service is appreciated. You did a great job of carrying the torch. Thanks for the hundreds of volunteer hours on our behalf.
What would be your fee knowing what you know now???
Twelve cents per sq. ft. plus $250 to write the report. I would also include a proposal with my report for contracting the additional evaluations recommended. Some people would like to deal with only one person and prefer to have them coordinate all the investigations. Might as well get your fingers into the whole pie and not just one piece. Jon Gudnason - Placerville, CA
A new Dell computer. Although it has not arrived as yet, I am patiently waiting with great expectations. Jerry Burch - Grass Valley, CA
Name, City & State: Please include your name or else I don't know who it is from.
For Immediate Release December 28, 2000 Release # 01-063 Contact: Ken Giles (301) 504-0580 Ext. 1184
WASHINGTON, D.C. - The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission is warning residents in areas hit by this week's winter storm that gasoline-powered generators should not be used indoors because of the risk of carbon monoxide (CO) poisoning. Deaths from CO poisoning have occurred after ice storms in the past.
CPSC Chairman Ann Brown said, "If people use gasoline-powered generators indoors, they could die from CO poisoning. Opening doors and windows or operating fans does not guarantee safety." CO poisoning from the use of fuel-burning appliances kills more than 200 people each year and sends about 10,000 to hospital emergency rooms for treatment. Others die from CO produced while burning charcoal inside a home, garage, vehicle or tent.
CO is a colorless, odorless gas produced by burning any fuel. The initial symptoms of CO poisoning are similar to the flu, and include dizziness, fatigue, headache, nausea and irregular breathing. Exposure to high levels of CO can cause death.
"Gasoline-powered generators should be left outdoors at all times to prevent CO poisoning," Brown said. "And every home should have a CO alarm that meets the requirements of the most recent Underwriters Laboratories or International Approval Services standard."
In addition, the safety agency is warning about fire and CO hazards from space heaters and kitchen ranges used to heat the home. Keep space heaters away from flammable materials and turn them off when you leave the room. Do not use a space heater while you sleep, and never
use a kitchen range to heat a room. These appliances can ignite nearby combustibles or produce carbon monoxide, either of which could be fatal.
To see a picture of the recalled product(s) and/or to establish a link from your web site to this press release on CPSC's web site, link to the following address: http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/prerel/prhtml01/01063.html.
NOW PLAYING: CPSC Warns Winter Storm Victims: Do Not Use Gasoline-Powered Generators Indoors Because of Carbon Monoxide Poisoning
RADIO ALERT: CALL (888) 531-9070 for Soundbites
Audio relating to this press release can be received by calling (888) 531-9070. It features soundbites by CPSC spokesperson Ken Giles.
PLEASE NOTE: I thought this was pretty cool. Call the 888 number and you can listen to a message that is a couple of minutes long that clarifies the warning and restates the CPSC's stance on carbon monoxide poisoning. If you are looking for the reason to recommend the addition of a carbon monoxide detector in each home you inspect, this will be your justification.
What do you do when you depress the TEST button on the receptacle and the button and spring shoot across the room???
I would tell them it was broke and they should have it fixed. Jon Gudnason - Placerville, CA
It's only happened to me once. The GFCI was one of the white ones with the square buttons. It took me 20 minutes to find the spring. When I encounter one of these GFCI's now I hold my free hand over the outlet to catch the spring, just in case. Jim Oler - UT
Install that new GFCI that you carry in your truck for such an occasion, or delay the next inspection while you run to the supply house for one. Home owners do not appreciate any inconvenience or destructive testing, even though it is not your fault that the outlet came apart. Comes with the territory. Reggie Ayres - Medford, OR
This has occurred to me more than once. At times I am really bold and state that it is broken and in need of repairs. This is an easy statement when the GFCI that self destructed at your fingertip does not control anything major. The uneasy position comes when the broken unit does control the freezer full of food. I have been guilty of replacing a unit without letting anybody know. The last time this happened the home was occupied, the freezer was full, and the spring was nowhere to be found. The buyer was busy talking to the seller and both were elderly. It was about 6 PM and all I could think of was that I had a demonstrator GFCI in the van to help with explaining to those clients who just don't get it. I replaced it and then let the seller know that I upgraded the unit so that their food would not spoil...... Yeah I came out the hero and yes I would have been responsible if their house had immediately burned down and all of the occupants died in the flames. Somehow my decision just seemed like the right thing to do at the time.
The whole economy started to slow early last year. This condition will continue for at least 6 more quarters. Tom Walther - Vista, CA
Here in southern Oregon it has been good all year around for the past ten years. I don't see any reason for that to change. I certainly hope not as I encounter the expense of updating to 3D reporting. Hopefully the stock market behavior will not reflect negatively on the housing sales. Reggie Ayres - Medford, OR
If 2000's 1st quarter was weak, I hope 2001's isn't much better. We had the best early spring ever. That is right, Michael, January/February is early spring around here. Jobs are projected to increase by 1/3 here in the Sacramento area over the next several years, so I anticipate staying busy. This December has last year beat by seven inspections. I predict the trend will continue. Jon Gudnason - Placerville, CA
Hello to all, and may the coming year be prosperous for both your soul and your business. I am regrettably facing my first significant complaint. I will share more of the detail once it is resolved, which will probably be Jan. 10th. That is the date for arbitration.
My question is, Does a professional pest and dry rot inspection include determining the presence of rodent infestation? Any documentation, if there is any, will help.
This inspection was a Full Home Inspection, not a Wood Destroying Organism Inspection. There complaint is that I did not discover a rat's nest under insulation in the basement /crawl area. They never contacted me and so I never had the opportunity to see what they were complaining about.
Oregon Standards free me from any such discovery in regard to a Home Inspection. The plaintiff, though, states that they thought that my inspection covered it all.
I am thinking that even a standard Wood Destroying Organism does not cover rodent infestations since they are not technically structural pests.
I must say it has been very valuable having a "good" Errors & Omission company to deal with this, so I can continue keeping my mind on the business at hand.
Thanks, Greg Justice - Justice Home Inspections - Rainier, OR
Greg is in a bind. Have you ever thought about your report and service agreement. Is there anything in there that prevents a client from thinking that you wouldn't be looking for rats, mice, bats, ants, flies, roaches, or any other pest??? Here are a few responses that have already given Greg some help......
Hi Greg, I am sorry to hear you are going through this. The only time I have included rodent information in a Pest & Dry Rot Inspection is the few times I have found a situation where they have effected the structure. This is a few times out of thousands of basements and crawl spaces over 16 years. In one real bad situation they had eaten through sub-floor, underlayment and carpet in four places throughout the house. I only found two, the buyers discovered two others after the house became vacant. One of those was under a bed and one under a pile of dirty clothing. This floor was also insulated. The two I found were obvious holes in the carpet that I investigated further from under the house. I may occasionally make an informational note stating an "excessive amount of rodent feces." You didn't mention if there was any damage to the structure. How does anyone know they didn't move in after your inspection? And, why don't they just eliminate the concern? Nevertheless, this condition was concealed by the insulation.
On another more pleasant note, I was hired once to do a 'Rodent Consultation' on a Hunting Lodge that had sat vacant for four years. This included a real nice initial fee and two follow up fees to assess the progress after the buyers started eradicating the situation. They were afraid of the beasts and waited outside while I went through the lodge on the initial visit. My goodness, I wonder what they do when they hunt big game!!!
Best wishes for a speedy end to this learning experience. Sincerely, Betty Buckley - Klammath Falls, OR
Greg, Sorry to hear about your misfortune. It is hard to believe what people will sue for. By the way, what are they suing for? How much could it cost to get rid of some rodents? Oh, I guess you can't answer that yet. Perhaps you can disclose the E & O company that your so happy with.
Wishing you and everyone else on this forum a Happy and Prosperous New Year! Sylvan Stenge - CA
To All, The Errors & Omission company is Marion Allen. they came highly recommended by Ron Cloyd when I went through the training class. To think, I actually considered not carrying E&O insurance! Greg Justice - OR
Greg, Rodents are not wood destroying organisms, PERIOD. They are not considered nor are they included in FHA or VA reporting requirements (which are the standard guidelines). They are pests, yes, but so are spiders, raccoons, possums, etc., but NOT WOOD DESTROYING. Stand on those standards. Reggie Ayres Medford,OR
That was good. I'll use the NPCA Form to verify the argument. Rodents are NOT Wood Destroying Pests. Greg Justice
Greg, the Wood Destroying Insect form says the following......
2. Scope of the Inspection. A wood destroying insect inspector is trained to look for visible signs of wood destroying insect infestation. A representative of this inspection firm has conducted an inspection which may include probing and/or sounding of the unobstructed and accessible areas of the subject structure(s) to determine the presence or absence of visible evidence from wood destroying insects. For the purpose of this inspection, wood destroying insects include termites, carpenter ants, carpenter bees, and reinfesting wood boring beetles.
This form makes no mention of non-wood destroying animals, insects or household pets. Michael Leavitt - Orem, Utah
Greg, Do not use word PESTS. Wood destroying ORGANISMS. (WDO). Reggie Ayres Medford,OR
I agree with Reggie.... We need to stop using the phrase "Pest Inspections." It conjures up the wrong idea in the client's mind...... We are actually looking for Wood Destroying Insects (in Utah) when we perform Termite Inspections. In Oregon, you are also responsible for Wood Destroying Organisms when you get paid for the extra service. Let's get away from the use of "Pests" as we refer to these services. For those of you who only do traditional Home Inspections, it is important to convey the fact that you are not looking for Wood Destroying Insects, Wood Destroying Organisms, or any other Pests including but not limited to Spiders, Rats, Bats, Cockroaches, Mice, Rats or any other Insects. Michael Leavitt - Orem, Utah
Greg, I have read your situation and the responses to it, and I just want to add in my support. I had a situation where I fixed something I really didn't have to because I wanted to save the relationship with the agent. It worked out good for me. Then I refused to fix something I didn't have to, because the claim was 1) absurd and 2) did not comply to my service agreement. Like you, they did not call to get my money until after they fixed the challenge. I could not verify or evaluate my responsibility. This is clearly against my service agreement, which the client signed. They were advised not to pursue it by their attorney.
Anyway, I hope you are not spending any money on such a ridiculous claim that the cracker client wants to make against you. I've never been to mediation, so I don't know how much cost is involved.
Too bad the rats are in the crawl space, as opposed to the rats above the crawl space aren't still there. I would recommend a 1/2 stick of dynamite, and would be happy to pay for the remediation.
Roy Brown - Puget Basin Home Inspectors - WA
Greg, here are the only things I found in the AII™ Standards of Practice that have direct bearing on your situation.....
This final #9 does more to leave us dangling out there than it does to protect us. This is an item that needs clarification by Jon Gudnason's Standards committee. The intent was for the single word "Insect" to be the fuller "Wood Destroying Insects" so as to prevent us needing to report on spiders, ants, roaches etc. Now I'm going to scan my Service Agreement for anything that helps to cover me..... I'll highlight the things in RED that help out......
PLEASE NOTE: This Service Agreement has been modified from the original AII™ Service Agreement as the result of previous scares. It has been looked over by a Utah Attorney and meets Utah laws. Feel free to borrow any phraseology and adopt as your own.
INSPECTION ADDRESS: ___________________________ CLIENT: _________________________
INSPECTION DATE: _____________________ START TIME: _____________________
WHAT YOUR INSPECTION INCLUDES - We will make a visual inspection of the prominently visible and accessible areas of the property. The Inspection Report is a reasonable effort to assess the DURABILITY and SERVICEABILITY of the property in its present state, and our analysis is limited to our written Report. The Report does not evaluate “desirability” of a property. You should have already determined that this property is desirable using your own set of criteria.
THE INSPECTOR WILL ATTEMPT TO BE FAIR BY POINTING OUT BOTH THE STRONG AND WEAK POINTS OF THE PROPERTY. Home ownership brings with it the certainty that failures & repairs will occur. Your Home Inspection will not be able to predict all such occurrences, but a 2 or 3 hour investigation by our professional Inspector, & the resulting Report, should provide you with a useful tool.
Our inspections are not intended as a service call. Operable conditions of mechanical, electrical, plumbing devices or other items are only surmised from the visible evidence. No maintenance services, removal of cowlings, or destructive discovery can or will be performed. Should we locate an item that is not serviceable, or creates doubt for our Inspector, then we will suggest that a licensed tradesperson be contacted to investigate further and/or make repairs.
This inspection is not conducted to detect every minor problem or condition that may exist in the building. Cosmetic deficiencies are to be considered obvious. It is understood that if "Cosmetic Inclusive" inspection is desired, that service is beyond the parameters of a regular Home Inspection and requires an additional fee.
You are encouraged to be on the site at the time of the Inspection, or arrive near the completion of our Inspector’s evaluation, so that he can review the inspection findings with you in person. If you are unable to attend, we will be happy to try and answer your questions by phone. Should an additional visit to the property be required, it will be billed at our hourly rate.
The inspection will be performed in accordance with the Standards of Practice of the American Institute of Inspectors®. A copy of the Standards of Practice is available upon request, or they can be viewed online at www.Inspection.org or www.TheHomeInspector.com. For equipment and components of the home which are not to be operated or tested, please refer to the Standards of Practice.
RISK OF BUYERS & SELLERS - Buyers are always at risk. OUR VISUAL INSPECTION MAY ILLUMINATE SOME AREAS OF RISK, BUT CANNOT ELIMINATE IT. OUR INSPECTOR IS LIMITED TO THE EXISTING CLUES AND SYMPTOMS ON THE DAY OF OUR INSPECTION, AND WE CANNOT BE LIABLE FOR NONVISIBLE, OBSCURE, OR CONCEALED FAULTS. Claims for concealed conditions, whether intentional or unintentional, must be made against the seller of the property.
The most conscientious visual inspection is not capable of determining all conditions that actually exist within a house. We make a random evaluation of some components and, of course, cannot move furniture, etc., to obtain access. If we find 90% of the Reportable Conditions, then we have done an excellent job. Even with our thorough effort, these are some examples of the types of things our Inspection cannot determine: 1. Improperly made wiring connections. Random outlets or switches that do not function. 2. Cracks in fireplaces, chimneys or liners. 3. A drafty or hard to heat home. 4. Roof, wall, or basement leaks that only occur under unusual conditions. 5. The inner workings and integrity of mechanical items including combustion chambers. 6. Underground and/or concealed pipes, drains, foundations, or wiring.
Although, there are many items that our Inspector might determine or surmise if given enough time, our evaluation is also limited by a reasonable investment of the Inspector’s time for the fee paid. There are, therefore, other items that could be added to the above list after a reasonable and competent inspection on any particular property.
Hazardous materials are beyond the scope of the Home Inspection Report. If asbestos, electromagnetic fields, fiberglass, formaldehyde, hazardous wastes, lead, radon, soils contamination, or the quality of drinking water and waste disposal are a concern, please contact an appropriate expert. The Inspector may be contracted separately as an Environmental Professional for specific environmental concerns.
CONFIDENTIALITY - The client understands that the Home Inspection and Inspection Report are performed for their sole, confidential and exclusive use. The Client agrees that they will not transfer or disclose any part of the inspection report to any other person with the exception of these ONLY: (a) one copy may be provided to the current seller(s) of the property, but only upon the express conditions that the seller(s) covenant to use the Inspection Report only in connection with the Client’s transaction, and agrees not to transfer or disclose the report to any persons other than their real estate Agent, and (b) one copy may be provided to the real estate Agent representing the Client and/or a bank or other lender for use in the Client’s transaction only. The Client agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless Michael Leavitt & Co Inspections, Inc. from third party claims relating to this Home Inspection or Inspection Report.
CODE COMPLIANCE - Our Inspection is one of “Serviceability,” NOT Code Compliance. By necessity, our Inspection deals with existing structures which may have older types of wiring, plumbing, heating, etc. As an illustration, today, most local building departments require ground fault interrupter circuits, insulation in the exterior walls, anchor bolts, and dozens of other items which have not always been included in the building codes. Homes absent these installations can be “serviceable,” even though they do not meet current codes, (or may not even be desirable for modern life styles.) We assume that the “then current” codes were complied with at the time of construction.
As an example: A home may have only two (2) electrical outlets in a bedroom, where the current requirement is usually four (4) - as long as the condition is “serviceable” under the conditions existing at the time of the design of the system, our Report will not contain negative comments. We will simply state the factual conditions we encountered. IT IS ASSUMED THAT PURCHASERS OF OLD HOMES EXPECT TO RECEIVE OLD PLUMBING, OLD WIRING, OLD HEATING SYSTEMS, OLD FLOORING, OLD SIDING, ETC. The desirability of owning older designs is a matter of taste and is the decision of the buyer. The Code of Ethics of the American Institute of Inspectors® EXPLICITLY EXCLUDES COMMENTING ON “DESIRABILITY.”
ADDITIONAL SERVICES - PLEASE NOTE: This normal Home Inspection does not include information about Wood Destroying Insects, Lead-Based Paint, or Radon Gas although we do offer these services. The same is true of the other environmental evaluations mentioned above in the Hazardous Materials section. If these items are a concern, please contract with our firm or another firm to get the information you need.
WARRANTIES AND INSURANCE - The Inspection and Report are not intended to be construed as a guarantee or warranty, expressed or implied, including any implied warranty of merchantability or fitness for use regarding the conditions of the property, items and systems inspected, and it should not be relied upon as such. (Home Warranty Insurance Plans which may insure appliances in the home are available at the Buyer’s option from other companies.)
YOU SHOULD NOTE - The conditions stated in our Report are NOT repair requirements, or even suggestions. Some items on the Report are, by definition, subjective and the “opinion only” of the Inspector stating the relative conditions encountered. Our intention is to provide an unbiased analysis. Our Inspector is not allowed to make repair suggestions or comment on the quality of materials and workmanship. Decisions regarding maintenance or repairs are left to you and your tradesperson. In addition, our Inspector is not allowed to answer the question, “Would you buy this home if you were me?” Our purpose is to create a Report that can help you in your decision, but you should not base the decision to buy solely on our Report. Your decision to purchase this home includes responsibility for the future maintenance of the grounds, structure, and mechanical/electrical/plumbing systems.
Unfortunately, some home buyers later wish that they had not bought their home. Because you are a thoughtful consumer, we do not expect that situation to develop. But in the unlikely event it should, your signature below waives the claim: “But for your inspection, I would not have bought this home...” and other similar claims. Time is of the essence to this agreement. Paragraph titles and headings are not to be considered part of the agreement.
The client understands and agrees that if they are not present at the time of the Inspection and therefore do not sign this Service Agreement that this agreement will form a part of the Inspection Report and acceptance of the Inspection Report by the Client shall and therefore will constitute acceptance of the terms and conditions of this Service Agreement.
ARBITRATION - If you feel that the Inspection was negligent in some respect, you are personally expected to immediately communicate this IN WRITING to our address above within ten (10) business days of discovery. Any legal action must be brought within (1) year from the date of the inspection, failure to bring said action within (1) year of the date of the inspection is a full and complete waiver of any rights, actions or causes of actions that may have arisen therefrom. Communication must be from the party originally contracting with us for our service. (Note: If you call in contractors to comment on a component, you can expect subjective and biased opinions from their sales people.) However, we will respond to any legitimate complaint because we recognize that Inspectors are human and potentially fallible. We believe that the difference between a good company and a bad company is how they handle their mistakes, and we want you to know that we intend to be a good company. Any dispute, controversy, interpretation or claim including claims for, but not limited to, breach of contract, any form of negligence, fraud or misrepresentation arising out of, from or related to, this contract or arising out of, from or related to the Inspection or Inspection Report shall be submitted to final and binding arbitration under the Rules and Procedures of the Expedited Arbitration of Home Inspection Disputes of Construction Arbitration Services, Inc. The decision of the Arbitrator appointed thereunder shall be final and binding and judgment on the Award may be entered in any Court of competent jurisdiction. Property or equipment in dispute must be made accessible for re-inspection and arbitration. The accepted standard against which the inspection will be judged will be the “Standards of Practice” as published by the American Institute of Inspectors®. Arbitration shall occur at the property in question. All inspections will be judged against the performance of a reasonably fair and diligent inspection and not against results or occurrences. No consideration shall be given to clients who fail to perform a complete pre-closing walkthrough inspection prior to transfer of title. By agreement herein, no settlement in favor of the client shall exceed $500.00 or the inspection fee, whichever is greater. Disputes settled without favor to the client will mandate payment of fees at the hourly rate stated below for time invested by our staff or principals.
NOTE: If any portion of this Service Agreement is found to be invalid or unenforceable by any court or arbitrator the remaining terms shall remain in force between the parties.
FEES - The fee for this inspection is $_______ payable by check or cash by return mail within 3 days of receiving the report. CHECKS SHOULD BE MADE PAYABLE TO: Michael Leavitt & Co
DEFERRED PAYMENTS ARE SUBJECT TO A SURCHARGE OF 20% IF THE RETURN MAIL ENVELOPE IS NOT POSTMARKED WITHIN 3 DAYS OF THE INSPECTION ($300.00 FEE = $60.00 SURCHARGE). Plus, after 30 days, fees are subject to interest at 1.5% per month as well as any additional collection fees levied by the Collection Agency. This Service Agreement is considered the first notice of payment. Your prompt payment is greatly appreciated. The Inspection Fee is for the service performed on the property. Re-inspections, Research, or Expanded Reports, (including disputed issues requiring investment of time by our staff or principals), will be payable at the rate of $135.00 per hour.
PERMISSION IS GRANTED TO PERFORM AN INSPECTION PER THE ABOVE AGREEMENT AND PAYMENT IS AGREED UPON AS OUTLINED ABOVE.
I HAVE READ AND ACCEPT THIS AGREEMENT:
INSPECTOR: DATE: _________________
APPROVED: _______________________ DATE:__________________ One signature binds all parties PLEASE CHECK - ( )Buyer’s Signature * ( )Realtor as Agent for... ( )Buyer ( )Seller * ( )Seller’s Signature
Now let's relook at the items I highlighted.......
Please include your name or I don't know who it is from...
This photo shows an exterior shut off panel made by Zinsco. It was added in the mid 1970's when an addition was put onto the house. It supplies power to an interior subpanel that has separate neutral and grounding buss bars fed by the four wire feeders. I have been asked on several occasions by fellow inspectors why we as inspectors should even bother removing a single breaker exterior main panel dead cover..... Afterall, what could possibly be wrong inside???
For more information E-MAIL Us