Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Hey everyone...Having just joined city-data, I am still going through threads and posts. What an informative site!! very impressive.
Being a home inspector in the St. Petersburg, Fl. area I can see where a forum like this would help my business. Looking forward to reciprocating and to be able to offer sound advice based on my experience and education.
One of my recent experiences has a Realtor friend who uses my services quite frequently. I have been trying to get her, as part of her listing service...to pay for the pre-inspection. Of course I was willing to work with her on all fronts including waiting for payment till after the home closed. I was hoping to show how a pre-listing would expedite the process while alleviating last minute negotiations with the buyers, possible saving the sellers hundreds if not thousands of dollars. Well you would have thought I just hit her in the head with a club. Lots of excuses but primarily the main reason was sellers disclosure, seller doesn't want to repair, yada yada yada. Well my recent conversation with her was asking why her buyer didn't need or want a home inspection. Her response was the home had a previous inspection and my buyer used that report to base his decision on whether to purchase it or not. Guess what...he purchased the home based on what basically was a pre-listing inspection.
It definitely opened her eyes but isn't quite willing to pay for the inspection but she will try harder when going after listings to get the home pre-inspected.
As most Realtor's on this forum have recommended the seller get the home pre-inspected why hasn't the Realtor offered to pay for it ?
Maybe home inspectors should lobby their legislature to include a home inspection report as part of the sellers disclosure...
Looking forward to hearing all the pro's and con's to this.
...As most Realtor's on this forum have recommended the seller get the home pre-inspected why hasn't the Realtor offered to pay for it ?.. .
There are pro's and con's for getting a pre-inspection, and they have been discussed in other threads.
The Realtor is hired to provide advice, pay for the expenses to market the home, negotiate the sale, and process the transaction successfully through escrow.
It is not an agents job to pay for home inspections.
In fact, it could be a liability for the agent because if she paid for the inspection, it could be determined that she encouraged the seller to make the decision to have the inspection. Something could be found in the inspection that the seller didn't know about, but now that he knows about it, is required to disclose it. This could negatively affect the selling price, and the seller could then blame the agent.
Whereas, if the buyers inspector discovered the fault, that the seller would not have been aware of, the agent would not have any liability, but could continue to negotiate that repair item with the buyer and most probably get the transaction completed successfully.
The agents job is to provide the seller with the pro's and con's of having a pre-inspection, and the seller then makes the educated decision, and pays for the pre-inspection if that option is selected.
There are pro's and con's for getting a pre-inspection, and they have been discussed in other threads.
The Realtor is hired to provide advice, pay for the expenses to market the home, negotiate the sale, and process the transaction successfully through escrow.
It is not an agents job to pay for home inspections.
In fact, it could be a liability for the agent because if she paid for the inspection, it could be determined that she encouraged the seller to make the decision to have the inspection. Something could be found in the inspection that the seller didn't know about, but now that he knows about it, is required to disclose it. This could negatively affect the selling price, and the seller could then blame the agent.
Whereas, if the buyers inspector discovered the fault, that the seller would not have been aware of, the agent would not have any liability, but could continue to negotiate that repair item with the buyer and most probably get the transaction completed successfully.
The agents job is to provide the seller with the pro's and con's of having a pre-inspection, and the seller then makes the educated decision, and pays for the pre-inspection if that option is selected.
Exactly this. Even though I think pre-inspections are a great idea and tell sellers why, paying for it steps over a line. Also, I also don't pay for them to paint their house or replace their carpeting or do landscaping (beyond potted plants by the door if appropriate) or any of those kinds of things. It's my job to notice those things and point out that they need doing if the house is to sell quickly for the best possible price, not to pay for them. No matter how good it might be for your business.
I don't think it steps over a line and I pay for them. The sellers do have a choice about having one or not. I lay out the pros and cons of discovering defects and since I work only with good, ethical, reasonable people, they all elect to do one. It has been very helpful in having the home sale process go smoother and I think it helps to reassure buyers when they have the presale and their inspection essentially say the same things about the house. Two opinions is better than one.
While I have had buyers use the presale as their inspection, I don't encourage buyer agents to encourage it. I think it is very important they verify the condition of the property with their own inspection, especially since sometimes the presales were 4 months ago and things can change in a house over that time.
My job, as I see it, is to help my clients get their home ready for market. The presale is just another tool, like using a stager, to get ready for market. I highlight all the items on the inspection report that I think most buyers will ask for to be repaired. Most sellers appreciate having the time to get things done, as often some of the repairs can be done by the homeowners themselves when they aren't rushing to get packed and moved at the same time.
Real estate is filled with liability. I actually think presales reduce my risk of being sued because we have a third party verifying the condition of the home and it is disclosed to potential buyers. Buyers sue when they think you are being dishonest. Hard to sue an agent for being dishonest when they go out of their way to discover defects to make sure they are representing the property correctly. In my opinion, presales reduce the risk of lawsuits for me and my seller. I can't think of a single buyer that hasn't done an inspection on my listings in my entire time as an agent. Why pretend the house doesn't have defects when we all know it will?
As most Realtor's on this forum have recommended the seller get the home pre-inspected why hasn't the Realtor offered to pay for it ?
Maybe home inspectors should lobby their legislature to include a home inspection report as part of the sellers disclosure...
Looking forward to hearing all the pro's and con's to this.
Better suggestion.... You do the Inspection and get paid at closing like other vendors do. You could increase your business tremendously. There are carpet companies and others who do this to sell their services.
There are many reasons a home should not have a Pre Listing inspection. An inspection done within a short early time as in a new construction, has been bought within the last few years or meticulously maintained.
Before the recent disclosure laws came into effect.... and by that creating a false sense
that a buyer could expect anything other than motivated self interest on the part of sellers...
the informed or at least well counseled buyer knew that the onus was on them.
Somewhat before this law change the HI industry blossomed as a means for these informed
or at least well counseled buyers to have some objective or at least 3rd party basis to describe their
concerns about condition and help quantify their apprehension about the risks/costs involved.
And that's when the inspector is competent.
Shifting the inspection relationship to the seller end of the transaction? I don't think so.
And especially not so long as the disclosure laws remain in force.
Hey everyone...Having just joined city-data, I am still going through threads and posts. What an informative site!! very impressive.
Being a home inspector in the St. Petersburg, Fl. area I can see where a forum like this would help my business. Looking forward to reciprocating and to be able to offer sound advice based on my experience and education.
One of my recent experiences has a Realtor friend who uses my services quite frequently. I have been trying to get her, as part of her listing service...to pay for the pre-inspection. Of course I was willing to work with her on all fronts including waiting for payment till after the home closed. I was hoping to show how a pre-listing would expedite the process while alleviating last minute negotiations with the buyers, possible saving the sellers hundreds if not thousands of dollars. Well you would have thought I just hit her in the head with a club. Lots of excuses but primarily the main reason was sellers disclosure, seller doesn't want to repair, yada yada yada. Well my recent conversation with her was asking why her buyer didn't need or want a home inspection. Her response was the home had a previous inspection and my buyer used that report to base his decision on whether to purchase it or not. Guess what...he purchased the home based on what basically was a pre-listing inspection.
It definitely opened her eyes but isn't quite willing to pay for the inspection but she will try harder when going after listings to get the home pre-inspected.
As most Realtor's on this forum have recommended the seller get the home pre-inspected why hasn't the Realtor offered to pay for it ?
Maybe home inspectors should lobby their legislature to include a home inspection report as part of the sellers disclosure...
Looking forward to hearing all the pro's and con's to this.
This would open a can of worms,having just gone thru home inspection,how would she be able to handle this and make a sale?
Termites active in garage,new roof,no felt paper under lower section nor rubber shield around bottom,boots around vent pipes cracked and leaking,reused,bathroom fan vented to attic,woodburning stove vented in same flue as furnace and mold and fungus,which was treated, not reported on disclosure statement,also some water leakage in basement not checked off,I got refund from realtor on report.
Before the recent disclosure laws came into effect....
Disclosure laws vary state to state and sometimes within state.
Not all states require sellers to disclose.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
