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.
After having a highly rated inspector come through the last place I put an offer on (and ultimately pulled out for reasons unrelated to the inspection), I got to wondering whether I REALLY needed the inspector to come out anyways...
I know, I know...usual wisdom is to ALWAYS, ALWAYS get an inspection done.
But after reading his report, and paying attention to some of the stuff he was doing while he was there, I really ended up feeling like I paid someone $350 to tell me things I already knew or could easily see myself, as he's only reporting problems that are easily seen. I can see some minor value in his report on the roof, as I typically don't show up with a ladder, but it almost seems like I'm just paying someone to take a longer look at a house because the realtors seem to want to get me in and out of the place inside of 5 minutes.
Plus, if there are problems found in the house after I move in, it's not like I can hold the inspector liable after the fact for missing something (not that I'm implying I should be able to).
I realize in the grand scheme of things, it's a small price to pay compared to total home ownership, and it's not at all an issue of not being able to afford it, or having to rebudget around it. But on the other hand, to paraphrase an old saying, no one got rich by wasting their money.
Lot's of reasons NOT to do the inspection yourself. Home inspections go well beyond a visual look at a property, no matter how long you look at it.
Do you have the skill and knowledge to recognize the difference between cosmetic problems and structural problems?
Are you willing to climb on the roof, climb in the attic or crawl space?
Do you have the tools (heat gun, electrical meters, pressure gauges, etc) to inspect electrical & plumbing?
Do you have insurance in case you break something, blow a fuse, fall off a ladder, etc.?
How will you justify requesting a repair for an item if find something you feel is defective? At least with a licensed inspector you can substantiate the issue.
I can probably go on and on.
Of course, if you do decide to make an offer on a home you certainly should go back and look a second (or third) time if necessary to make sure the property meets your needs. Then you won't waste your money paying for an inspection on a home that you have only spent 5 minutes in.
Lot's of reasons NOT to do the inspection yourself.
...
How will you justify requesting a repair for an item if find something you feel is defective? At least with a licensed inspector you can substantiate the issue.
This would probably be my biggest issue as a seller. That, and confidence that the buyer, poking around for an extended period did not intentionally or unintentionally damage something. The inspector is, at least in theory, a knowledgeable and impartial third-party. And of course there is the liability issue.
How would the contract be written? Not using a home inspector and merely inspecting yourself is, effectively, not much different from waiving an inspection contingency. Would you ask for an extended visit prior to making an offer? Would you write the contract as contingent upon satisfactory close inspection yourself? As a seller I would never agree to that. I'd either want you to look closely before making an offer and not include an inspection contingency in the contract, or include an inspection contingency and use a professional home inspector.
After having a highly rated inspector come through the last place I put an offer on (and ultimately pulled out for reasons unrelated to the inspection), I got to wondering whether I REALLY needed the inspector to come out anyways...
But after reading his report, and paying attention to some of the stuff he was doing while he was there, I really ended up feeling like I paid someone $350 to tell me things I already knew or could easily see myself, as he's only reporting problems that are easily seen. I can see some minor value in his report on the roof, as I typically don't show up with a ladder, but it almost seems like I'm just paying someone to take a longer look at a house because the realtors seem to want to get me in and out of the place inside of 5 minutes.
20/20 hindsight is a great thing! particularly if no major problems or issues are found, and one pulls-out for reasons unrelated to the inspection.
IMO, an inspection is like paying for insurance. If one knew how long they would live, buying/paying for insurance would be an entirely different proposition. Likewise, if one pays for an inspection and finds something they had not noticed, then the inspection is a good deal; otherwise, it's a $350-$450 inspection that didn't turn up any major problems ... But, then, isn't that the point and value of an inspection? ... to find problems if they are there -- or otherwise verify that the house is as good as it looks?
And aren't the inspectors more apt to be up on current building codes?
Don't forget, a house doesn't have to be up to current building codes, and asking a seller to bring it up to current building code is a good way to get a sale to fall.
I think you are crazy, but if you don't see the value, you don't see the value.
It sounds like the house you offered on didn't have huge issues, which is great. So the question is, on the next house, can you spot huge issues yourself?
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.