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.
Pros/cons are identified by others above, but if you do hire an inspector hire your own inspector unrelated to your prospective realtor. Then, he/she reports directly to you and works on your behalf versus your potentially self-serving realtor's possible whims. The latter applies equally on the buy side. Good luck!
Remember, some home inspectors have to 'find something' to justify their high fee.
Nothing personal as you are far from the first to think so, but that is a false notion that has been perpetuated for years and years. We inspectors cannot find and report on something that doesn't exist. If a problem exists, we call it regardless of our fee.
I would love to find a "Unicorn" house with absolutely nothing wrong. I have never seen one in 15,000 or so inspections, although I have been close from time to time. If anything, it is disappointing when I get close and something minor pops up.
In your case, would skip the pre-listing inspection -- it sounds like you are pretty much on top of the major issues that people zero in on. Any buyer's agent worth their salt is going to counsel their buyer to get an independent inspection, anyway. Many sellers want to have the satisfaction of having a "clean" inspection, as a sort of blue ribbon for how well they have cared for the home, etc. These are the sellers who get upset and annoyed when the inspection comes back with items -- "these are so MINOR!" You have no idea what is going to be important to a buyer, and you might drive yourself batty trying to anticipate every single issue.
In 20 years, building codes have changed. A popular item that pops up is GFCI outlets. Inspectors inspect to current code, not the code that was in place when the home was built. A typical seller will protest, "That has NEVER been an issue!" and grouse about why on earth so many GFCI outlets are needed.
Just clean up and put that puppy on the market, and then sit back and wait to see what is important to your buyer. Your agent can only recommend -- s/he can't insist. I recommend pre-listing inspections with clients who have obviously not been on top of maintenance issues. That way, the seller has a chance to fix any glaring deficiencies if they so choose -- or they have an opportunity to price those items, and price their house accordingly.
Recently sold a home with an original HVAC system -- 35 years old. It was a good system to start with, and the system had been meticulously maintained quarterly since the home had been built. It worked. Now, was that going to convince a new buyer? Of course not -- every buyer saw that system and then saw $$$$ for a replacement -- because they knew it was going to break down any day, not to mention the lack of energy efficiency.
Location: Stuck on the East Coast, hoping to head West
4,640 posts, read 11,937,291 times
Reputation: 9885
Quote:
Originally Posted by dblackga
In your case, would skip the pre-listing inspection -- it sounds like you are pretty much on top of the major issues that people zero in on. Any buyer's agent worth their salt is going to counsel their buyer to get an independent inspection, anyway. Many sellers want to have the satisfaction of having a "clean" inspection, as a sort of blue ribbon for how well they have cared for the home, etc. These are the sellers who get upset and annoyed when the inspection comes back with items -- "these are so MINOR!" You have no idea what is going to be important to a buyer, and you might drive yourself batty trying to anticipate every single issue.
In 20 years, building codes have changed. A popular item that pops up is GFCI outlets. Inspectors inspect to current code, not the code that was in place when the home was built. A typical seller will protest, "That has NEVER been an issue!" and grouse about why on earth so many GFCI outlets are needed.
Just clean up and put that puppy on the market, and then sit back and wait to see what is important to your buyer. Your agent can only recommend -- s/he can't insist. I recommend pre-listing inspections with clients who have obviously not been on top of maintenance issues. That way, the seller has a chance to fix any glaring deficiencies if they so choose -- or they have an opportunity to price those items, and price their house accordingly.
Recently sold a home with an original HVAC system -- 35 years old. It was a good system to start with, and the system had been meticulously maintained quarterly since the home had been built. It worked. Now, was that going to convince a new buyer? Of course not -- every buyer saw that system and then saw $$$$ for a replacement -- because they knew it was going to break down any day, not to mention the lack of energy efficiency.
Thanks. Great points.
Regarding the GFCI, yeah, our electrician has already told us and we're in the process of doing them.
The plumber has already replaced the polyblu pipes that are a problem in our neighborhood. We've tried to keep up with stuff like that.
Regarding the 35 year old HVAC----when we bought our first house (prior to HGTV and internet), the inspector said the roof was in good condition for a 20 year old roof, the HVAC was in good working order, for a 15 year old heat pump; etc. I think we ignored the age qualifiers, lol. That was a fun (not) house to own.
We didn't expect to buy a used house with all new stuff. We also didn't expect things to last forever. I think current buyers expect to buy a 50 year old house with all new stuff. What they want and what they can find are 2 different things, so I'm feeling pretty good.
How about this idea. If you really want to use this agent that insists on it why not ask if she will pay for it? The whole problem may then completely go away.
Remember, some home inspectors have to 'find something' to justify their high fee.
Thank you for quantifying the comment with "some". Yes unfortunately there are those out there that feel they have to find something to justify their fee. Also unfortunately those are typically the ones that can not find a major safety issue even if they stared at it for an hour!
....
Remember, some home inspectors have to 'find something' to justify their high fee....
While this might be true with some, I think it goes hand in hand with a low quality report and a general sloppy approach. A well constructed and thorough report should justify their fee, regardless of how many of the findings reflect good condition vs problems. If all the inspector's work is opaque except for the list of problems, then yeah I suppose that logic holds (even if you don't agree with it). If it's a longer list, it looks like he's done more work but if it's a short list or worse, a list containing nothing, then you might understandably wonder.
But a good inspector thoroughly and systematically documents the condition of various features of the building and its systems whether the condition is good or bad. The work (and therefore the justification for the fee) is not very different between a building with lots of problems vs one with very few. Just like when you have a very thorough health exam and you're presented with a thorough report of all of the tests and examinations done and the results and conclusions. I doubt that many people would think that the doctors work is of lower value if nothing was found vs if lots of issues were found. But if he presented a sloppy report that basically just said that everything is ok, it might be understandable if one questions how thorough the work was.
In summary, I do not agree with the assumptions behind your view.
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.