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.
It's the northerner in me that makes me not trust people. I'm slowly working on it
But it is a slight conflict of interest, if you don't buy the house, the realtor doesn't get paid. Theoretically an inspector could cover up an issue in the interest of getting the realtor a sale. I'm not saying this happens frequently, but it could so why risk it? There's a gazillion inspectors out there, I'd rather a recommendation from a non-interested party.
An inspector has far too much liability to be concerned about a realtor that doesn't get paid if the deal doesn't go through. Their license is controlled by the state and any type of collusion is specifically prohibited. I doubt that many would risk losing their license to make an agent happy.
The pricing structure above is very strange indeed. Recommend interviewing multiple inspectors or trust your Realtor. If you can't trust your Realtor, who do you have one????
The RE agents I have used for purchases often offer up their own list of recommended service providers they've worked with in the past (mortgage lenders, home inspectors, pest inspectors, contractors for fixes, etc). I always appreciate that they offer this but I don't necessarily go with those recommendations. For example with home inspectors, I like to select my own, simply because if the inspector turns out to be friend or family of the agent, or just needs the business the agent sends their way, it presents a conflict. A bias may or may not be present at all. Even if the inspector's professionalism and ethic enables him to report problems without influence of that bias, there is still a set of tendencies that are part of human nature and difficult to detect or change. A person who is operating on some level of bias is often not even aware that they are. This is not an insult to the agent or the inspector.
Its kind of like do I leave the liquor cabinet unlocked with my underage teenager in the house alone when I'm out of town? If I can't trust my own family, who can I trust? Do I leave large amounts of cash laying around the house when the maid service is coming to clean the place? If I don't trust them, why let them in the house at all?
The point is that just because someone is diligent to remove the risk of temptations that are an inevitable part of human nature, it does not mean they are paranoid or lacking trust for the involved parties.
We sometimes do things for our own peace of mind, to remove the elements of temptation, and to make things smoother all the way around. Nobody should be offended by that or try to convince anyone it's the wrong way to feel.
The RE agents I have used for purchases often offer up their own list of recommended service providers they've worked with in the past (mortgage lenders, home inspectors, pest inspectors, contractors for fixes, etc). I always appreciate that they offer this but I don't necessarily go with those recommendations. For example with home inspectors, I like to select my own, simply because if the inspector turns out to be friend or family of the agent, or just needs the business the agent sends their way, it presents a conflict. A bias may or may not be present at all. Even if the inspector's professionalism and ethic enables him to report problems without influence of that bias, there is still a set of tendencies that are part of human nature and difficult to detect or change. A person who is operating on some level of bias is often not even aware that they are. This is not an insult to the agent or the inspector.
Its kind of like do I leave the liquor cabinet unlocked with my underage teenager in the house alone when I'm out of town? If I can't trust my own family, who can I trust? Do I leave large amounts of cash laying around the house when the maid service is coming to clean the place? If I don't trust them, why let them in the house at all?
The point is that just because someone is diligent to remove the risk of temptations that are an inevitable part of human nature, it does not mean they are paranoid or lacking trust for the involved parties.
We sometimes do things for our own peace of mind, to remove the elements of temptation, and to make things smoother all the way around. Nobody should be offended by that or try to convince anyone it's the wrong way to feel.
It's the northerner in me that makes me not trust people. I'm slowly working on it
But it is a slight conflict of interest, if you don't buy the house, the realtor doesn't get paid. Theoretically an inspector could cover up an issue in the interest of getting the realtor a sale. I'm not saying this happens frequently, but it could so why risk it? There's a gazillion inspectors out there, I'd rather a recommendation from a non-interested party.
I would offer a different interpretation of the agent/client dynamic.
If you don't buy the house, the agent recognizes that they were involved in your loss of time, due diligence fee, money for inspection(s), possibly appraisal fees and any loan application fee.
Any good agent just hates to see you lose that money, and works very hard to help you select a good property to begin with.
Additionally, "agent getting paid" is mostly a non-issue. 99% of the time, the agent who knows they have done their best in the failed transaction, also knows they will get paid when you settle on another house and get it bought.
The question always arises:
What would a consumer expect their agent to do when they independently go to a scam site like Angieslist, or to book club, or wherever, and pick a known loser of an inspector?
Since the agent is already not deemed trustworthy, is it incumbent on the agent to discuss the choice of inspector, or should the agent just sit back and let their client use a bum without a murmur?
The RE agents I have used for purchases often offer up their own list of recommended service providers they've worked with in the past (mortgage lenders, home inspectors, pest inspectors, contractors for fixes, etc). I always appreciate that they offer this but I don't necessarily go with those recommendations. For example with home inspectors, I like to select my own, simply because if the inspector turns out to be friend or family of the agent, or just needs the business the agent sends their way, it presents a conflict. A bias may or may not be present at all. Even if the inspector's professionalism and ethic enables him to report problems without influence of that bias, there is still a set of tendencies that are part of human nature and difficult to detect or change. A person who is operating on some level of bias is often not even aware that they are. This is not an insult to the agent or the inspector.
Its kind of like do I leave the liquor cabinet unlocked with my underage teenager in the house alone when I'm out of town? If I can't trust my own family, who can I trust? Do I leave large amounts of cash laying around the house when the maid service is coming to clean the place? If I don't trust them, why let them in the house at all?
The point is that just because someone is diligent to remove the risk of temptations that are an inevitable part of human nature, it does not mean they are paranoid or lacking trust for the involved parties.
We sometimes do things for our own peace of mind, to remove the elements of temptation, and to make things smoother all the way around. Nobody should be offended by that or try to convince anyone it's the wrong way to feel.
"...just needs the business the agent sends their way, it presents a conflict."
Most inspectors want future business, no matter who selects them. Hardly ever has a client-selected inspector not played to me in some way, hoping to garner future business.
I have seen highly-rated Angieslist advertised agents give a hard sell on the property to my clients while watching me out of the corner of their eye.
Here's the conflict:
I deliver more inspection referrals in a year than the average buyer does in a lifetime.
An inspector with minimal business knows that they are more likely to get their next gig from an agent, than from the buyer's book club.
It's the northerner in me that makes me not trust people. I'm slowly working on it
But it is a slight conflict of interest, if you don't buy the house, the realtor doesn't get paid. Theoretically an inspector could cover up an issue in the interest of getting the realtor a sale. I'm not saying this happens frequently, but it could so why risk it? There's a gazillion inspectors out there, I'd rather a recommendation from a non-interested party.
It's not a conflict of interest at all.
I'm from the North and have no trust issues like that. I can't imagine why geographical location would make any sort of a difference, but please don't lump your trust issues with people from the North. If you cannot trust a professionals recommendation then I'm not sure what to tell you.
A realtors biggest compliment is to receive referrals from their past clients. Most of them do not care about making the sale, and care more about getting referrals from the client after the sale. That means the client needs to be more than satisfied with the entire transaction which includes the inspections. Most Realtors have a great inspector that knows how to find the issues, and explain them in a way that does not scare the buyers.
I would always get a radon test. The presence of radon can be incredibly random. One house may have an issue with it and the neighboring house might not.
Thanks for the inputs. REALLY helpful tips. I will do some testing on my own as recommended by several people here & look at other inspectors as well. So far I know that I don't need water quality testing as the home doesn't have a well but I might still do a test with strips. Talked to the neighbors in that area & they said the homes in the area are in good condition & I shouldn't see much issues during inspections.
I would always get a radon test. The presence of radon can be incredibly random. One house may have an issue with it and the neighboring house might not.
I agree with this, for sure.
Check the radon level during Due Diligence, while it is someone else's problem.
I'm from the North and have no trust issues like that. I can't imagine why geographical location would make any sort of a difference, but please don't lump your trust issues with people from the North. If you cannot trust a professionals recommendation then I'm not sure what to tell you.
A realtors biggest compliment is to receive referrals from their past clients. Most of them do not care about making the sale, and care more about getting referrals from the client after the sale. That means the client needs to be more than satisfied with the entire transaction which includes the inspections. Most Realtors have a great inspector that knows how to find the issues, and explain them in a way that does not scare the buyers.
Why are you yelling?
When you go to a car mechanic do you automatically take what they say as gospel? My guess is that you do your best to do your due diligence and make sure that what they're saying is true, and they're not trying to take advantage of you. They are professionals as well.
I'm not the type of person to rely on someone else to determine my best interest. Sure it's easier to just take the recommendation of your realtor, and if your realtor is someone you know well and can trust, then that's perfectly fine.
By any chance are you a real estate agent?
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.
