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.
Location: Stuck on the East Coast, hoping to head West
4,640 posts, read 11,938,904 times
Reputation: 9886
As a seller, I wouldn't get an inspection before listing. A buyer is never going to accept the seller's inspector's findings except to look for more leverage to negotiate. Every inspector finds (or misses) something different so it ends up being irrelevant anyway---especially once the buyer's inspector is involved.
As a buyer, a 19 year old asphalt roof in your area would concern me. If you have a heat-pump/hot water heater that's 19 years old--that would really concern me. This would be particularly true if comparable houses had newer items. I do agree with your inspector that now is the time to sell unless you want to replace all of this stuff.
If you are trying to ascertain value of your house, contact local agents. I'd be more inclined to hire an independent appraiser as opposed to an inspector. Ultimately, it's all about comparisons, though. Know your competition.
Wrong.
NOVA is dead between Thanksgiving and New Year's.
Listing in January makes more sense so as to catch the early Spring market.
No to the deck.
No to any updates. With maybe one exception. Improving curb appeal with low-dollar landscaping.
Declutter first.
Deep clean second.
Touch up paint third.
Deep clean fourth.
Hire a stager ($200) to help you use your own furniture in the most auspicious manner.
Interview at least 3 real estate agents and get CMAs from each.
Pick one and go.
I couldn't agree more. It's odd that the inspector suggested a deck. Inspectors give opinions on the safety and function of the home. Opinions on updating are not typical.
We're looking to sell our house. Years ago, a realtor suggested that prior to selling we hire a home inspector. That way, if any problems come up, we can get them fixed before selling. In other words, hopefully there wouldn't be any big surprises when the buyer gets their inspection done.
So, today we had an inspector come to the house. He spent 3 hours checking things. We pointed out the obvious to him---that our kitchen needed updating, as the house is 19 years old. This is what he said---he recommended not doing any work in the kitchen and instead of doing that, we should add a deck to the house.
We never did get a deck because where we live (Northern VA), gnats are a huge problem in the summer. So we never could see ourselves ever using a deck. The inspector said that for many buyers, no deck is a deal breaker for them and that an outdated kitchen isn't a deal breaker.
So...do you agree with what he said or disagree?
We did this before we sold our house. It seems to me it was a waste of money. Our inspection revealed attic mold, which we had remediated. I have no idea if our buyers inspector would have caught it, or cared about it, but anyway we spent $3000. and this was the only issue our inspector found. Fast forward to our buyers inspection, which had about 50 ridiculous things on it. Four of which we agreed to fix.
As for your guy, I think he was not hired to give you decorating advice, but only to point out serious or dangerous items, like foundation, wiring or structural concerns.
That's not a house inspector's job. Since this house inspector was recommended by the realtor, he/she likely directed the house inspector to tell you to do these things. Because they cost money that you spend, and the realtor may enjoy the rewards of it. That's how realtors work, they get the home owner to "improve" things which are expensive hoping to sell the home for more and/or a little quicker, but it is all on the home owner's dime. I suspect this one who refers work to the house inspector to tell you these things. I would ignore it and hire a house inspector recommended by your real estate attorney, not your realtor. Realtors routinely get kick-backs from people they recommend for work.
I've hired house inspectors referred by the real estate attorney, they none of them comment on the things you mention. Their job is to see if the home is in need of repairs and issues that would need to be addressed during closing. I would ignore this house inspector, get new one as I suggested and fine another realtor, because something is very fishy here.
Per the bolded: No. We hired the inspector on our own. I explained why we hired him in my OP. Our house is not on the market right now. No realtor ever personally recommended him to us.
We did this before we sold our house. It seems to me it was a waste of money. Our inspection revealed attic mold, which we had remediated. I have no idea if our buyers inspector would have caught it, or cared about it, but anyway we spent $3000. and this was the only issue our inspector found. Fast forward to our buyers inspection, which had about 50 ridiculous things on it. Four of which we agreed to fix.
As for your guy, I think he was not hired to give you decorating advice, but only to point out serious or dangerous items, like foundation, wiring or structural concerns.
I agree---he wasn't hired to give decorating advice. He even told us that when buyers hire him, he doesn't say these things to them. He felt that since we didn't have the house on the market and that we were paying him to do the inspection, he would offer up advice and suggestions.
We were both surprised to hear him say that we should add a deck!
Yes now is a good time, if your buyer gets and FHA loan the house needs to have a few years left, I think 3 to 4.. Your buyer's insurance company may tell them they have to get a new roof in 6 years so it's better to sell now. You may be able to show a potential buyer your home inspection report so they know nothing is wrong with the house and if they may even be able to use your same inspector if he offers them a discount to do their inspection since he's already basically gone thru it.
If I was a buyer I would never use the seller's inspector.
One advantage of not paying your own inspector is that you want the buyer to pay for an inspection. If you pay your own inspector, the buyer might decide to rely on that, but might try to get a lower price anyway, on the assumption that the inspector probably missed some problems.
The reason why you want the buyer to pay for an inspection is that then he has money invested in your house, and is more motivated to complete the deal, even if he can't get all the discounts he wants.
Our house just went on the market. If I were to get a home inspection prior to listing it, I would be more concerned about issues with the roof,chimney, heating system, structural issues with the home. I wouldn't add a deck.
We updated our heating system, tore the old wallpaper off the walls and put on some fresh paint. Previous owner had a cat that wrecked the carpet in the family room, so we replaced that.
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.
