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.
I'm planning to list a house I've owned for the past 20 years.
An agent suggested I get a pre-listing home inspection. I could then find out about any major issues and have time to repair them on my own timeline. Also, I could then disclose the home inspection up front so there are no surprises for the buyer---to reassure them. This agent seemed adamant that I should get a pre-inspection.
She said that the home inspection would also lead to less negotiating because everything is already disclosed. I have the option of using disclaim or disclosure and I'd be using disclosure. It is quite specific and lengthy so if my inspector finds anything I'd have to disclose.
Obviously, I'd expect the buyer to get their own inspection done.
Second agent said pre-listing inspection isn't necessary. She also said the buyer's inspection is going to find issues anyway.
I'm in a hot seller's market. I'm not under pressure to sell. I have time. I also know my house. I have had a roofing inspector out last year, for example, because I wanted to know how much time I have left on my roof (the estimate was 8-10 years).
I'm on a first name basis with my plumber who has been advising me for years. He's seen all of my pipes and I know they're in good shape.
I'm also on really good terms with my electrician and he's already told me about some things to do before I sell (very minor).
I don't have a basement. It's a slab foundation.
My HVAC is fairly new. I mean, doesn't that cover most of what an inspector is looking at anyway?
Had anyone else done a pre-listing home inspection?
Having a pre-listing inspection can be very useful. A good Inspector may well find issues that are being overlooked by your electrician, plumber, HVAC Contractor, or others. If possible large issues are found you can deal with them on your own time and terms before a buyer's Inspector finds them.
It's all a matter of choice how you want to deal with the sales process. If you don't get excited about buyer inspection results, and you intend to handle the large issues found on the buyer's inspection, then possibly a pre-listing inspection is not for you. If you want the process to go smoothly then have a pre-listing inspection performed.
As for "doesn't that cover most of what an inspector is looking at anyway" it will cover some but not near all of what a good Inspector is looking for. A good Inspector will look at the entire house as well as how individual systems might be affecting each other. Typically individual contractors are only looking at their own piece of the equation and may easily miss a problem affecting their system or affecting other systems.
I did not do an inspection before selling. I did however have the HVAC serviced and certified. And I had replaced the hot water heater just a couple of years prior to selling. I also had my handyman out to fix all of the minor little things I had identified and I had him do a walk through to see if he saw anything else that he felt should be fixed and we discussed and agreed on fixing a few additional things he spotted (I had used him for a decade and completely trusted him, I used to have to tell him to take MORE money than he wanted to charge! lol!)
Now, I will say it was a townhouse so the homeowner was not responsible for the roof and some of the other external maintenance, although they are for everything inside the unit.
The buyer - an investor buying as a rental unit - waived doing a formal inspection because of the documentation I was able to provide and the clearly well maintained condition. But I would have been extremely surprised if an inspection had found anything significant.
I'm not clear from the original post if the OP has actually lived there for 20 years or just owned it? If it was an investment property, then yes, I'd consider getting my own inspection. But if you've lived there, you know what you've done in terms of ongoing maintenance. You also know about whatever little niggling issues there are. Take care of things that you know about and make sure you are up to date on anything that should be maintained or replaced. And keep the few hundred dollars you'd spend on an inspection and put it towards negotiating what the buyer asks for based on their own inspection.
We got one simply because we were the ones that were going to place it on the market. No Realtor was necessary. The positive of this was, we could be forthright with the buyer. We had two inspections done so as to keep it fair. Each one had a few red flags that we quickly remedied and had them re check it.
It benefited both sides (buyer and seller) .
Ours was sold in three days and the buyer was eager to move in. It was a relief for all that the pre inspections gave us each time to negotiate fairly.
We sold last year and did not do a pre-listing inspection; however, our home was only 10 years old. You said you've been there 20 years, but how old is the home? If it's much older than that then it might benefit you to do one so you can fix the items or disclose them to potential buyers. AN inspection is about $100 in our area, but that could very.
The buyer will do an inspection regardless most likely so it almost seems pointless unless you have some concerns.
I'm trying to understand how it would benefit me, as a seller, to hire an inspector.
Pros: I'd find any major items and have time to either fix them or disclose and lower the price accordingly. I would have more time to get things fixed.
Cons: My inspector could find things the buyer's didn't. However, I still have to disclose and/or pay for repairs. I also risk the inspector missing something the buyer's inspector finds or being wrong about something.
I also talked to 2 neighbors who sold within the past 6 months. Neither did a pre-inspection.
Another aspect of this is that every home inspector is almost obliged to find something - which the potential buyers will tend to view as a negotiating lever. No buyer (or mortgage lender) is going to simply say, "Oh well, the seller did a pre-inspection, so I guess another is unnecessary."
You will find-out soon enough if a potential buyer's inspection turns up something you didn't know about - and will likely be able to negotiate to make repairs that are important to that buyer, rather than automatically making them all on your own nickel.
I did not do a pre-inspection and I wouldn't do it in the future.
Maybe I have a higher tolerance for surprises than most.
If possible I'd rather go with a concession than deal with arranging for contractors.
Some of the time buyers bargain for a concession and never bother with the fix.
Exactly. If you are confident that there are no major issues with your home, there is no reason for a seller to pay for the inspection. Disclose what you are aware of honestly, and let buyer make his own decision. I never pay for an inspection and never had a problem with a buyer. If something worth fixing is found I'll split the cost with the buyer.
Remember, some home inspectors have to 'find something' to justify their high fee. I never provide a home warranty either. They are only good for one year and if something breaks during that time, you'll never know if it was actually the buyer's fault or an excuse to replace something, like an appliance. Skip it all, turn over a well maintained house to the buyer and move on.
We were told at one time NOT to do an inspection ourself before putting it on the market. 'If you find out there is a problem you have to disclose it' the Realtor said. 'If you don't know for sure it can't be held against you'
As a buyer, I wouldn't go by the seller's inspection, I'd get my own.
As a seller, I don't see the need to look for more problems. I keep my house in good repair, so don't think there will be issues.
Except bugs; pretty much everybody here gets stuck tenting their house before selling, and my 2 closest neighbors have both tented in the last couple of years. I don't see termite damage, but I'm sure the buyer's inspector will find some.
I am inclined to say go with your gut and skip the inspection based on your knowledge of the property. We know you have been there for 20 years, but how old is the home? The older the home, the more potential items to be repaired.
Ask a (trusted) handyman to go over the home, looking for any area requiring attention. Chances are you already have one coming in, let a trained eye look it over further.
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.
