David Nasser
Jr. Member
Karma: 0
 Offline
Posts: 56
|
 |
« on: April 04, 2011, 02:39:33 AM » |
|
Wouldn't the law of the State of Calif. Courts supersede any Pre Inspection Agreement?
We could write down alot stuff to say we are not liable for nothing and get a customer
to sign it. But would that hold up in Court?
I think the Nachi Standard of Practice is sufficient.
David
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Dominic Maricic
|
|
« Reply #1 on: April 04, 2011, 02:52:37 AM » |
|
If you don't have them sign a contract where they are notified that you're following the SOP, it'll be useless (or close to it) in court.
There are just a few lines in CA law about inspectors.
There was a case recently in IL where an inspector was able to say his liability was limited to the cost of the inspection, client signed it and judge sided with the inspector. That hasn't worked anywhere else.
Remember, California is the state that allows your report to be shared with anyone and even subsequent owners of the house can sue you within 4 years (I think that's the right amount of time) based on your report. Even though they weren't your client!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
David Nasser
Jr. Member
Karma: 0
Offline
Posts: 56
|
|
« Reply #2 on: April 04, 2011, 09:47:53 AM » |
|
If you don't have them sign a contract where they are notified that you're following the SOP, it'll be useless (or close to it) in court.
There are just a few lines in CA law about inspectors.
There was a case recently in IL where an inspector was able to say his liability was limited to the cost of the inspection, client signed it and judge sided with the inspector. That hasn't worked anywhere else.
Remember, California is the state that allows your report to be shared with anyone and even subsequent owners of the house can sue you within 4 years (I think that's the right amount of time) based on your report. Even though they weren't your client!
Thanks.... |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Stephen Stanczyk
|
|
« Reply #3 on: April 12, 2011, 02:25:31 AM » |
|
There was a case recently in IL where an inspector was able to say his liability was limited to the cost of the inspection, client signed it and judge sided with the inspector. That hasn't worked anywhere else.
This same limited liability clause has been upheld in Washington courts as well. Lucky for the inspector because he missed a BIGGIE. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
There is nothing sweeter than the smell of fresh cut grass on a baseball infield, the click of a wooden bat and the taste of a hot dog at a warm sunny daytime double-header.
|
|
|
|
Stephen Stanczyk
|
|
« Reply #4 on: April 12, 2011, 02:34:29 AM » |
|
David, you have email.
Steve
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
There is nothing sweeter than the smell of fresh cut grass on a baseball infield, the click of a wooden bat and the taste of a hot dog at a warm sunny daytime double-header.
|
|
|
|
Dominic Maricic
|
|
« Reply #5 on: April 12, 2011, 03:02:43 AM » |
|
I didn't hear about that case Stephen. Can you post some more information here?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Stephen Stanczyk
|
|
« Reply #6 on: April 12, 2011, 03:19:18 AM » |
|
I will try to find it again. It had to do with an inspector that missed massive dry rot and other issues in an older home. Repair costs were something like $60k. The judge ruled he had to pay the inspection fee amount back due to that clause in his contract. It may take a while to find but that particular case was the basis for licensing in our State.
Updated. In a recent decision (2002) , Puget Sound Financial, LLC v. Unisearch,1 the Washington State Supreme Court unanimously upheld the validity of a liability-limitation clause printed in a regular invoice for commercial services. The decision extended the applicability of the trade usage and course-of-dealing doctrines to commercial services transactions.
The two cases I was able to find were both well into the hundreds of thousands of dollars. Handled by the same attorney and his comment was, ""They're supposed to be the expert out there that's going to find those things," he said. "Unfortunately, most of the home inspectors have clauses in their contracts that limit their liability to only the cost of the inspection. "Essentially, even if they miss tens of thousands of dollars in defects that they should have caught, you may only be able to collect the cost of their report."
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: April 12, 2011, 04:07:55 AM by Stephen Stanczyk »
|
Logged
|
There is nothing sweeter than the smell of fresh cut grass on a baseball infield, the click of a wooden bat and the taste of a hot dog at a warm sunny daytime double-header.
|
|
|
David Nasser
Jr. Member
Karma: 0
Offline
Posts: 56
|
|
« Reply #7 on: April 12, 2011, 09:26:32 AM » |
|
David, you have email.
Steve
thanks Steve...I got it. Its very thorough. Im going to remix it a little and make a version for myself. David inspect03@gmail.com |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Dominic Maricic
|
|
« Reply #8 on: April 13, 2011, 02:23:06 PM » |
|
Wow, that is a bit surprising.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Ken Sherman
Member
Karma: 0
Offline
Lake Villa, IL
Posts: 11
The Sherman Coat of Arms
|
|
« Reply #9 on: May 03, 2011, 05:14:38 PM » |
|
Hi, FYI: The Illinois ruling - the Illinois Appellate court upheld a lower court ruling regarding these provisions of the HI contract: Limitation-of-liability to cost of inspection Two-year limitation of liability: (specifically supersedes the statute of limitations) The full ruling is at: http://www.state.il.us/court/opinion...er/5100066.pdf |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Dominic Maricic
|
|
« Reply #10 on: May 03, 2011, 06:04:38 PM » |
|
Hi Ken,
Do you have another link? That one doesn't work.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Ken Sherman
Member
Karma: 0
Offline
Lake Villa, IL
Posts: 11
The Sherman Coat of Arms
|
|
« Reply #11 on: May 03, 2011, 06:13:30 PM » |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Cameron Anderson
|
|
« Reply #12 on: May 03, 2011, 11:13:30 PM » |
|
Ken,
Thanks for that link, that paper is fascinating. I kept interrupting my wife as she watched the biggest loser and made her listen to me read parts of it.(she was actually interested) It was interesting to see what the court placed specific emphasis on when evaluating the inspector's contract. Placement, font size, wording(obviously), and other text formatting was mentioned a lot more than I expected. Really good information to know.
I don't know the whole story, but some of what the court said made it sound like the inspector really didn't miss anything and the clients had just thrown around suits hoping one would stick. The case wasn't even about whether the inspector was liable, it seemed like it was only about whether his liability could be limited. I'll have to Google it to see if there is more public info available about the full story.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Dominic Maricic
|
|
« Reply #13 on: May 04, 2011, 03:13:07 AM » |
|
What a great read. I don't agree that the court is saying he didn't miss anything. I don't think they comment on that fact at all. The important thing is that they found that a limitation to cost of inspection is legal (note that it's NOT legal in California by state law, you have to multiply it by a few times at the very least) in IL and that changing the state mandated 10 year statue of limitations (WOW, 10 years?!?!) to 2 years was valid. One thing I find interesting about the last point is that as far as I've always hear, inspectors need to keep their reports 5 years. Since IL has a statute of 10 years, you'd need to keep your report for as long.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Richard Overton
Member
Karma: 1
Offline
Posts: 49
|
|
« Reply #14 on: March 27, 2012, 10:36:17 PM » |
|
So, anybody have a good format for a pre inspection agreement here in CA.? Maybe just the basics you can amend the CREIA or NACHI SOP too?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Dominic Maricic
|
|
« Reply #15 on: March 27, 2012, 10:45:46 PM » |
|
The CREIA SOP is a standard in CA and has been looked over by tons of attorneys. Why look further?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Home Inspection Software allowing you to create easy to read, customizable reports that can be uploaded online, emailed, or printed out on the job site. Runs on Windows, Mac & Linux! 
Create a professional looking home inspection website for $24.99 a month. We give you all the tools you need to create a site and get it to the top of the search engines. No previous skills required! 
