Any regulation at all

for CA home inspectors?

Is this it?

There’s CALNACHI. But there’s no licensing, no regulations, no state-enforced standards of practice or code of ethics to follow. Correct?


That is correct for now. The State does nothing to monitor, license, regulate or punish home inspectors in any way.

Philippe Heller
The San Diego Real Estate Inspection Co.

Thank the Lord they don’t! I’ve been a California State Licensed General Contractor for the past 25 years. Other than take my money for licensing, they do nothing. The contracting industry here in California is rampant with unethical, dishonest and or criminal behavior. Licensing of home inspectors will do nothing to improve the quality of the inspection industry. There are and will continue to be dishonest, unethical and unqualified home inspectors in the industry just as there are Agents in the Real Estate industry, which by the way is heavily licensed and monitored here in California…

  1. It is the duty of a home inspector who is not licensed as a
    general contractor, structural pest control operator, or architect,
    or registered as a professional engineer to conduct a home inspection
    with the degree of care that a reasonably prudent home inspector
    would exercise.

Actually CREIA is the recognized inspection standard and organization here in california…

The California building and professions code, Chapter 9.3, Section 7195 defines a home inspection as:

“a noninvasive, physical examination, performed for a fee in connection with a transfer, as defined in subdivision (e), of real property, of the mechanical, electrical, or plumbing systems or the structural and essential components of a residential dwelling of one to four units designed to identify material defects in those systems, structures and components.”

The reason I ask is this: I’ve gotten verbal permission from the Department of Real Estate in California, Education Section, Mr. Randy, to develop a 2 to 3 hour educational video for all of the real estate salespersons in California. Randy wants me (NACHI.TV) to teach real estate salespersons (agents) about the Standards of Practice and Code of Ethics that California home inspectors follow.

Shall I pick CREIA’s standards? Or InterNACHI’s? Or CALNACHI’s?

Your thoughts please.

**So here’s your chance, CA inspectors! ** What do you want Californian real estate agents to know about Californian home inspectors (in relation to the Standards of Practice and Code of Ethics that you follow?


Since you have a connection to INACHI, that’s probably the most favored SOP from your end.

Since most California Inspectors are not with INACHI they no doubt use a different SOP, (CREIA/ASHI and or NAHI).

It matters not in my opinion. Realtors could care less about what SOP the inspectors use or what inspection organization they’re members of. I just don’t have clients and or agents asking me about my industry memberships on a regular basis.

I would think Cal-NACHI would not be an option, since its no doubt the least used SOP of the group.

(The point is being missed.)

The educational video for the real estate agents would be indirectly designed to help educate them on what to expect from their home inspector. Not necessarily from their InterNACHI inspector. My goal goes beyond teaching real estate agents about home inspection associations.

The goal is to educate real estate agents upon what is required and not required of their inspector (whatever association they belong to).

Cali has a lot of problems (I hear) with the lack of understanding and communication between agents and inspectors. For example, it’s ridiculous (imho) to hold accountable the inspector for four years - 4 years! That statute of limitations came from a lack of communication between inspectors and others in the real estate industry. No? That’s the goal of NACHI.TV here. To educate CA real estate agents about home inspectors, what they do, what’s required, not required, what’s expected, etc. The goal has nothing to do with promoting a particular sop of a particular association - waste of time for us at NACHI.TV.

So, again, what do you (CA home inspectors) want to teach 100,000+ real estate agents? Tell me, and I’ll pass it along.

  1. The time for commencement of a legal action for breach of
    duty arising from a home inspection report shall not exceed four
    years from the date of the inspection.

Four years is not punishment?

In the course, I could review other state’s statute of limitations (such as in PA with a one-year limit). A one-year limit sounds reasonable. Four-year limit doesn’t (imho).

That’s what you want to teach real estate agents in CA? That’s it?!?

What about “Stop telling your clients to call the inspector whenever something breaks.”

Or “Tell your home buyer to take some responsibility for their own home’s maintenance and upkeep. Don’t call the inspector.”

Or “Tell your home buyer that the inspector is in the house for only a couple hours; of course you’re going to find something wrong - You’re living in the house.”

In the course, I’ll tone it down a little.:wink:

How about coming to Sacramento with Nick for the workshop on the 23rd September? We’ll be discussing this complicated and contentious subject, but you should be able to gather enough information to best educate CA realtors. Unfortunately, inspectors do not agree on many key issues, including the threat of litigation, the value of insurance, contracts, standards, etc.

No. That’s a standard contractual obligation in CA. Even if both parties agree to limit or reduce the four-year statute, CA state law will trump such an agreement.

Much like the “limit of liability” that many inspector try to pass on to clients. If my contract says that I can only be held liable up to the amount of the inspection fee - even if the client agrees and signs the provision - state law will allow full recovery of damages in the case of negligence.

The simple fact of the matter is - CA state law cannot be altered through contractual provisions.

I think Keith has suggested a great opportunity for you. Have a sit-down with some CA inspectors that have watched similar battles over the years.

It’s not a matter of changing the Real Estate Industry, it’s about changing the law.

CREIA was huge about 5 years ago but their membership took a beatin’ these last 2 years. I think they are under 400. We are at 342 as of today. We hope to pass them this year.

How many RSVPs so far?

Right… Gross negligence or willful misconduct. Limited home warranties that incorporate a “limit of liability” clause do protect inspectors who have followed the Standards of Practice and have not done anything wrong (negligence and misconduct). Nothing (neither law nor warranties) protect inspectors when their client can prove gross negligence or willful misconduct. (The client must prove it). For example, a warranty can be used to protect an inspector from a complaint filed about a roof leak that occurs 3 months after the inspection. In that example, there’s no negligence or misconduct; it’s just an unfortunate event.

I can’t change the CA law from the studios of NACHI.TV. But changing minds of CA real estate agents may help.


Listen to what an experienced and respected California inspector is saying to you.

here we go again… You aint talking about the Mountain warantee thing again, are you?

Back to the question of the topics for the course for real estate agents… It looks like I’ll teach mostly from the CREIA website and their SOP. That’s what Will Handly (an experienced and respected California inspector) is suggesting (post #5).*

It doesn’t have to be “gross” negligence or willful misconduct. In fact, even our E&O won’t cover us for this type of instance.

CA law says that negligence is a “legal cause” of damage if it directly and in natural and continuous sequence produces or contributes substantially to producing such damage, so it can reasonably be said that if not for the negligence, the loss, injury or damage would not have occurred.

If I have not been negligent, I do not need the protection of a limited home warranty.

In 90% (or more) of the transactions I’m involved with, the buyer is provided with a home warranty by either the seller, sellers agent or buyers agent - even in today’s REO market. I used to offer a warranty through AHW, but more often than not, a warranty was already included in the transaction. Multiple warranties on a single property cause trouble for the owner if/when a problem arises.

Now that I see the direction you’re headed, I would suggest you continue with using the CREIA Standards, simply because they are more widely recognized in our state.

Wow. The CREIA website is really great. And so is the SOP. Impressive. InterNACHI needs to get their SOP sht together.