BuildFax

Originally Posted By: mboyett
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



I am of the opinion that there is a very limited market for this service and that only a few clients will opt for it. I would expect, in my case only, that I might get 1-2 clients per month that would want this service therefore putting the cost/report fairly high and therefore drastically reducing any profit margin on it. I’m going to pass, on signing up with BuildFax, unless they were to offer something like a trial package of 10 reports for a fixed price and a longer time frame, maybe 60-90 days to use it.



Mike Boyett


Capital City Inspections


Austin, Tx


www.capcityinspections.com

Originally Posted By: dvalley
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



I’m interested in this service also but BuildFax has not prepared the Massachusetts area as of today.


I also would like a test trial for this service.

Feedback Please, for those of you who are utilizing this service.


--
David Valley
MAB Member

Massachusetts Certified Home Inspections
http://www.masscertified.com

"Some cause happiness wherever they go; others, whenever they go."

Originally Posted By: kgraham
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



I agree with Mike. I don’t want to buy a pig in a poke without a trial run.


Originally Posted By: gbell
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



Hi Mike,


I think you are correct in that this product will have little resell value for us as home inspectors.

When it comes to my area I plan on giving a report on every inspection. It will be just one more way of making my services a little better than the next guy. It will take less than two inspections to pay for a year. I have no doubt that it will bring me at least that. Very likely it could bring much more. That is where the payoff is for us. More inspections mean more money.


--
Greg Bell
Bell Inspection Service

Originally Posted By: mboyett
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



Greg,


That makes perfect sense, something extra to differentiate yourself from the competition. I like that. On the other hand, I’ve used the “only takes a couple of inspections to pay for it” one too many times I think. What with GL insurance, new tools, computer gear, higher gas prices, truck maintenance (new tires), oh you get the picture, I’ve kind of reached a point I need to say Kings-X and let some revenue fall to the bottom line for awhile. I might rethink this though with the marketing angle you’re using. As R? would say: Hmmmmm…



Mike Boyett


Capital City Inspections


Austin, Tx


www.capcityinspections.com

Originally Posted By: mpelz
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



I think that Greg hits the nail on the head with his point about how BuildFax can help distinguish you from other Home Inspectors. As a matter of fact, we encourage anyone in an area that we serve to put a BuildFax link on their website so that your clients can easily see that you go the extra mile for them: “We Proudly Feature BuildFax Property History Reports”


At $2 per report ($29.95/15 reports), there is nothing easier you can do that will better distinguish yourself, perform added due dilligence to decrease liability, or serve your clients better.

Also, you may have seen in IQ that we're looking for Distributors in all areas to help us expand into new markets. Those of you waiting for BuildFax to come to you may want to get in touch with me to discuss this opportunity.

Mike@BuildFax.com


Originally Posted By: jburkeson
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



I think it is a great idea and plan to include it in my reports just as soon as it is available in my area.



Joseph Burkeson, RPI (Hooperette)


?Anyone who has proclaimed violence his method inexorably must choose lying as his principle.?
~ Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

Originally Posted By: jfarsetta
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



It will be a nice service, but will caution all inspectors who offer the service, with a basic question:


Are you a code compliance inspector, are you an appraiser, are you an attorney, are you a realtor, or are you a Home Inspector?

This service is clearly beyond the scope of any SOP. Not that it's a bad idea, but it is based upon the gathering and verification of information performed by a third party.

I'm not sure if I'd be willing to take on the responsibility to research the existence or validity of building permits, code violations, or COs. I believe there is an added liability which extends beyong the limits of E&O insurance

I'm also not sure if most clients would be willing to pay for such a servce, and if so, how much.


--
Joe Farsetta

Illigitimi Non Carborundum
"Dont let the bastards grind you down..."

Originally Posted By: kgraham
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



TREC has a specific rules wording we are supposed to use as our report. On the cover page, it has “It is recommended that you obtain as much history as is available concerning this property. This historical information may include copies of any seller’s disclosures, previous inspection or engineering reports, reports performed for or by relocation companies, municipal inspection departments, lenders, insurers and appraisers. You should attempt to determine whether repairs, renovation, remodeling, additions or other such activities have taken place at this property.”


So, I guess I'll have to consider using Buildfax when it is available in my area.


Originally Posted By: mpelz
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



Ken has a very good point. As a Standards of Practice for NACHI, I’m surprised that a similar statement isn’t included.


Originally Posted By: cmccann
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



Mike,


Can you explain what distributors would be doing? Thanks,


--
NACHI MAB!

Originally Posted By: pdacey
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



Ken,


That paragraph on the TX report is intended for the client. It puts the burden on them to search for and obtain the information if they want it.


--
Slainte!

Patrick Dacey
swi@satx.rr.com
TREC # 6636
www.southwestinspections.com

Originally Posted By: jonofrey
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



kgraham wrote:
TREC has a specific rules wording we are supposed to use as our report. On the cover page, it has "It is recommended that you obtain as much history as is available concerning this property. This historical information may include copies of any seller's disclosures, previous inspection or engineering reports, reports performed for or by relocation companies, municipal inspection departments, lenders, insurers and appraisers. You should attempt to determine whether repairs, renovation, remodeling, additions or other such activities have taken place at this property."


That would be "you" as in your client should attempt to obtain as much history, info, etc...

That wording was put in there to help limit the inspectors exposure. I would be hesitant to deviate from this limitation but that's just me. Knock your socks off! ![icon_biggrin.gif](upload://iKNGSw3qcRIEmXySa8gItY6Gczg.gif)


--
Inspection Nirvana!

We're NACHI. Get over it.

Originally Posted By: pdacey
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



jonofrey wrote:
I would be hesitant to deviate from this limitation but that's just me. Knock your socks off! ![icon_biggrin.gif](upload://iKNGSw3qcRIEmXySa8gItY6Gczg.gif)



Ditto


--
Slainte!

Patrick Dacey
swi@satx.rr.com
TREC # 6636
www.southwestinspections.com

Originally Posted By: kgraham
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



I agree that it appears the “you” applies to our clients, but I have heard the argument that it applies to ourselves as well. Regardless, should we not provide our clients this information or at least offer them this alternate source for the information?


I don't think this would expose us to additional liability if we are careful on our promises. Such as, offer the report for what it is, which is information from a 3rd party resource for their consideration.

It may be that little "something extra" to seperate us from the crowd.


Originally Posted By: pdacey
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



Quote:
"The inspection of the property listed above must be performed in compliance with the rules of the Texas Real Estate Commission (TREC). The inspection is of conditions, which are present and visible at the time of inspection, and all of the equipment is operated in normal modes. The inspector must indicate which items are in need of repair or are not functioning and will report on all applicable items required by TREC rules.
Please read this report carefully. This report is intended to provide you with information concerning the condition of the property at the time of inspection. If any item is unclear, you should request that the inspector provide clarification. It is recommended that you obtain as much history as is available concerning this property. This historical information may include copies of any seller?s disclosures, previous inspection or engineering reports, reports performed for or by relocation companies, municipal inspection departments, lenders, insurers, and appraisers. You should attempt to determine whether repairs, renovation, remodeling, additions or other such activities have taken place at this property. Property conditions change with time and use. Since this report is provided for the specific benefit of the client(s), secondary readers of this information should hire a licensed inspector to perform an inspection to meet their specific needs and to obtain current information concerning this property."


When read in context with the rest of the paragraph I don't see how it could be said that it is addressing the inspector. It speaks of the inspector in the third person. It's plainly addressed to the client.


--
Slainte!

Patrick Dacey
swi@satx.rr.com
TREC # 6636
www.southwestinspections.com

Originally Posted By: kgraham
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



Patrick,


You're right, it is pretty obvious that it is addressed to the client when read in context with the rest of the information. Below is the response from TREC as well.


"The inspection report language cited below is directed toward the
inspector's client and is intended to alert the client (particularly a
potential buyer of a property) to the possibility that the inspection will
not reveal every detail of the history of the property. While inspectors
may make the same sort of inquiry, they are not required to do so.

We hope this information is helpful to you.

Devon V. Bijansky
Staff Attorney
Texas Real Estate Commission
(512) 465-3960
fax (512) 465-3962"


Originally Posted By: cbutler
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



everyone,


this report would NOT be covered by FREA; as it falls outside the SOP.


Check with the “others” if you are covered with them.



Sincerely,


Chris Butler


(Former) Director of Membership @ FREA


chris_butler32@yahoo.com

Originally Posted By: cmccann
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



cmccann wrote:
Mike,

Can you explain what distributors would be doing? Thanks,


![icon_rolleyes.gif](upload://iqxt7ABYC2TEBomNkCmZARIrQr6.gif)


--
NACHI MAB!

Originally Posted By: gbell
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.



Chuck,


I would suggest that you send him an e-mail. I have looked into it in my area and feel that it may be a worthwhile enterprise.


--
Greg Bell
Bell Inspection Service