Originally Posted By: clawrenson
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.
Larry: Point well taken - but have you ever tried fighting with a judge on their take on the SOP? I think we are left in a no win position, even if you appeal their judgement.
I do not disagree with you, but perhaps through these types of "nuisance" case considerations, over time, the judges may eventually see there are certain and real limitations, to even perceived expectations. Honestly there are far too many loopholes even now in the SOP. Are all inspectors obliged to follow them? How about those that do not, or those that exceed them?
Another discussion raised the issue of safety, or how about that environmental concern - inspectors and have been successfully sued for mold - even though the SOP indicates we don't (normally) inspect for it. Sure we report it if we suspect it, but how many go as far as not just reporting it, but go further to indicate implications of your client and their family, et al?
Also our inspection agreements should and must include lines of defense to "fairly" cover off the what if scenarios. First and foremost - we do not have X-ray vision do we? Secondly, it is almost impossible to find all defects, but hopefully we find the "biggies". There is not a clear line of demarkation regarding access limitations - its rather subjective. Simply too general.
Some also feel, that the moment we step onto the property - we are the expert, hired to diagnose all problems, and are paid to to do so. Simply we assume far too great a risk for far too little compensation! Than we are left after the fact inspection and report, to be sued for whatever that client or their legal advisor feels compelled to chase after.
So unfortunately lawsuits and good negotiation skills with our clients will help make us wiser of how to diminish our risk.
Ontario Home Inspections Inc.