I performing an inspection on behalf a of seller who sold his property on a contract for deed. The contract for deed was completed 2 years and the buyer is claiming there’s various stucco damage that’s causing interior damage. I believe the buyer is attempting to reclaim any money on this contract and the seller would reclaim the property. I’m performing a normal non-invasive inspection (per NACHI SOP) on the exterior of the home and any potential moisture intrusion related to the likely exterior defects. The buyer did not have the home inspected prior to purchase and has not lived in the home, so I don’t know how they’ll resolve if these issues were present prior to the purchase and/or if that’s even relevant. Anyway, is there a particular inspection agreement I should have the person hiring me (the seller’s legal council) sign. The normal inspection agreement I have buyer’s sign doesn’t seem relevant here. But then again, I’m no legal expert. Thanks in advance! Jeff
Walking into an inspection with a KNOWN legal problem coming??? Run Forest Run!!!
I agree with Matt. If there is a known problem, why do they want to hire a home inspector that is going to recommend having a qualified contractor make corrections?
If you do decide to move forward with the inspection, the client on the contract should be the person or company you’re inspecting the home for and include in detail specifically what the inspection will consist of.
IMO, unless you’re planning on being an expert witness, which brings a whole other dimension and pricing structure with it, you may want to reconsider doing the job.
Well, you fellas really didn’t answer the question i asked regarding an inspection agreement. That’s ok, I appreciate the feedback anyway. Basically it’s a he said/she said type scenario between the buyer and seller. It’s in writing the service i’m performing. I describing the various property conditions as they exist on the day of the inspection. I have no way to discern when or how the various defects arose. I can’t imagine a scenario where i’d have any liability. $100/hour to sit at a hearing and answer questions is fine with me. I could also tell them i’m not interested in doing that. I’m charging this client accordingly anyway. It’s worth my couple hours of time. I’ll have them sign a very basic release and go from there.
Without seeing your inspection agreement, I don’t know why it is not Relevant. I use mine for anyone that needs an inspection.
If legal council is signing the agreement, then they are your client. Which is interesting.
Your final statement is the same for me. I’m no legal expert. For that reason, I’d walk away if I was not sure if I was on firm legal ground.
For what it’s worth, if you are performing a complete home inspection (or close to one) than use a regular agreement.
If you’re performing a single component or similar inspection, the NACHI agreement system has a form for that as well.
Presuming there is actual damage to the interior, it is only your guess (opinion) as to what caused it. You cannot do what the seller wants you to do without an invasive inspection, which is outside the InterNACHI standards of practice, as well as (likely) not covered by your insurance. Rendering any opinion as to cause of any defect is generally not advised for those reasons.
Seems to me the seller needs you to say the damage occured after the sale (2 years prior). The buyer needs you to say the damage was caused by stucco damage prior to the sale. Since neither of those things is possible (unless you have a crystal ball) what they need is a cost estimate of the damages that they can then fight over. They need a contractor not a Home Inspector IMHO.
The “Time Line” of the occurrence of the events is the tilting point to make the decision.
Whatever your inspection will be today, is happening TODAY. Your observations in a Home Inspection are for that day and moment ONLY.
You Observe, Note and Report…. “At the moment of this inspection”
You do not ‘predict’ nor ‘guess’ nor have a “back to the future” McLaren (the car from the movie!) nor can you say if water will intrude under any circumstances. In TWO (2) Years many things could had happened, a wind storm, hurricane storm, hail storm, lack or negligence in regular home maintenance best practices, etc. etc.
Stop think like a builder, constructor, carpenter or whatever you did in your previous professional life. You are now a professional HOME Inspector and you only SEE, NOTE & REPORT on what’s happening in front of your eyes TODAY, not tomorrow, not yesterday.
That would be a DeLorean, Pedro. 
Bet you wish you could go back in time and not post this.
There are two kinds of written reports - those that list observations and those that provide opinions.
If the report will provide an opinion and the party commissioning the report intends to introduce it as evidence in a court proceeding, his attorney will attempt to qualify you as an expert so that the report can be introduced, and you can testify and be cross examined regarding its content.
Under those circumstances, your agreement should address those contingencies and associated fees. My expert witness contract consists of seven pages.
I see no problem doing this inspection. It should be 3x your normal fee though. More work to do.
You can not use your normal inspection contract. It must be written specifically on what the client is asking for. You can not rely on HI Rules that say what you must or not required to do. Your contract must be written specifically for the work you are to perform. Like doing a commercial building inspection that obviously does not fall under HI State Rules.
(c) This rule does not limit home inspectors from:
- Reporting observations and conditions or rendering opinions of items in addition
to those required in paragraphs (7) through (16) of this rule; or- Excluding systems and components from the inspection if requested by the
client, and so stated in the written contract.
It is likely that what you do does not fall in the scope of normal HI SOP Rules. Treat yourself as a “consultant”, not a HI. If you are not comfortable taking this on, don’t do it.
Morning, Jeff. Hope to find you well and in good spirits today.
Jeff, ‘your explanation’ tells me you should keep clear of this or sharpen your terminology.
My take on your explanation…
1: The property was sold 2 years ago.
2: The purchaser purchased the property “As Is.” No purchasing real estate continency.
Too bad. So sad.
3: The current owner now is having regrets, or Buyers’ Remorse and has given the previous owner a chance to wade into the legal mess, if so accepted, must be a fool, meaning that YOU ride along opening yourself to liability.
4: You can be retained to preform a SoP inspection on the Exterior, the Envelope claiming Stucco defects and moisture, while the owner states the damage is on the interior.
5: You are looking for a a particular inspection agreement, PIA for exterior.
Is this the jest of it or is there more?
Looking forward to your reply.
PS: Do not take my reply as an insult.
Agreements below.
Why, yes, yes it is the jest of it.
You covered the jest of it well.
Surely, you meant gist?
Whoops…there I go calling you Shirley again…sorry, but you left me no choice. 
Morning, Larry.
Hope to find you well.
No, I meant jest… ‘a thing said or done for amusement,’ but you can use gest as well.
PS: Do not take my reply as an insult.
But there is no such word, that I know of.
gist
/jist/
noun
- the substance or essence of a speech or text.
“she noted the gist of each message”
As with this forum, we learn…Jest Definition & Meaning - Merriam-Webster
Are you going to make me call you Shirley again?