repairs for a period of 1 year after the inspection, however I did not see any prohibitions against an inspector purchasing said properties. I can see where there could be a conflict of interest, whereas an inspector could purposely kill the deal, so to speak, in order to benefit from purchasing the property if the buyer should back out. Anyone ever seen, heard or been in a situation like this?
Ken, how is the inspector going to “kill the deal” without lying and violating the COE?
it would be easy to do, an inspector can stay in bounds, but scare the client by how they word the report, ask any realtor.
How do they know for a fact that the client will back out? There is no sure fire “deal killer” statement. I’ve inspected several homes that you’d think a client would not buy, but do so anyhow.
Everyone thinks differently when buying property.
I wouldn’t think the powers that be have the time to sit around and think of every possible scenario to prohibit. I would hope that common sense would prevail.
Something like what you suggest would be at the very least unethical, and most likely illegal, so NACHI isn’t going to waste it’s time on putting it into the SOP. That would be a matter for the law to handle.
If you are going to go back and inspect the property a second time declaring yourself the buyer and inspector at the same time then I don’t see an issue as long as it is disclosed that you inspected it the first time as well.
Not a good inspector. Fiduciary duty prohibits this.
Why are you even asking this question?