This is the 2nd time i’ve been asked to provide something like this and in all honesty I cannot remember what I said previously, but I think it was along the lines of “no.”
I was hoping ya’ll who have more experience could provide some insight, more of a starting point in response.
Backstory, the agent is asking for me to say something along the lines of functional for major systems to provide to the insurance company. With insurance being more and more difficult they home insurance companies I guess are turning to home inspectors. The funny thing is, is there is no certification requirements in MN for home inspectors so not sure why they are coming to us when there are no standards.
This was a typical old house, multiple issues in all major systems. Is the house going to fall down or burn down, no. But I have no idea how to respond appropriately, apparently they’ve been able to get other inspectors to “certify”.
This is the “form” the agent sent me, which I don’t really agree to “certify” anything since that is not what a home inspection is.
I would never sign anything like that. What if a system failed the day after the inspection, although it was functioning properly during the inspection?
Exactly, that was what I’m leaning towards. I’m not sure why other inspectors are signing stuff like this. I wasn’t planning on signing it to be completely honest. I just asked them to email me so I could respond appropriately, and have a written record of our conversation.
I agree 100%. I’m not sure why these insurance companies are asking for certification. I am not even sure why share an inspection report with the insurance company is needed.
So at this point I’m thinking of responding that what functions, functioned during the inspection and that the inspection will NOT determine the suitability of the property for any use an inspection does not determine the insurability of the property (as noted in our SOP). And that rather our inspection shall identify, in written format, defects within specific systems and components defined by these Standards that are both observed and deemed material by the inspector. Inspection reports may include additional comments and recommendations. Thats it. Me to say so would be going outside of our SOP and if they’d like to move forward they can share the report with the insurance company for review as it is theres for sharing.
Just tell them that you will be glad to certify that you performed the inspection and to your comments and opinions in your written report at the time of inspection.
First, it is an ambiguous statement, and no one should sign it until the document defines “good standing”. This is not an insurance term, by the way, and I seriously doubt it is required or being asked for by an insurance company. There is some other use for this statement that a prudent inspector will uncover before considering it.
Second, your inspection report should speak for itself. Signing a separate anything regarding or pertaining to the condition of the home immediately conflicts with everything else you reported about the home.
This sounds pretty much like a 4 point inspection that I do in Florida all the time. I did one today in the course of a full home inspection. It’s a nice add-on.
While I don’t “certify” it beyond stating that it’s satisfactory, and working at the time of the inspection, it probably amounts to the same thing.
There’s a list of required pictures and validating that certain things don’t exist, like Aluminum single strand wiring that hasn’t been remediated in some fashion.
Usually, when the insurance company is involved they want to know basic things, like if the plumbing is copper or galvanized, if the water heater is rusting, if the furnace is still original to the home, if it’s a modern-style electric panel.
Several reasons. First, “good standing” is not how insurance carriers or policies describe the conditions of “plumbing, heating, electrical and roofing”. Second, insurance carriers do not use “heating” to describe HVAC systems and break down roofing and electrical systems by types, design, and material. Third, insurance companies would have no use for certification of anything pertaining to these systems since they insure the property as it is, whether “in good standing” (whatever the hell that means) or not. Last but not least, the potential homebuyer requesting the inspection has yet to buy insurance on the home and there is no insurance provider identified yet to request this information.
You should dig deeper and find out the real reason it is being requested … and then explain to the agent that your report will speak for itself.
So is “heating”, “plumbing”, “electrical”, and “roofing”. Does “heating” include the heating of water, and does it exclude cooling? Are gas lines included in reference to the term “plumbing” and does “electrical” refer to all electrically operated appliances and connections? Is “roofing” limited to the material on the roof shedding the water or does it include the roofing structure as well?
The whole thing is too ridiculous to have anything to do with an insurance company, IMO. This could be a trick that a real estate agent will use to preclude future home inspections on the home should this buyer walk. This statement can be passed on indefinitely to future prospects until it sells. Heck, it doesn’t even identify the address of the home in the statement, as far as that goes. This smells bad to me.
