Oh yes, I remember well. I do believe Nick ending up taking care of that one though if I remember correctly.
That was my understanding as well.
I know if I use it, I will definitely be making it clear on the marketing that it would be NACHI buying the home, and under their conditions, not mine.
Nick, no need to rehash that old thread but can you comment on what happened in the end with Chris?
I wonder if there would be any concern if a person just made their own logo? I would rather use one that meshed with my color/design “scheme” anyways.
Kris had one covered by the BBG, for missed foundation issues. The one with termite damage wasn’t being covered by the BBG, or was there an update after this?
https://forum.nachi.org/t/inspectors-being-sued/201499/22
Edit: Here was an update.
Anything missed; don’t know of a single inspector that doesn’t miss something, we are just not there long enough not to miss “something”. The guarantee should just read “if you don’t like the house, we’ll buy it back.”
Thank you JR. And I see it is Kris with a “K”.
I find his case with termites very interesting. The insurance company defended him and won. So, they customer went for the BBG and were denied by NACHI. So then they went after Kris because of the wording in “WE will buy back your home”
Had he not been in the program, he would not be sued. I am very curious if he is now the proud owner of a second home which just needs a little termite treatment 
Bet the house has orgasmic views from the backporch!
LOL. Yeah, right. So the angry consumer hellbent on suing everyone is just going to go away on his own because his attorney can’t find any other grounds to file the suit? C’mon.
We’ve been running the Buy Back program for almost 8 years. It’s thwarted hundreds of attacks on inspectors. When some consumer is angry enough to start suing everyone, they are suing you regardless of your participation in the Buy Back program and even regardless of the merit of their claim. That’s how the world works. But if you participate, the terms of the program provide strong defenses for you because they force the plaintiff to live with those terms… and it forces the plaintiff to make a decision. Either way they choose is good for you:
We’ve never had to use the latter defense in court because every plaintiff’s attorney can see what we can: “Your honor, we offered to buy their entire house back for full price and they refused to leave.”
Correct, we don’t have a program for missing termites or radon or meteorites or anything. We have no plans to create one, either. So the buy back program doesn’t solve all problems or world hunger.
You make an excellent point and I agree. When the insurance denies and the buy back denies then the inspector is the last man standing. Such is life.
However, when standing alone he is forced to defend this statement.
I am not expecting you to agree with me. And I can see how it has helped more people than it will ever harm. But it is the exception that keeps all of us up at night.
It would be so easy to change the wording in that logo. It should say “InterNACHI Will Buy Your Home.”
Yep, and Nick agreed to make a change. But he had second thoughts apparently. Oh well.
Honestly, if I decide to participate, I will make my own logo. Or, not use a logo at all if making my own is frowned upon.
On our website:
In our agreement:
6. The Client understands that under the “We’ll Buy Your Home Back” Program, InterNACHI® purchases the home – not the Inspector or Inspection Business. The Inspector’s role is limited to his/her participation in the “We’ll Buy Your Home Back” Program, but InterNACHI® purchases the home. The client understands that the Inspector and Inspection Business has no obligation to purchase the home under the “We’ll Buy Your Home Back” Program, and the Client’s sole remedy for any failure to purchase the home is against InterNACHI®.
Nice! And honestly, using that logo wouldn’t really even be necessary, in my opinion. It’s not like the logo is widely known and instantly recognizable to the client.
So the big question, do you find that some clients/agents use/refer you based on the Buy Back Guarantee?
We’re not sure if any use/refer us based on that or not, we’ve never asked. A majority of our clients are from out of province, and find us through Google, submitting forms on our site, etc, so maybe they see it and like what they see. 
And not using “If we miss anything.” if there are actually things that if missed would exclude the home from being bought back.
Good point! It shouldn’t say “If We Miss Anything.”
Not sure how you would word it, but it should say “If We Miss Anything That Is Covered Under Our Agreement” or something along those lines. Someone more creative than me should be able to come up with better wording, lol.
Attorneys said that change was unnecessary. They were right. Anyone who could claim to rely on the program couldn’t simultaneously claim they ignored the terms or that the entire set of terms was solely inside the logo. That would be ludicrous. Anything one could claim was important enough to rely upon, would also be important enough to read.
