I can go along with that line of thinking. Would there be any issue with an inspector creating their own logo for the Buy Back Guarantee?
1 Like
The text of the logo can’t be changed. Our law firm hired outside counsel that specializes in stuff like that to make sure it is fine. I even recall them insisting on the word “Backed…” for some reason. I think because it reinforces that there are terms and conditions and then you can’t get to the terms and conditions without getting to all of them. I’m not a lawyer though. But after 8 years, they’ve been shown to be correct.
It’s a really good program that has helped many inspectors and their clients. Beats the crap out of “Uh, how about I refund your inspection fee?” when there is a serious issue.
2 Likes
This whole thread shows that there are a lot of misrepresentations and improper wordage used with this program.
1 Like
Well, proof is in the puddin’, as they say. We bought the home back, the inspector wasn’t sued, the insurance company didn’t have any defense costs, and the family is super grateful. Another Win-Win-Win. Such an awesome program.
2 Likes
… and would have been defended at the expense of his carrier if he was.
I am not a home inspector and how you all market yourselves in today’s market is not something that concerns me or that I fully understand. I believe that kudos should go to the home inspector who is still able to market himself as skilled, professional, experienced, and confident. “I will buy your house back should I ruin your life with a crappy home inspection,” is a contradiction to competence, in my opinion, and just not something that appeals to me as a selling point to a serious homebuyer.
1 Like
Spoken like someone who wasn’t a top-producing REALTOR for a decade and who spent months with new buyers who were too scared to pull the trigger and put in an offer. The “We’ll Buy Your Home Back” Guarantee would have been a great sales tool for me back then. But it didn’t exist yet.
So let me update my Win-win-win comment to Win-win-win-win.
But let’s use your scenario, Jim. Let’s say I’m a buyer who doesn’t know one home inspector from the next and is worried that I might get a “crappy” inspection (as you put it). For sure the “We’ll Buy Your Home Back” Guarantee is going to appeal to me.
Yes the thing works to protect inspectors, we get that. But as you point out…it’s also works to promote inspectors in an industry where our clients only need a home inspector every 8 years on average. It’s the ultimate USP.
Since you asked … as a homebuyer and not a home inspector anymore, I have come to understand that there is a myriad of combined elements in my decision to buy a home that has little to do with the building structure itself.
The dwelling structure’s location and proximity to work, church, and family is exponentially more important to me than a drip pan under the water heater, etc. Affordability, the surrounding neighborhood, the area’s crime rate and susceptibility to pollution from nearby industries are also factors weighing heavily on my decision to buy.
With all of this (and more) in mind, there is no comfort to me … when choosing a home inspector … to know that his professional failures can be compensated (under a litany of possible exclusions) by my being forced to move my entire family out of our brand-new home, the area, school district, neighborhood, and home that we took so much time and expended so much effort to choose because he “missed something”. The disruption to my personal, family, and professional life due to the poor quality home inspection that would cause such a choice is something I would prefer to avoid rather than to consider as an attractive bonus.
I would prefer to take the time to find a competent home inspector. I know it’s old fashioned, but I believe that there are many others like me.
If you wanted to market something that would impress me and other homebuyers like me, offer to simply pay for the repair of the item a NACHI inspector missed so that I can enjoy my new home and the non-structural features that led me to purchase it. I know it would actually cost you money instead of making money on this buyback promotion, but it would be of GENUINE benefit to the homebuyer.
It turns out, no hombuyer in America lays in bed at night, tossing and turning (after their offer was accepted) worrying that they miscalculated “their proximity to work” (as you said). They all worry that they just bought a financial nightmare. That there is something horrible that the inspector didn’t pick up on. It’s just how human brains work when they make a huge life decision. There have been a few grooms who didn’t show up to the altar because of this as well. LOL. We unfortunately can’t offer anyone a 90-day test run with their spouse and the option to unwind their wedding. But we can with their home purchase.
Every homebuyer deserves the “We’ll Buy Your Home Back” Guarantee.
I did not say that. I said that the factors that involve the selection of a home exceed the things found or missed by a home inspector.
You and I both know (but you have never publicly acknowledged) that your buyback promotion makes a lot of money for you. The three houses you buy per year are resold, presumably for a profit, and home inspectors pay you to participate in the program. I get it and I congratulate you on it and, like everything else you promote, a bit of hyperbole distorts the value of it.
In this case, no home inspector was in danger of anything more than an invalid complaint that his insurance company would have paid to defend. The title of the thread is incorrect, as you have admitted, and lured viewers to learn more about (and hopefully pay to play) in your buyback thing. Nothing wrong with that, either. It’s your message board.
You asked and I provided my view, which other homebuyers certainly share, that the process of selecting a home inspector does NOT include finding one inclined to force you to uproot your family and belongings and start the homebuying process all over again after he screws up. Instead, I and others prefer to hire a home inspector less inclined to miss things and does not need such an intrusive and cumbersome safety net to cover his mistakes. I think you should try a different angle to recruit new players.
This forum won’t let me post my reply as it is too short. So here it is: “Duh!.” Of course location is more important than water heater drip pans in choosing to buy a home or not.
But home inspectors aren’t interested in what sells homes, they are interested in what sells their inspection services.
“Duh”, right back to you. As I spelled out in two consecutive posts, home buyers looking for home inspectors expect home inspection reports that are reliable from home inspectors who are competent. They are NOT looking to have to move because their home inspector missed something. Judging by the three homes per year you have been able to invest in because of unhappy customers out of the millions of home inspections you said are performed, it appears to be something more of value and interest to you, and possibly to the inspectors you recruit into the program, than it really is to the homebuyer seeking a home inspector.
If you want to provide something a homebuyer will care about it, pay for the item that was missed so the buyer can be compensated for the inspector’s mistake and still stay in his home. It will cost you rather than make you money, but it will not require the buyer to sacrifice his home (and many reasons for buying it) in order to make up for the inspector’s mistake.
I’m thinking that eight years of collecting $5 per inspection from home inspectors would buy quite a few missed GFCI’s that don’t trip.