Two Years ago we did an inspection ( my great partner ) found a small leak behind the oil tank 100 gal had gone into the ground.
Compression fitting on the 3/8 line ,this is not allowed in our area to join an oil line .
Could have missed it if we had not been looking hard very little smell.
Wrote it up hard recommend further evaluation and an inviromental impact study.
Very cheap house in the country sold to my client for $69,000:00.
The previous owner had to pay $60,000:00 for the clean up .
Has any one heard what happend with the previous spill .
Roy Cooke . Royshomeinspection.com
This has just been over one year It would be interesting to see where it went if it went any where .
Always the Home Inspectors fault.
Roy Cooke …Be Happy Join NACHI
One of the most interesting things in my part of the country is a tactic being used by lawyers. It is this they would go after the HI for not noticing the air fresheners, but then they would go into the HI comunity and do a study on how a test group of HI’s would respond to this. The thing about this is that if they worked with the right group of HI’s in the area that had special high tech tools such as Thermal imaging equipment etc… and working with EDR CO. they would determin that it was common that HI’s (there group of HI’s) had knowledge of and use Environmental reports and high tech. equipment. so The HI would be pulled in full force in to liability (if he was a good HI he would of found and noted this) Here in AZ. Ignorance of and use of All things known by a population of good HI’s (as determined by the Lawyers) is not an acceptable defense.
paint a target on your back guys:shock: :shock:
Oh! yes but I have E&O insurance and I tell every body about it .
I agree… " paint a target on your back guys ".
Be Happy Join NACHI
Roy Cooke …RHI…CHI…CMI…CAHPI-ON
It is unfortunate that an HI would have to go through this, but it is live and learn sometime at your expense.
Walking in a house that is lit up with candles, incenses, and air Fresheners, would really light up the bulb in my case.
I smoke and when my wife is away, I will sneak one in, but don’t worry, when she comes back and I don’t care if it is three days old, she will know that I smoked in the house, let alone an oil spill.
This is a dead giveaway, remove the incense and candles, go outside and inspect the roof and come back.
You will probably find evidence of the dog piss, cat piss, or other unpleasing odor in the house for you to investigate.
You should see what my Daughters Inspector wrote about the Carpeting in her house that she bought.
"Carpet torn and worn out in some places. "
Jesus!!! I wanted to puke when i was cutting it and being sand blasted in the face as well. The previous owner had six kids and three cats, and no husband.
Might of taken me alot of work for my Daughter, but that is alright, she paid $50,500 for the starter and when I got done she sold it for $102,000 five years later. Shocks, I did not even get a percentage of the profit. What’s wrong with that picture.??
Marcel 
Don’t say it I already know.
Marcel
</IMG></IMG></IMG>
Sounds just what my inlaws did for Char and I.
Just what we did for our kids and I bet your daughter does it for her kids .
Life is great and we all reap what we sew.
Do good and it all comes back.
Now My kids are doing the same thing fot their’s.
Roy Cooke
“When in doubt, call it out!”
To the title of this thread, did the inspector "miss’ the spill.
What about the local AHJ. They missed it too.
So did the home sellers (and their agent!), and they actually lived there and missed it.
Whenever I see a bunch of air freshners, I call them out.
Live and learn, I guess.
Hhhmmmmm.
All this in a licensed state. Go figure.
Licensing solves nothing.
Jim;
Licensing does provide a legal (state) SOP and give protection to the inspector (if they follow the SOP).
Licensing causes burdens, but it also conveys legal protections.
If the state defines (and sanctions!!) the trade, the lawyers have much less ‘wiggle room’ to try to institute new liabilities.
In a state, like yours (and correct me if I am wrong) there is no such legal definition, and therefore no such protection.
Think of it like this:
Chiroprators provide a useful service, and their profession is defined. Im most states, they are licensed. If they go to acceredited schools and pass professional and state licensing exams, they practice under those rules. They practice in a limited manner (manipulation of the spine) and do some good.
If, however, the try (by themselves) to expand their ‘practice’ into untried and non-sanctioned (non-state licensed) proceedures (like tyring to cure cancer, whcih they are noty qualified or licensed or (in science fact) able to do and they charge the public (and lead the public to believe that they actually can cure cancer, which the can’t) they are opening themselves up to increased liability.
Since there are no state rules in your state (and, again correct me if I am wrong) with regards to HIs, then there are no defined rules, regulations or legal expectations. So, if an HI does a good job (like you probably do) but a client is (unreasonably) dissatisfied with your work, you are open to liability because your job is not legally defined.
In my state, if I do a good job (according to the state sanctioned definition of my job and the state’s accredidation, via a license, of their satisfaction of my ability to so that job) I am covered as long as I do the job as they define it. If some yahoo lawyer tries to claim that I ‘should’ have found something that I missed (like this oil spill), I have the legal argument that the state does not expect me to find such defects and I am protected.
I have had a couple of ‘complaints’ abiut what the client thought I ‘should have’ found (cracks in a slab under a carpet, mold in a wall that was not visable or detectable without ‘destructive testing’, predictions that a water heater would fail, ages and lifetimes of appliances, etc) but didn’t. I was protected because the state law (and my license) said I was not liable for not being able to find these defects.
In otherwords,licenseing can protect you as well.
Counterpoint?
Licensing solves nothing.
Inspectors pushing for licensing to limit liability…are still subject to being sued.
Inspectors pushing for licensing to limit competition…are inundated with new inspectors.
Inspectors pushing for licensing to “raise the bar”…find a market full of minimally qualified inspectors.
Inspectors pushing for licensing to “enhance their experienced status” find themselves considered equally competent to brand new, minimally qualified licensed inspectors.
Inspectors pushing for licensing to “enhance the profession” find themselves subject to news reports from sting operations set up by other licensed inspectors wanting even stricter criteria to limit even more of their competition.
Licensing solves nothing.
Re: Local Inspector misses Oil spill
Licensing solves nothing.
Inspectors pushing for licensing to limit liability…are still subject to being sued.
Inspectors pushing for licensing to limit competition…are inundated with new inspectors.
Inspectors pushing for licensing to “raise the bar”…find a market full of minimally qualified inspectors.
Inspectors pushing for licensing to “enhance their experienced status” find themselves considered equally competent to brand new, minimally qualified licensed inspectors.
Inspectors pushing for licensing to “enhance the profession” find themselves subject to news reports from sting operations set up by other licensed inspectors wanting even stricter criteria to limit even more of their competition.
Licensing solves nothing.
Veni, Vidi, Velcro
(I came, I saw, I stuck around)
Very well writen Jim…I couldn’t agree more
Jim you said it, I am in a licensed state you are right on the money. I have found in this business that there is
- Allways a group of HI’s that are equipped with better equipment than you.
- Allways Lawyers that can turn anything in to money in there pocket.
- at least 50 new HI’s every quarter that just got there license.
- You can disclaim anything on your report, that you don’t do ( mold ) but if enough other HI’s in your area do mold testing you will be in for a visit from the lawyer with hands in your pocket.
I can’t emphasize it enough to all of you that if enough HI’s in your area do something that becomes the norm in the eyes of the law. So if you say you don’t do it that will not protect you.
In my area more and more HI’s are using Thermal imaging devices to look for hidden things it is now very close to being necessary to use these devices weather you want to or not if something shows up in a home you inspected and you didn’t find it and another HI finds it easy with a new high tech device you will be nailed.
I wish Joe Ferry would rain in on this for all to hear about this type of practice by lawyers.
This article was from a year ago what was the end result???
I’m interested because the results could change the very discussion we are having now.
Maybe all of us in NE should go to Joe Ferry’s seminar in Boston and learn more about how to protect our businesses better
I disagree with most of what you say. The fact is AZ still has an SOP and if your report and contract are as they should be you will be fine. Them dudes with thermal cams are going way beyond what a HI is required to do as set forth by the AZ SOP and they are the ones that will get hammered with lawsuits.
I go beyond the AZ SOP, but not by much and I do not use any “special” equipment so to speak. At least not when anyone is watching.
Todd: You better check it out talk to your lawyer and to AZ buildmasters etc… when a large enough group does something it becomes the norm. It doesn’t matter what the AZ SOP’s say (and the SOP’s can change) I was hoping Joe Ferry would join in on this so you would see what I am talking about from a Lawyers point of view. If enough people do something in law it becomes acceptable. I don’t do Mold and I disclaim it on everything but Mold testing is so standard to a large population of Inspectors in the Phoenix area that it is becoming a standard practice. My lawyer has told me I need to look in to doing mold inspections and thermal imaging because he would be hard pressed to help me as time goes on.
There is no such thing as “going beyond” an SOP. You comply with an SOP or you do not. If you do not, then you have no SOP…just your own set of unpublished standards. Accordingly, you have no protection.
An SOP is your client’s way of knowing and understanding the scope of your inspection. When you deviate from it and your client no longer can rely upon it as previously advertised, you are subjecting yourself to risk.
Thanks James once more you are showing that you have a grasp on the HI’s issues.
Where is Joe Ferry when you need him I think everyone really would gain from his perspective on what I wrote. I went to the Ask Joe Ferry thread to ask him to join us here but he must be busy right now I hope he gives a responce here for everyone so you can understand what I was saying.
Michael Craig gets it. What he says is really true. Look at all the inspectors being sued for NOT doing mold.
Michael Rowan got together with the other two big multi-inspection firms in Jacksonville. They all bought infrared cameras and now everyone is inspecting with them… he changed the market so that you have to have a camera.
Nick…how does an inspector “do” mold, other than to report it when it is suspected, by observation? No one has ever been challenged for not collecting a sample and sending it to a lab, have they?