Move In Certified Question

I have been marketing the Move in certified program for 2 Years and it’s great. Two offices in the Area have every house inspected before they go to Market.

Now some legal eagle has a Question???

Can I get some help on how to respond?

From the e-mail I received last night.

In one of your listings there is some wording that could cause some challenges
later. Using the word “certified” indicates that something, in this case a home,
has met certain standards that were set by an entity who had the authority to do so.
Is there
a certification process that you are specifically referring to on this home? If
there is a certificate from someone who is issuing them on properties I’d like to
review it for my own knowledge, if not, it’s best to use another word or phrase. I
have seen
this one other time, but don’t know of an actual certification process. Please let
me know if there is one out there.

Thank you in advance for all that can help


Anyone can certify anything. The home owners are certifying that the home is ready to move in and that all major concerns and safety items found on a specific date, and documented in a specific inspection report have been fixed.

Enough said.

Contact this NACHI member. He does 70 a month and may be able to help:


MoveInCertified homes have been pre-inspected by InterNACHI certified inspectors and the sellers confirm that there are no major systems in need of immediate repair or replacement and no known safety hazards.

So technically, the residence is not “move in certified” until the necessary repairs have been made - after the inspection? And these corrections are “certified” by the seller?

Yes, but are they issuing a certificate? I believe that is the question.

Bingo, and the question was, is the seller issuing a certificate to back up the claim.

Got a link to the MIC contract?

I use my regular contract.

This is one reason why I had to stay away from this program. My suggestion (which fell on deaf ears) was that the language be changed to “no undisclosed major system repairs or safety issues.” The report being the disclosure.

I hear ya. Sometimes I think NACHI needs to be fitted for hearing aids. Heck, at least ideas should be discussed some before dismissing them.

Jeff, I’m thinking of using MIC and you raise an interesting issue, what part of the language would be changed, also how are errors & immissions insurance companies on this MIC ?

Jeff writes:

Jeff, your suggestion didn’t fall on deaf ears. Your suggestion simply makes no sense.

Think it out.

A home that has a roof that is leaking and a furnace that is shot, could be Move In Certified (in your scenario) provided the bad roof and furnace are simply disclosed (“no undisclosed major system repairs or safety issues.”)

Simply having no undisclosed major system repairs or safety issues doesn’t mean that none exist… it just means that none are undisclosed. So I don’t see how your idea is workable.

The current Move In Certified system has been used thousands of times and works fine. It drastically reduces inspector liability while not permitting mere disclosure to imply Move In Certified.

Sorry trying to play catch up here.
In a Move in Certified home, do the repairs that are reported need to be made before you would authorize the MIC sign to be placed in the yard?

Seller wants home to be move in certified
HI does the inspection
Seller repairs all reported defects.
HI confirms that systems are corrected makes notes to the report?
Sign is placed in the yard

I Just looked at SOP, under Roofing. It states Inspector is not required to warrant or CERTIFY THE ROOF.
Sometimes restating the obvious ( contract states no warranty, guarantee etc) can get you in trouble!

2nd poster and soon to be member,

If I had a bit more clarification as to the “certification” process, I might be inclined to agree Nick - trust me, I have thought this out.

Once I have discovered a leaking roof and a nonfunctional furnace, do I make a return visit to see that the items were repaired/replaced satisfactorily? Or does the house simply “fail” the certification and I collect my money and leave?

Is there a binding contract included in the MIC program that obligates the client to repair/replace these items before the home can be listed as Move-In-Certified?

All major defects need to be repaired. Myself, I charge a reinspection fee to make sure that those repairs are indeed made, I do not trust just having receipts.

So you charge more that a normal inspection due to the reinspect. How long do you give the homeowner to make the repairs or do you leave it up to them to schedule the reinspection, at which point wouldn’t there be a possibility of other issues with the home.

I guess what I am getting at is at what point can an inspector confidently place a Move In Certified sign in the yard without threat of reprocussion.

Jeff asks:

It simply isn’t MIC at that point. Yes, give your client (the seller) your report, collect your money and leave. The seller can’t claim there are no major systems in need of immediate repair or replacement because your report made it “known” to him/her. If they want to fix it, call you back to inspect, so that they can say there are no known major systems in need of immediate repair or replacement, they can.

No, but even if there was, what would it have to do with the inspector?

All you are doing on an MIC inspection is what you do on any other inspection. Nothing more complicated, just a whole lot less liability.

For a home to be MIC it requires 2 things:

  1. An inspection performed by an InterNACHI member.


  1. A seller who knows of no major systems in need of immediate repair or replacement and no known safety hazards… AFTER READING THE REPORT!!!

P.S. The knowledge of a major system in need of immediate or replacement does NOT have to come from the inspection report, but it can. The seller may just know something is wrong without an inspection. The purpose of the inspection (other than to get members more work) is to force the seller to become alerted (know) if anything is wrong. A seller, without an inspection, can already claim there are no known… , but that wouldn’t be much good because the seller may just be ignorant and not know something is wrong. The reason the inspection is required is to remove the ignorance by force.