Mystery caller

bboerner · July 11, 2010, 7:12am

Bingo

jbushart · July 11, 2010, 12:08pm

I thinkthis suit in Texas comes close.

gromicko · July 11, 2010, 2:29pm

Interesting read. Thanks.

mboyett · July 11, 2010, 3:03pm

The Maze -vs- FIG lawsuit was successfully mediated and dismissed prior to the trial date. Terms of the settlement have yet to surface but they may in time unless there was a gag order agreed upon.

bkelly2 · July 11, 2010, 4:11pm

gromicko:

Jim warns: I can envision a scenario in which an inspector’s report contains so many material errors that a seller would try to sue an inspector using this type of theory, but this would be a tough case to win. The seller would have to prove a few things, the most difficult of which is that the inspector *intentionally *caused the buyer not to perform under an existing contract. Negligence alone, isn’t enough. The general rule is that a professional (such as a home inspector) owes no duty to third parties. See, for example, Section 552 of the Restatement (Second) of Torts. “One who provides information in a commercial context is not liable to third parties are neither the beneficiaries of, nor parties to, a contract.” See, for example, Bily v. Arthur Young & Co., 834 P.2d 745 (Cal. 1992).

An inspector might owe a duty to a third party such as the seller of a home, but only if the inspector and buyer/client intended to make the seller a third party beneficiary of the contract. In general that will not be the case because the inspector is performing the inspection solely for the buyer that hired him and often has no intention of sharing the inspection report with the seller or of conferring any benefit on the seller. So I don’t see how a home seller would be able to successfully sue an inspector hired by the buyer on a negligence theory.

I came up with another way a seller might be able to successfully sue an inspector, and that is under a defamation or similar theory: if the inspector made false statements of fact about the property. I just don’t know of any case where something like this has ever even been attempted. The only case I know of is one where I (personally) sued a credit reporting agency for giving their clients incorrect information about me on a defamation theory. The credit reporting agency quickly stopped defaming me. In other words, I got them to stop telling strangers lies about me via the credit report they were issuing. The credit reporting agency in this case would be similar to a home inspector (both issue reports to their clients about 3rd parties). And I would be similar to a seller (being defamed by an inaccurate report). Again though, this is only a theory of mine which I used once against a credit reporting agency (which settled quickly), and I don’t believe it has ever been used against an inspector.

Any more tips on how to successfully sue Home Inspectors you care to share in this area of the Message Board Nick??

Brian_A.MacNeish · July 11, 2010, 4:54pm

B…R…I…A…N!!!:twisted::twisted::roll::roll::shock::shock:

wdecker · July 11, 2010, 4:54pm

I do not discuss an inspection or the report with anyone other than the client, or the client’s agent or lawyer, if the client authorizes me, in writing.

I have had many seller’s agents, seller’s brokers, seller’s lawyer, contractors, sub-contractors and even a city inspector or two call me to complain about some stuff.

My answer is always the same, “I am sorry, but the state law, and national industry standards prohibot me from discussing the inspection and the report with anyone other than the client.”

Simple, and keeps me from a lot of grief.

Hope this helps;

tspargo · July 11, 2010, 7:46pm

Standard Contract provides the seller of a copy of our report… at least here.

They’ve (sellers) called me lots of times over the years…

As recently as last week, from Home Depot, asking me if I used a Klein type of 3 Bulb Tester w/a GFCI button as they wanted to make sure that their new house had protection near the sinks, it was a rental and he couldn’t see hiring me…oh well. I had inspected there previous home which was modern one and none of the bathroom GFI’s worked, seller couldn’t believe it and was mad at the builder.

Some of the inspections that I’ve booked have been from the sellers calling me as they are looking for an inspector.

So yes, the sellers looking at our reports is a liability to some extent, but if you a providing a good service, our report is our best marketing tool ?!

wdecker · July 11, 2010, 8:22pm

Is this a requirement of the state law or merely of the real estate contract of sale?

In our area, there are all sort of contract’s of sale that specify all sorts of silly things (prohibit home inspection, limit backing out of the deal unless the defects exceed $5,000 in cost, etc), but I am not held to those terms because a) Illinois has a state HI law and b) I am not a party to the contract of sale.

As my Dad used to say, “The beauty of standards is that there are so many of them.”.

jburkeson1 · July 12, 2010, 1:02am

They always ask me if I’m a NASHI Inspector. :mrgreen:

Jam_Lasserton · July 12, 2010, 7:17pm

I totally agree with this. I would just over your work and all the details just in case she does call back. If it comes to it have a colleague check your work to make sure you aren’t at fault for any reason. She is just probably some angry person that has nothing better to do.

Sell My Music online