WOW, this guy gives the industry a real bad name! Shame. 
2 Likes
I suspect he will be out of business soon.
I found this interesting. There have been many discussions about “filler” in a report. The filler may have backfired in this instance. From the article
“The entire inspection report appears, in the opinion of the undersigned, to be intended to obfuscate the actual condition of the subject house rather than to inform the client of the condition of the property,” Guihan wrote.
“The Buyer’s Choice report contains excessive amounts of unnecessary and irrelevant information that appears to be used solely to take up space and to create the false impression that the report is inclusive and thorough.”
2 Likes
The article states An InterNACHI spokesperson said Densmore is currently a member of the association but was not a member when he inspected Paul’s home
Property closed September 2020.
Been a member since 2018
5 Likes
Is there an incident review process within InterNACHI? InterNACHI staff should review the original inspection report and if it did not meet SOP minimum standards Densmore should perhaps have his membership revoked (minimum). The second inspector (Guihan) knew what defects to look for and the benefit of hindsight, so had a distinct advantage.
I too am concerned about the “filler” comment from Guihan. I would like to know what he considers filler.
I shouldn’t speculate, but I can’t help thinking Densmore might have been under financial stress and was cutting corners on inspections. How did he not discover that the roof was in such poor condition, if that was indeed the case?
As far as licensing goes, it has to weed out pretenders to be effective. Otherwise, it is just another financial / bureaucratic process to go through. I am located in California; no licensing here, amazingly. If I thought they would do a good job qualifying people to become home inspectors, I would be for licensing.
3 Likes
I am shocked to learn that California has no license requirements @bhoefer. Florida is rather stringent with its licensing. And I mean, it’s Florida.
From the article…
“More important to her, the report said her roof was good for at least another decade.”
If that’s true, this home inspector was asking for trouble.
Pictures speak a thousand words, eh?
Nuff said!!
2 Likes
The Licensing of Home Inspectors in my opinion does not “apparently” mean much. All one needs to do is compare E&O and GL rates Quoted and Charged to (licensed) inspectors in states that require a license, versus Rates for (unlicensed) inspectors working in states that do not have licensing. If we that are unregulated were screwing up at any greater rate, we would be in a higher risk group and would be paying higher premiums. (Which from what I can see is not the case.) The insurance industry runs the (risk) numbers and their rates simply do not reflect licensing as being a risk factor one way or another.
I’ll hold judgement because we are getting basically one side and only hearsay (and that of a reporter selling a story)…Let me see This Guy’s report, if it in fact says (In the report, not just what the buyer remembers or is saying to boost their side of the argument) “Roof is Good for another 10-15 Years”
I’ll be the first to say he is an idiot and a fraud.
3 Likes
In my opinion, the highest risk inspectors are those trying to (or being told to by their boss) squeeze in three + a day. You will see them bragging on Facebook about their great day but you know all three of their clients got shortchanged. They are also the ones driving up our insurance rates.
4 Likes
State / Province licensing is definitely not a cure-all, but IMO a lot more stringent than being an InterNACHI CPI, including more enforcement and consequences when an inspector screws up.
…yet, they don’t…not yet. 
Really? You need to think about that for a minute!
OK fine!
California is too full of themselves & groovy for licensing.
Much more basic than that. Think “Politically motivated”.
OK thanks
Far out, man
So true. I say “publish the report with the article” if you are going to be unbiased. My first thoughts, what limitations did he disclaim?
And why did he not know about the judgement? Sounds like someone did not show up to court.
1 Like
I concur.
I fought off licensing in Quebec. None as of yet. Not needed.
2 Likes
So true. I would never hire an inspector that does “or brags about” performing 2 or more inspections per day…Not even worth the $225.00 they are charging…I’ve seen their reports…they suck.
4 Likes
I do not call them professional home inspection reports. They are written inspection briefs, a short document used by creative professionals and agencies, to develop creative deliverables, for the attention of real estate agents and their vender’s.
NOTE: They are in no way a professional prepared home inspection document, personally prepared, outlining specific defects and deficiencies observed in a homes’ Structurers, Systems and Components with the intent of making the purchaser aware, your client, of specific items that can or may significantly affect ‘the overall cost’ of the home, in any way, including safety related items.
To bad.
So sad…
2 Likes
Just one More Thought…Says the guy is part of a Franchise… That pretty well explains why there would be some pissed off customers… As all of the ones I have experience with, Market Heavily to Realtors and after all the hard work of kissing Realtor butt… to name you as “Their Guy” . They may claim to Work For The Client, But they are Married to The (mob) Agents.
1 Like