Absolutely. If an inspector for any reason cannot view anything, be it because of height, pitch, lack of access, etc. it should be noted in the report that the system or component was not inspected and the reason for not inspecting it.
I have fire damage in my own attic. Some blackened rafters and such.
Doesn’t make it a major problem by any means.
But yes, I would have mentioned that I saw signs of a previous fire.
There are disclosure laws in Georgia and the fire damage was not disclosed.
The sellers had the entire fireplace, chimney, adjoining walls, and wiring completely rebuilt/replaced - but permits were not applied for and it was never inspected by the county building inspector. Turns out the job was done so poorly that it IS in deed a safety hazard.
Bottom line is that it would be an extremely costly nightmare to try to sue the sellers and/or the contractor.
The inspector had a duty, I believe, to inform me of the fire damage. I never would have purchased this house had he done so. I paid for a “TOTAL” inspection package plus paid for add-on items.
Leanne
I think there is more than enough evidence to “condem” this inspector. Failure to note fire damage and improper description of the chimney is more than enough.
Further, if you have not had the chimney properly inspected, you need to do so before use. We do not know what caused the fire.
Standards or not, this should have been reported.
Also, I had dealings with a GA inspector once and confirmed that GA uses CABO building code, which does in fact require flashing. No offense, but your description of the problem area is not really sufficient to fully understand this issue. We need a photo.
Having said all that, here is the proper way to handle it. Get your repair bills together and send them to him and tell him he has 10 days to turn it into his insurance company. Further, demand to know the name of his insurance co. They’re aren’t many so it shouldn’t be too hard to figure out, assuming he is telling the truth.
If he fails to turn it into his insurance co, it may be time to hire a lawyer or file in small claims court yourself. I’m pretty sure that once a lawsuit is filed he HAS to report it to his carrier or risk losing coverage, again assuming he is not lying.
You have to check out your inspector carefully. Any time you go with a multi-inspector firm you risk getting the newbie employee. Further, you have to verify his claims, as many will mislead you. One local inspector here advertises his inspections exceed NACHI and ASHI standards, implying he is a member of both, when he is a member of neither.
Since we posted at the same time there are some overlaps. I would recommend getting a new inspection by an experienced home inspector to identify all of your problems. From there IMHO the best route is to go after the inspectors insurance and let the insurance co go after the sellers.
I would be happy to help you find a qualified home inspector in your area. Feel free to email me at inspector@swfla.rr.com.
I have no financial interest in helping you, I simply would like to help you out.
Bruce,
Do you mind telling me where you’re located? (I’m in Tallahassee, FL and the house that was inspected is in Bainbridge, GA)
The Inspection Company I’m dealing with (their lawyer continues to stall and NOT turn it over to their insurance company) also claims to meet or exceed ASHI standards!!! And neither the owner nor any of his empoyees is a member of ASHI.
Leanne
Jeffrey, this turned out to be major, dangerous fire damage.
Leanne
It appears that there are two main questions with the inspection:
-
Did the Inspector perform a thorough inspection?
-
Did the Inspector identify what are reported as obvious damages and/or
issues with the home?
From the state of Georgia statutes:
http://www.state.ga.us/cgi-bin/pub/ocode/ocgsearch?docname=OCode/G/8/3/330
Ms. Jowers,
Did the inspector provide you a scope of the inspection? Was it specific with regards to what the Inspector would and would not do? If the Inspector did not provide a scope for the inspection did they specify something in brochures, WEB site, etc. that would indicate, infer or lead you to believe a scope of work?
The NACHI SOP is a good document for a minimal home inspection but is not a complete document for an inspection. The state of Texas has an SOP we must follow and it is very rudimentary in itself. Neither of these cover all aspects of what a Home Inspector should do and no Home Inspector should hide behind them just to reduce their responsibilities.
You noted that the Inspector stated they inspected the attic and incorrectly reported on a chimneys construction. If the charred wood was anywhere near the inspected area then it is obvious the Inspector flat out failed to report it. Every attic that can be safely walked should be thoroughly inspected.
As for the roof issue I walk every roof I can safely get on and have walked 10/12 roofs just to get to hidden valleys, backsides of dormers, etc. I have yet not been able to get on any roof at least partially. The only reason I see for always inspecting a roof from the ground level, and not even attempting to climb a safe roof, is to reduce the inspection time and make time for two or three inspections a day. Was your roof unusually steep or unsafe to walk?
I would certainly have to agree with Mr. Siegel’s words below:
Mr. Scanlan,
Thank you very much for the Ga. code information pertaining to home inspections.
Yes, there was a detailed scope for the inspection. The inspector flat-out lied, though. He said everything was fine, when it wasn’t. He said he inspected things that he didn’t inspect.
The inspection company made lots of promises in their advertising brochures. Because I’m single and this is my first home purchase alone, I very carefully selected this home inspection company and got lots of written and verbal assurances.
I must say, I am quite impressed with the professionalism and caring shown by so many of you responding to my inquiries. If only one of you had inspected this house…
Thank you, all of you, very much for your help.
Leanne
Leanne,
Fired or not, NACHI or not, this inspector represented the company you hired to inspect. The company is responsible and should act it. They should have vetted his qualifications more thouroughly before sending him out to represent them. They have created themselves a problem and as professionals, they should rectify it.
Roof repairs with tape???.. only a moron would do that and that is being polite.
The fire damage should have been mentioned if it was visible. Sometimes certain items are deliberately covered, other times items get covered simply by the passage of time and people and will not be readily visible.
To miss so many items seems to be from a person who did not know what they were doing.
However wells, hot tubs and air conditioners many time need to be deferred to the professionals in that field as a home inspector simply cannot keep up on all these items and they are not included in most inspections.
Being a member of a professional association (NACHI included) does not mean you are good in your profession.
Call the company and advise them to get at least some of this rectified asap or legal steps are next. If they are a franchise, call their head office.
Leanne,
I am very sorry for the trouble you are having. I know it must be very stressful to see your dream turn into a nightmare. That is what we inspectors are supposed to be trying to prevent. It sounds like your inspector was either lazy, or terribly incompetent, and it makes us all look bad. It’s also a reason we have to pay such high rates for E&O insurance. I will say that it takes a pretty good “remodeler” to cover up fire damage to the point that a good inspector cannot sniff it out. A house will tell its own story. I hope that you pursue this matter, and I hope you are successful, but please, don’t let the sellers off the hook! I have had people selling one-owner homes who had cosmetically covered up damages, did not disclose it, then throw hissy fits when the inspector (me) uncovered their little oversights. Some even still claimed they didn’t know!
Where are you?
Since, in the US, this really isn’t true. If you have a case, even if you come out with a net zero, you can set an example for future sellers, and help your fellow home buyers. Isn’t the greater good a motive enough, not money?
Purely, In My Humble Option. I often do things not for personal gain, but to set precedences, get causes some print time, and help make the world a better place, one battle at a time. <music in background with flag waving of course.> 
tom
So your true question,obviously is ,do you have any legal footing?
Based on your information,yes.
Should the inspector have seen the lack of flashing where the main roof changes pitch and transitions into a shed roof over your porch?Yes .IF he looked at the edge of the roof the flashing should have been obvious.Since you’ve already had it repaired you know the flashing should have ran from one end of the transition to the other.
The inspector should also not have been trying to perform repairs.
This matter should also have been stated in the sellers disclosure in the specific “Are you aware of…” section.
If I saw any fire damage ,would I report it?Damned straight.
This should have also been in the sellers disclosure under "Other matters…"where it states,are you aware of fire damage at any time?
The task is to prove the seller was aware.The fire department (if called) would have record of that call.
Based upon your information,you have an obligation to yourself to go after all parties involved.
Lastly as far as “protecting” NACHI or its members I have no loyalties to it or any other organization.The NACHI ,or any other ,tag does not the inspector make.I’ve never used their logo or intellectual property to promote myself.And I haven’t paid my “club” dues in a year and a half yet am still listed as a member.(maybe that will change now;-) ).
Oh,Bainbridge is a cool place.I did Bike Ride Across Georgia there in 2003.
You might add visible and accessible without damage to the roofing systems and or personal injury to the inspector. I inspect tile roofing systems everyday, which I do NOT walk for fear of damaging the roof and or in the case of steep slope configuration for fear of injury to myself. In many cases the second story elevation, crickets, valleys and or saddles cannot be observed from the ground. A better question might be, was there any evidence of prior water intrusion to the structure at the area in question. Was any staining noted by the seller, agents, WDO inspector or the home inspector? Had the seller owned the property for any length of time? Would, could or should the seller have known the roof leaked in that area? Was the interior of the structure recently patched and painted? possibly to cover and or conceal prior leaks? Did you as a buyer receive a home protection or warranty plan from the seller or during the transaction? In many cases a home warranty will cover roof related issues.
In any case, don’t jumb to conclusions against the lowly home inspector. He may have been doing an excellent job for you within the limited parameters of “Visible and Accessible”. It is an environment in which all inspectors have to operate.
I’m assuming from your post, you not only provide home inspections but also hold a law degree. It amazes me how many times members on this board immediately advise folks to take legal action. It may very well not be in the subject parties best interest to do so. You have zero facts, evidence and or information to make such a recommendation. You’ve not seen the report, property, view from the surrounding grade and or access issues involving the subject property and roof line.
In many cases the cost associated with legal action can far exceed the cost of the actual repair.
Bottom line is, none of us can possibly know what the circumstances are based on the very limited information available. The inspector may have simply had NO ACCESS to that portion of the roof line.
Your assumptions completely invalidate my assumptions;-)
Kenton?
You walk metal roofs?
Thanks for the comments:
Jimmy,
The fireplace and chimney had been “repaired” (but not properly). However, none of the charred wood was replace in attic - the fire damage is quite obvious. As soon as I figure out how to post pictures, I’ll do that.
David, as I told Jimmy, the fire damage was NOT covered up!
I paid extra to have the well and the hot tub inspected (neither worked on the day I moved in!)
The home inspection company is not a franchise. I am suing, but as good a case as it is, it takes a loooong time!!!
Thomas, would you like to loan me $30,000 - $50,000 to sue the sellers? If I was sure of just breaking even, I’d do it in a heartbeat.
Leanne
Will, you make some good points (the water damage from the leaking roof had been covered up). HOWEVER,
Instead of saying that a roof is in great condition, an inspector who doesn’t go up on the roof OR view the roof from the ground with binoculars should tell the prospective buyer that he won’t or can’t inspect the roof, instead of lying.
Instead of saying that he ENTERED the attic and that everything is fine (including the metal flue, which is actually masonry), the inspector should have admitted that he was too tired or lazy to actually have peeked into the attic (which in fact is BLACKENED AND DEEPLY BURNED/ CHARRED THROUGHOUT FROM A EXTENSIVE FIRE)
Leanne
Leanne,
I agree with what a previous poster stated. The seller is likely the most culpable party here. It sounds like your inspector may be liable for not doing his job right (I would like to hear his story too), however it is the sellers who did not disclose some very serious issues to you that they must have been aware of. They sold you a damaged home, and they knew it!!! If you agree with this, but you are only going after the inspector because he is insured and represents the “low hanging fruit”, than I question your ethics.