Yes I would Roy
WOW! I know I have a couple of Copies will try and find one tomorrow and send to you … Roy
Thanks mate.
Your the king.
OK, help me understand, are you saying that a SPIS is of no value because sellers may not tell the truth or may not know the answers to items on the form?
The examples stated, clearly show that those who lie in a SPIS can be sued. Those sellers who truly do not know about the condition of thier properly can simply say on the form that they do not know about a particular item, this will allow the buyer to act accordingly.
How can a SPIS be worse than no SPIS?
This was written by a lawyer and he said and I agree most home Owners do not know what is in their home, Many have the agents help to fill them out and many agents also do not know all about the home as they might have just had a walk through or they too might just get it wrong .
There has been much written about this over the years .
No way would I fill one out if I listed my home just one more place to get into trouble . Roy
You, a CMI, do not know your own home? Not confident enough to make a statement about it?
In my area, not having a similar statement (PCDS- Property Condition Disclosure Statement) will cause some buyers to walk!!
So far, I have seen only 2 situations in which a house without a PCDS/SPIS did not raise undue concerns from the potential buyer…(1)An estate sale where the executor for the estate was not living in the home…the vendor is dead and he’s saying nothing… and (2) a house sale by an absentee owner/landlord. The house I did on Tuesday was in the second category.
The second last one without the PCDS was an estate sale about a year ago…I discovered some signs of an oil tank spill in some plumbing pipes/sealed floor drain in the basement. A bit of discussion with the elderly lady next door confirmed that , yes, there had been an oil tank spill but it was not on the property I was inspecting but had been on her property… it had gone into the ground and to the house I was inspecting!!
One of those situations where taking 4.5 hours and going beyond the SOP to inspect a vacant 3,500 sq ft home may have paid off…unbeknownst to myself, the gent of the young couple/first time buyers was a LAWYER!!
PS…Just remembered a call inquiring about doing an inspection last March/April. After we got by the first question…Price!!..his next question was about the lack of a PCDS. The longterm owners were “snowbirds” and only spent about 5 months/year in the house now. Because of this part-time occupancy, the vendors did not want to complete and sign the PCDS. I told him that since they were longtime owners and spent at least 5 months in the house each year, they should know the house!! He agreed and moved on to another property!!
Now let me see who I should listen to a Home Inspector who has no confidence in any association ,or a lawyer who very experienced in litigation .
Seems simple to me listen to the expert not an amateur home Inspector who tries to show every one how smart he is .
Just depends who you talk to…
My client that had an $80,000 potential lawsuit against her dropped by the architect & builder of her home/business due to my $2,300 report was quite impressed! The suit by the above was for her holdback due to poor work.
My current litigation clients (who are away on vacation) with the fight against a restoration and insurance company e-mailed me Tuesday that all their wood siding is to be replaced…something that they have been asking for since the fire in March/09. I only started on this about 3 weeks ago and haven’t even completed my report yet…but the restoration company ran into me about 2 years ago in another town…cost them thousands due to my 2 hour, $350 report!!
Now let me see who I should listen to a Home Inspector who has no confidence in any association ,or a lawyer who very experienced in litigation .
Seems simple to me listen to the expert not an amateur home Inspector who tries to show every one how smart he is .
Brian you like listening to your own accomplishments it seems.
I think they call it BLOWING ONES OWN HORN… honk honk beep beep.
Why you seem to delight in going after piratical INCHI members that want to enlighten the public and try to put a voice on the unknown is beyond me.
Sounds to me like HE AND THEY checks your every move.
Even good chess players know when to call it game.
CHECKMATE BRAIN.
True the consumer should have some assurance but the current licencing standards in BC and the proposed Standards in Alberta do nothing to provide any improvement of what we have now. In fact when I proposed an upgrade to the SOP the other association vehemently opposed any upgrading of the SOP.
The whole argument is to protect the consumer but there is not a single consumer on the advisory committee.
Every Association out there pays lip service to protecting the consumer. The reality is that all associations are self servicing and do everything to protect the interests of their members and only in extreme cases are the consumers interests dealt with.
Roy:
Apparently everything you read you do not analyze!! Have a look at Aaron’s wording- “has resulted in an **avalanche **of litigation resulting from its widespread use and misuse”.
Me thinks he has overblown the issue with the use of his words!! This sells!! We all know how Mike Holmes does the same with regard to HI’s and contractors…say what sells…it’ll make me a star!!
Have a look at my calculated #'s:
“With conservative #'s of an average of 400,000 house sales per year X 15 years (since 1995)= 6,000,000 sales/202 = the rate of court cases/litigations resulting from the SPIS documents is probably as high as 1 per 20,000 sales to a low of 1 per 29,000 sales.”
These are very, very low #'s but do make a column and some $$$ for him!
If only complaints against HI’s could be that low!!:mrgreen::mrgreen:
You can listed to the expert Brian or what a Lawyer has this to say
(" The SPIS form is so impossibly technical, so complicated, so ambiguous and so** badly worded** that even a college of cardinals, a posse of priests, an institution of imams, a multitude of monks or a regiment of rabbis ,** could not honestly fill it out**. ")
I am sorry if Brian is not able to Comprehend this .
You conclusion and numbers are sound for YOUR calculations Brian…
I will leave the mathematical guess work for real number crunchers.
So from1995 till now.
I will point out 2 observations on what little I know so far about the Artical and the SPIS from for home owners.
1: I see more and more home owners doing their own selling of the property they own in the market place today.
ProPrio Drict being my example and taking a large chunk out of the ( once thought to be ) other alternatives.
My analysis Brian, is what I have noticed and not scientific.
2: I will agree to some extent that he is advertising our making a case. No more than that.
BUT
To say " marketing like Mike Holmes " and use him as an benchmark for your reasoning.
You lost me there.
I would also like to see where ( the source ) you dragged up those numbers for homes bought and sold in Canada from 1995 till today.
Could they have been from the **same source **that used imaginary numbers to show the rationalization of R&L in Canada.
I hope not.
Brian I applaud you on your consistences.
You are a driven and a intelligent man, and no on can dispute that.
There is a great gap between intelligence and smart though Brian.
Please be smart and recognize the gambit’s that others can achieve when you argue with or TRY to out wit them .
SO
You will only frustrate yourself in not openly recognizing that a lawyer is specialized in his field.
Plus certain INACHI members can out preform you.
By putting out false or unjustified statements can cause him great harm.
Also by constantly arguing with a INACHI SENOR member, on the INACHI MB, that can clearly out class you in fact and intellagencea will only weaken there admiration of you.
Its just a view.
YEPP!! IMO, the waiver …err weasel clause is such a case…should be banned…period! Joe F. has said that in Massachssets, you can lose you license for using a waiver clause…some smart folks there!!
2 sides to the story Brian?
Can both arguments be drawn from this SPIS form?
I am seeing to opposing arguments and one is a lawyer.
Forget the SPIS, the minute the purchaser retains a home inspector the SPIS is virtually null and void and liabilities for omissions are transferred to the inspector absence of fraud by the vendor.
Ontario Superior Court of Justice
Gallagher v. Pettinger, 2003 CanLII 21844 (ON S.C.)
*[62] The legal principles regarding reliance by a purchaser when a home inspector is retained were dealt with in **Hoy v *Lozanovski [1987], 43 R.P.R. 296 (Ontario District Court) and were stated as follows:
However, if the purchaser chooses to not rely on the vendor and requests inspections, including professional inspectors (i.e. Home Inspection Service) then reliance for completion of the deal (the waver in this case) is shifted to the inspector whom the purchaser has chosen. The purchaser has relied on the inspection report not the vendor’s silence, to formulate his decision whether or not to complete the deal…
Of course, as stated, if the vendor made representations to the purchaser or the purchaser’s inspection that were fraudulent, then the responsibility for disclosing the latent defect would remain with the vendor…
*[63] Absent fraudulent representations or concealment, when a professional home inspector’s report is obtained then reliance has shifted to the home inspector. *
[64] In this case, the purchasers obtained a home inspection report before waiving the condition. The report noted evidence of possible water problems and indicated that the type of repairs which have been effected and for which damages are claimed might be required.
[65] In view of obtaining an inspection report which indicates possible water problems any reliance the purchasers had made on the vendors statements on the VPIS document would have been transferred to the home inspector.