Why is construction supervisor angry at home inspectors?**
Claims some are a waste of money
***Tuesday, July 17, 2007 * Dear Barry, I’m a construction supervisor for a nationwide residential developer, and frankly, I’m tired of dealing with you know-it-all home inspectors. My company constructs good homes; we build them to code; and we don’t sell them until they’ve been approved by a city or county inspector. But some of our buyers, after the municipal inspector says everything is OK, waste their money on a bogus inspector like you. They hire some self-appointed “expert” who invents a list of imaginary problems, just to make the buyers think they’re getting some value for the inspection fee. For example, we installed a water heater and secured the exhaust connections with metallic tape. The city inspector signed it off, but a home inspector said the connections should be fastened with screws. In another house, a home inspector said that all the windows should be safety glass. Why don’t you guys find some real jobs instead of making up problems where there aren’t any? --Howard
Dear Howard,
Levels of competence vary widely within all professions. Admittedly, there are home inspectors who need to find other jobs or at least be retrained in their current ones. Likewise, you’ve probably known a few construction supervisors who don’t measure up to your professional standards. But you wouldn’t dismiss the credibility of your own profession on the basis of poor performance by some. If that premise were acceptable, we could write off all doctors because of a few malpractitioners; we could reject all carpenters because some are wood butchers; and we could discard all attorneys because … well, we’ll skip that example.
Of the two instances you cite, one is favorable to the home inspector and one is not. Flue pipe connections on a water heater are required to be secured with screws or other approved method. Tape is not an approved method because the glue eventually dries out and loses its adhesion. Ensuring the permanent attachment of an exhaust pipe within a home is a vital safety concern for the occupants. Screws do not detach as they become older. The municipal inspector, rather than approving the taped connections, probably just failed to notice them. Fortunately, this error was caught by the “know-it-all” home inspector.
In your other example, a home inspector called for tempered safety glass for all windows in a home. The absurdity of that recommendation is obvious. That home inspector clearly needs retraining or retirement. On the other side of that coin, there are newly approved homes in which windows that should be safety glass are not. Examples include windows adjacent to bathtubs or at stair landings. Defects such as these are sometimes missed when buildings are signed off. Home inspectors provide a final backup in the consumer protection process.
The bottom line, Howard, is this: All new homes have defects, regardless of the competence and integrity of the builder or the construction supervisor. If this were not the case, the essential imperfection of humanity would be disproved. Some new homes have repair lists that are long, while other lists contain only a few items. In most cases, defects are minor in nature, but serious problems, such as violations of safety requirements, are not uncommon. A home inspector can spend three or more hours searching for construction errors in one home; a municipal inspector cannot. A home inspector can spend an entire workday inspecting just two houses; a municipal inspector cannot.
In the long run, a thorough home inspection benefits the builder, as well as the buyer, by reducing the number of repair callbacks that might occur after the home is sold. It lessens the possibility of injury to occupants, and limits the likelihood of future lawsuits. Builders, in fact, would be well advised to hire a home inspector of their own to provide a final “pickup” list when the construction is completed. Then the buyers’ home inspector would be less likely to irritate the supervisor with further disclosures.
*To write to Barry Stone, please visit him on the Web at www.housedetective.com. *
I bet that construction supervisor is not as good as he claims. What an a ss. The fact is most new homes are not fully inspected by municipal inspectors or the municipal inspector misses something.
I know if I were buying a home from this supervisors company I would be a lot more diligent after reading his pointless il informed opinions. Barry set him straight thankfully.
Why is construction supervisor angry at home inspectors?**
Claims some are a waste of money
***Tuesday, July 17, 2007 * Dear Barry,
*I’m a construction supervisor for a nationwide residential developer, and frankly, I’m tired of dealing with you know-it-all home inspectors. My company constructs good homes; we build them to code; and we don’t sell them until they’ve been approved by a city or county inspector.
*This is an issue with me. The code is the absolute minimum building requirement. When builders tell me they are building to code I ask if they are building minimal housing.
Larry
Claude
If the builder is enforcing safety requirements he must enforce safety requirements with all who come on the site, not just who he determines must adhere to the requirement. The easy way around this is to do the PDI after the homeowner takes possession.
Larry
I have always submitted my certifications to builders prior to inspections. They are primarily concerned with qualifications, business license, insurance. The submission is a professional standard and is often required by their insurance. I have made money while on inspections in this manner.
For instance, I was inspecting for a client (pre-approved authorization from the builder). Another HI shows up to inspect for someone else across the street. The builder objects (no prior approval) and the HI argues with the builder that he “represents his client and did not need the builder’s permission”. The builder called the cops and had the HI removed. The HI’s client walked across the street to me and gave me an order.
Remember - it is the builder’s property. They can establish any reasonable requirements. ICC/NACHI/ASHI are always the basic requirements.
Well after builder would not let me perform inspection the client called me back anyway. No wonder the builder didn’t want a home inspector on his property. I ended up with about 3 pages of deficiencies, poor workmanship just about everywhere. Cracked columns in kitchen, cracked window trim, just horrible but I guess that is why this “respected” builder trys to avoid home inspectors.
I see one of the “motor mouths” is advertising a sale on home inspections. Why would that be, maybe not as good as he thinks he is, I know my business is booming and the only person I am not going to like is the Tax Man…but keep on talking while the rest of us keep on working :mrgreen:
Three pages is average… as long as they are deficiencies, not vendettas.
I have had houses with over ten pages, now they were bad.
“Poor workmanship” is not a deficiency. That may be attributed to your opinion only.
The questions that should be answered. Is the item installed wrong or broken? Smeared grout is sloppy workmanship, but is not a defect the builder has to repair. That would be an item the owner would address as a clean up to the builder. Paint on a window pane is sloppy workmanship, but not a defect. I would hope you know enough not to put stuff like this on a report! Now not caulking the window is not sloppy workmanship, it is a defect. Make sure you report the real defects, not the sloppy way it (in your opinion) was finished. This can make you look bad very fast.
I think “Mr” motor mouth (to you) still did 60 inspections last month at about double your charge. hmmmmm money, you gotta put your prices with the professionals big guy.
I inspected a $1,200,000 house yesterday. The roof leaked. In the attic I can see the lake. There is not near enough ventilation in the roof. Two broken trusses in the attic. The insulation looks like my sister walked on it. (SHe weighs over 450 lbs) The electrical wires go over thirty feet without a single support. The AC unit is connected with regular 14/2 just laying on the ground. The panel is missing the cover that separates the mains from the work area. Two shower stalls are not caulked around the entries. Those are the first items on list for builder to repair. Eight pages of defiencies altogether.
Let’s be one of those cheapo home looker atter guys and do it for $200… This would make one of the stupidest moves in Home Inspector history… but some are doing it.
Did they ask you to do an inspection on it?
I can send someone from Barrie to do it for $200:mrgreen: :mrgreen: … you could charge $400 and get half the money without having to move.:mrgreen: :mrgreen:
Mostly I charge by the expected time to complete the inspection and deliver the report. I charge a minimum $250 for the mobile you describe up to $400 for a 3,000 sq footer. After that, it’s by the sq ft: $0.15-0.20 per sq ft depending on the architecture, complexity and # of systems in the home. I will do a quick 1 item consultation with no report for $150 +taxes if I’m in the area (driving by or near the house some future day)
I have been contracted to supervise schedule of commercial building for an international company. This will be a 10 to 12 week project with a minimum of two inspections per week. Most of the documentation will be comments and pictures.
What do you guys charge for this kind of service. Have tons of experience in this type of work but no knowledge on what the going rates are?
I have had the opportunity to deal directly with Tarion as a newhome buyer. You may have had the opportunity to review our article in the Hamilton Spectator. You can review at www.thespec.com and in the quick search input joe and joanne west.
There is an appointment form available that homeowners can submit to Tarion and the builder to inform of representation. The builders cannot refuse under the ONHWP act.
I have been doing commercial inspections for several years and I am now entering into the residential sector.
There is most certainly the odd builder who is irate, I am sure your red flag is up when you inspect this home.
Personally speaking I would be suing the City of Hamilton for failing to ensure what they are legislated to do.
Here is an interesting case where the Township of Hungerford was found at fault for failure to carry out its duty as enacted under the Ontario Building Code.
At least, that’s how it’s supposed to work. Unfortunately, it didn’t turn out that way for Joe and Joanne West, who bought a new home on Lanza Court in Hamilton.
