Call 911, Will. When the ambulance arrives at your house, jump behind it and ask your lawyer if he got your email
Hope springs eternal 
Not in Will’s world.
Now you did it, Will.
You painted yourself into a corner with your BS that you will have to do what you never do to get yourself out. You will have to present facts.
Cite the case law you refer to, or admit you are full of $hit.
Come on, Will.
Cite the case law you are referring to. No one refers to case law that they do not know. Call 911 and have the ambulance driver validate that with your attorney.
What are the cases you refer to, Will? Flintstone vs. Rubble?
Ken,
You are confusing being a hired gun with being a professional.
A fiduciary represents the best interests of the client, but does so under a special grant (state license) from the state. The license states that the fiduciary should not violate the law (writing a report to make the house look bad and give an unfair advatage to your client is fraud) in represneting the client’s interest.
BTW: A fiduciary does not always have the authority to act in the client’s behalf. Lawyers cannot do so without a specific “power of attorney” agreement. All the lawyer can do is represent, withing the scope of his license and under the laws of the state in which he is barred.
Do the same thing with the physician or lawyer or CPA licensing acts, in Illinois. You will have the same result.
But that does not mean that lawyers, doctors or CPAs don’t have a fiduciary.
And in helping them deterime the condition of the property, to guard them from liability.
If there is a problem that an inspector should find (visual, defined by the SOP) and you find it and report it, you have guarded your client (and yourself) from the liability of having to pay for fixing it.
If there is a problem that a home inspector should find (see above) and he doesn’t find it, he has the liability because he didn’t do his job. So, he took on the liability.
People hire us to protect them from liability (i.e., having to pay money to fix things or getting killed because the electric is all messed up).
Tell me who “has the liability” if the inspector misses something that they could and should have found.
Awwww. He’s back! And he promised he was going away. :mrgreen:
Interesting pathology, isn’t it, how Jim always makes everything so personal?
Wonder why :shock:
Do it with home inspectors, builders, architects, engineers,and U.S. World Leaders. You will have the same result.
But that doesn’t mean that they DO have a fiduciary, either.
Your over inflated ego has now morphed into paranoia.
Everything is not about liability, Will.
Some home buyers will buy a house with defects and fix them, themselves. Some will bargain to have the seller do it. Some will simply leave them as they are.
“Why else would anyone hire an home inspector if not to keep them from liability.”…is little more than a continuation of the absurdities you have pulled out of your colon and posted to this thread. While it is not the stupidist thing you have ever posted, it does make the top 500.
I’m still waiting for you to cite the case law you lied about earlier in this thread. What is the case so we can all look it up, Will?
No.
It just proves that this method of testing, which is the entire thrust of your arguement (it it is not clearly written into the law, it does not exists), is flawed.
Thanks for finally admitting that, Jim.
And I, and many others, are awaiting your repsonse, or counter agrumement, to what you posted and quoted me on.
Notice, Jim did not address or agrue the question, but instead slammed me with personal abuse.
Ad Hominum Arguement: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem
When you have no arguement or countering factual claim, just slam the messenger.
Jim does it all the time, doesn’t he.
Kinda sad.
Besides, he promised us all he was done here.
Doesn’t seem to keep his word too well either.
Would you trust this mand to do your home inspection? :mrgreen:
Will Decker. You are a liar.
You are lying about the nature of your license in order to inflate your importance as a home inspector above others. You lie to defend it with with make-beleive conversations and interpretations of nameless others who you have promised would chime in (remember that phone call and email to your lawyer) who have not - and now you have lied by saying that there is “case law” to support your lies…and cannot provide any references to it, whatsoever.
There is no further need for me or anyone else to address you on this issue. I’ve wasted enough time on your lies and BS.
Good night.
But, please note, you still didn’t address the problems posed buy yourself.
don’t like losing, do you Jim?
BTW: I see that you offer those bogus warranties :
http://www.missourihomeinspection.com/?D=6
And you don’t seem to care about some licenses:
http://www.missourihomeinspection.com/?D=3
"I am licensed by the State of Missouri to perform inspections for the presence of wood destroying organisms such as termites"
are you a “prefessional”, Jim? That was the point of this thread.
Will,
Let’s assume for a minute you are not a total idiot and pathological liar…and simply provide the citation to the case law you referred to in your earlier post. If you were telling the truth, this information is at your fingertips. If you were doing as I suspect…and making up facts as you go along like you always do…these citations do not exist.
Which is it, Will?
I think we all know…
And, by your own previous post:
"There is no further need for me or anyone else to address you on this issue. I’ve wasted enough time on your lies and BS.
Good night."
You have proven that your word is not good.
You beg off, in discust, then you keep coming back.
Kinda Sad.
But, if you are really interested, call Andy. I will pay any fees.
Hope this helps, but it probably won’t.
You have been trying to get me to stop posting for several pages, Will. That is the only reason I continue.
Why do I need to call your lawyer?
You call him. Tell him you dug yourself into a very deep hole with your lies and BS on a message board and you need his help. Tell him to do some research for you and to come up with some citations that come close to referencing the “case law” you referred to in your earlier post.
There is a shift change with the ambulance drivers at 11:00 your time. You should be able to catch him, then.
Or, of course, you can simply admit that you lied. We all know you did, anyway.
Let me put you out of your misery, Will.
The reason you cannot produce any references to the “case law” you cited to support your lie is that it does not exist.
You made reference to codes…in fact…your very words were “It has been found, in case law, to mean that we are required to call things out, when they are unsafe, according to “accepted residential construction standards”, and the courts have taken this to mean the current national codes (NEC, IRC, etc), NOT mere local codes (even if youy work in an area that ahs no local codes).”
You see, Will, many of these different “national codes” you refer to conflict with one another. NEC and ICC do not address the same issues in their published electrical codes. And the various dates of the various codes differ from one another as well. What this means…Inspector Gadget…is that there is no court to uphold a “national code” over what you refer to as “mere local codes”.
There is no court that has ever ruled that Will Decker has a requirement to “call out” unsafe things by any “current national code”.
What you are referring to does not exist.
Even your attorney, who is ignoring your telephone call and email request to support you in your insane argument, is avoiding you.
I heard that God just started a thread in the “Not for Everyone” forum challenging that Will Decker does not exist. I think I’ll go read it for a while.