Oscar wrote:
"Big Jim" wrote in message
...
Their lawyer would have seen that during attorney review and killed the
deal ASAP. If I
were the homeowner, my lawyer would be earning his pay and I certainly
wouldnt get jerked around by what seems to be a fishy sounding
inspection process.

You really don't have a clue. When you enter into a contract to sell
FHA/VA, your laywer can't make exceptions. You either sell FHA/VA, or you
don't, it's that simple.
....

Well, sorta' yes and sorta' no...

Fundamentally all the FHA is is an insurer policy to the lender--there
are certain requirements from FHA but the inspection is actually _not_
specifically theirs. From the FHA.gov site in advice to the potential
buyer--

"The FHA does not guarantee the value or condition of your future home,
and the FHA does not perform home inspections. If you find problems with
your new home after closing, FHA cannot give or lend you money for
repairs, nor can it buy the home back from you. FHA cannot help you in
discussions you may have with the builder or seller.

When you make a written offer on a home, you should insist that the
contract states that the offer is contingent (dependent) on a
satisfactory (to the buyer) home inspection conducted by a qualified
inspector. If you are satisfied with the results of the inspection, then
you can proceed with your offer or make a counter offer if the results
are not satisfactory."

So, as far as the FHA is concerned, its up to the buyer to accept/reject
the results of the inspection and it is normally the buyer's nickel to
pay for same. It sounds as if in this instance the lender the potential
buyer is using is taking over the prerogatives of the buyer buy refusing
to approve the deal even if the potential buyer is satisfied.

Probably not too much the seller can do there unless the buyer is
willing to push as he doesn't have a lot of clout; the lender probably
isn't really concerned about the deal closing. If this is a represented
sale, one would think the realty agent should be earning their keep in
expediting this; if it's a private sale then the lawyer route may be
best alternative--of course, in that case it's probably unwise to not
proceed w/o at least a token, cursory representation even as seller. Of
course, there's also the potential conflict of interest issue w/ realty
agents depending on which State has jurisdiction; some have much more
stringent guidelines than others for disclosure of their potential/real
conflicts of interest.

And, of course, the other sticky wicket has to do w/ the particular
state requirements for inspection/condition; some of them are quite
onerous in my view but certainly shouldn't be this difficult to meet for
a house in reasonable condition. Finding out just what are the actual
requirements is another piece of information the seller needs to find
out and see what, if anything, is actually not fulfilled that is a
requirement other than just taking the inspector's word for it.

I'd also suggest a call to the FHA for straight skinny from them
1-800-CALL-FHA (225-5342).

There certainly is also a cottage industry of inspectors many of whom
are nothing more than barely over scams; sounds like there may be a
problem there. There are State oversight and registrations for these
folks; should check up on this person/company and also there may be an
illegal sweetheart deal w/ the appraiser/inspector/lender.

All in all, it really sounds as though the OP simply hasn't done much
actual research on the actual requirements to be met nor used many
(any?) of the resources available to him to find out what has to be
done, who says so, and how--seemingly simply relying on the buyers
agents to do so who aren't actually in his employ and therefore serving
his interest. Altho it begs the question of why, if he is paying for
these inspections, the information seems to be being taken solely for
the benefit of the purchaser--altho this is the normal role, it isn't a
COI because the buyer normally is the purchaser of the service and so
the inspector is in his employ. If that isn't the case here, that is
definitely a COI and is probably at least against a State code of ethics
if not actually a violation of statute.

All as a long-winded way of say the OP needs to get somebody on his
nickel and if the inspector is, slap him up the side 'o the head w/ the
fact he's getting paid by one side and seemingly working for the other
in the deal.

--