On Mon, 8 Jul 2013 15:12:44 -0700 (PDT), "
wrote:


The overall thing here that stands out is that no

one without experience should ever buy a house without a house

inspection. If you do that, you could be paying $100K for a house

that is worth $20K. That's not to break someone's spirit or be

mean, it's just the truth.




That you think it is the truth, or even that something is the truth,

does not mean that one has chosen the right time to express it.

It is the truth plain and simple.

Are you saying the statements were plain and simple, or that because
something is the truth, it's always the right time to say it?

I take major issue with the latter, and I'll explain why if that is
what you meant.

And in my world, it's far better
to tell someone how to avoid a potential disaster, so they learn,
instead of sugar coating the obvious. Do you disagree that it's
a mistake for someone not experienced in checking out a house to
not get an inspection done before buying it?

I think that's the wrong question, and I thought I made clear in the
previous post and even the first one why: She had bought the house
already so it doesn't apply to her. And you're not telling her how
to avoid a potential disaster.

It's of no value to her to be told she should have hired an inspector

before she bought the house, because she's bought the house already,

and she's in the middle of fixing it up. This can be a joyful

experience, as one by one, the problems get fixed.

Why would you start fixing stuff when you have no idea the
extent of the problems? She already poured a concrete slab
that not only didn't fix anything, but made it worse. She
could do a lot of repairs, pour money into it, only to find
out that to fix other problems that she can't recognize, those repairs she just made need to be torn out.

Now you're talking about hiring an inspector after purchase to give
advice about what repairs to make. But in the paragraph you're
replying to I was referring hiring an "an inspector before she bought
the house". Because you had said "She needs a complete home
inspection, which should have been done before purchase. "

BTW, in my first post on this subject, I deleted both attibution
lines, including yours, so as to not make it look like I was replying
especially to you. There had been other posts elswhere in the thread
that almost got the same reaction from me -- I don't know who wrote
them - but not enought to make me post.

I didnt' complain about everything you and others said, only being a
downer and risking breaking her spirit (as in "and it could be tens of
thousands of dollars of trouble here."

Instead, such

advice may turn it into months or years of berating oneself while

awake, and inabiltiy to sleep.

If that happens, it's not because of my advice.



If things go badly all-in-all, she

won't need you to convince her to hire an inspector before the next

house. She'll figure it out herself, or she'll hear about it later.

At any rate, a separate thread or inclusion in some other thread will

make the same point to everyone else who might benefit by hearing it.

Leza is the one that needs to get hear what I and others have
said. Good grief.
All I said was that she needs a competent inspection done to find
out what all is wrong with the house. She should have done that
before the purchase. If she chooses to not do it now, it's another mistake. And I'm not buying that some etiquette says that I'm
not supposed to tell her the truth.

I'm not relying on etiquette. It's common sense. Or "Love your
neighbor as yourself"

I assume you saw the short reply that followed yesterday's longer
reply by a few mintues. I apologize for annoying you, and for
hurting your feelings if I did so. I was just looking out for Leza
and other posters in her shoes.