The recent question about handling to do items listed by a home inspector was thought
provoking.

The general theme was how necessary repairs would impact the selling price of the house
and should be used as a bargaining tool by the buyer.

Does it make any sense for the SELLER to obtain a home
inspection report prior to selling the property. This would allow him to repair or
replace those cosmetic items before selling the house and to get an estimate on the
big ticket items so he could adjust the price of the house accordingly ??

It seems to me two very important things should be done before
placing a home on the market for sale

#1 is to get an appraisal done so you know what the ball park asking price should be

# 2 is to bring the house up to marketable condition. An adequate home inspection would
be a good starting point for #2.

Am I being naive ??? Is it possible that no matter how perfect the condition of a
house, a home inspector will find "somethiing" wrong with it to justify their fees ???

Your thoughts, opinions and experiences please ???

Peter wrote:
The recent question about handling to do items listed by a home inspector was thought
provoking.

The general theme was how necessary repairs would impact the selling price of the house
and should be used as a bargaining tool by the buyer.

Does it make any sense for the SELLER to obtain a home
inspection report prior to selling the property. This would allow him to repair or
replace those cosmetic items before selling the house and to get an estimate on the
big ticket items so he could adjust the price of the house accordingly ??

It seems to me two very important things should be done before
placing a home on the market for sale

#1 is to get an appraisal done so you know what the ball park asking price should be

# 2 is to bring the house up to marketable condition. An adequate home inspection would
be a good starting point for #2.

Am I being naive ??? Is it possible that no matter how perfect the condition of a
house, a home inspector will find "somethiing" wrong with it to justify their fees ???

Your thoughts, opinions and experiences please ???

If I was the seller I wouldn't get a pre-inspection. Any defects
discovered must be disclosed to a potential buyer. There are also
legal issues involved about the buyer relying on your pre-inspection if
you give them a copy or say the one you had done showed no issues.
Check with the lawyer your ARE going to use and get their opinion. I
think it opens the seller to unnecessary legal risk.

Think about it this way:
What difference does it make if a defect like a cracked floor joist is
found before the house is listed or after a buyer puts in an offer and
gets their own inspection? Either way it needs to be fixed, disclosed,
price adjusted or the buyer overlooks it. (I'd be a lot less spooked by
a house with a cracked floor joist than one with a brand new joist, hmm
termites).

DAGS "seller home inspection" looks like all of the hits are home
inspection companies recommending that both sellers and buyers get a
home inspection on the same property. Does that mean inspectors screw
up 50% of the time?

Having recently sold a home I WISH I had gotten a sellers inspection.
The buyer can get their own if they want.

It will uncover all sorts of likely minor issues, that YOU can correct
any way you want.

Most buyers want all repairs done by a registered contractor increasing
costs dramatically, and they will demand receipts once the repairs are
complete.


For a few hundred bucks its cheap insurance.

If the buyers inspector finds too many troubles many buyers will freak
and walk away.

This exact thing happened to my first buyer many troubles were minor .
Cost me months of stress and delays

Oh yeah Get the furnace and AC hot water tank serviced hang the
receipts on the appliances. This discourages from later home inspector
to CLAIM, so and so appliance has trouble....

No matter what home inspectors will find troubles, do it as a seller
minimizes the number of deal breakers. I also bought the sellers
insurance so anything that breaks during the first year gets fixed for
free. gives buyers some peace of mind, most are totally strapped out
having spent every cent they can afford and some they cant...

90% of buyers today want a home in move in condition. Making your home
that way gets you a LOT more shoppers and potential buyers. More $$$$

DONT put in a new high end gold plated stuff but a nice home in good
shape thats ready to moive in is a big plus.

FOR CERTAIN some posters will say dont do much of anything, they are
miss guided. some talk of ugly purple walls and not wanting to paint.

I dsuggest you go to some local open houses just for the heck of it to
see what others in your area are up to, compare conditions etc..

...

"Peter" wrote in message

It seems to me two very important things should be done before
placing a home on the market for sale

#1 is to get an appraisal done so you know what the ball park asking
price should be

# 2 is to bring the house up to marketable condition. An adequate home
inspection would
be a good starting point for #2.

There is the "appraisal" and then there is the market value that a realtor
will do for you. The appraiser may set a price based on construction,
replacement cost, conditions, etc. But that has nothing to do with the
actual selling price in many cases. You are correct in finding out the
value as accurately as possible though.

#2 depends. I know a bit about houses, construction, utilities, etc. I know
a few things that should be done before putting my house on the market and
I'd do them if that was the case. There are people that have no clue what
makes the heater tick or how water gets to the faucet. In that case,
someone should take a look around and make suggestions. That may be Uncle
Bob, the handyman in some cases.

It has been a few years since I bought a house. Home inspections were rare.
Today, it seems to be a "must" for buyers. My problem with that is two
fold.

1. Some of the inspectors are plain incompetent. A good one is well worth
the cost for many, but there has to be some better standards in that
industry. They also have contracts that protect them from any liability for
missed items. Too easy for them to cop out a few months later when the
house falls down because they missed the collapsing foundation. Put some
liability on them and the good ones will thrive, the bad ones will go away.

2. Too many buyers don't know what to do with the information from a
competent inspection. Every house has faults, the older the house, the more
likely they will be found and possibly greater magnitude. The buyer will
insist the seller fix everything on the list and take 25% off the selling
price. It still comes down to the selling price versus value. Buying a
properly priced house with known defects may still be a good deal.

If the buyer has an inspection, he is going to approach the seller with a
list. The seller will have a different report and both will insist the
other is wrong and both walk away thinking the other is trying to scam them.
.. Maybe you do have a good idea after all.

I agree that the seller getting an inspection may be a good idea esp.
on an older home. If some of the items are repaired before listing
,any buyer's inspection will have less to bargain over. If the more
serious items are addressed there is less chance for a buyer to expect
a drastic price reduction.


wrote:
Having recently sold a home I WISH I had gotten a sellers inspection.
The buyer can get their own if they want.

It will uncover all sorts of likely minor issues, that YOU can correct
any way you want.

Most buyers want all repairs done by a registered contractor increasing
costs dramatically, and they will demand receipts once the repairs are
complete.


For a few hundred bucks its cheap insurance.

If the buyers inspector finds too many troubles many buyers will freak
and walk away.

This exact thing happened to my first buyer many troubles were minor .
Cost me months of stress and delays

Oh yeah Get the furnace and AC hot water tank serviced hang the
receipts on the appliances. This discourages from later home inspector
to CLAIM, so and so appliance has trouble....

No matter what home inspectors will find troubles, do it as a seller
minimizes the number of deal breakers. I also bought the sellers
insurance so anything that breaks during the first year gets fixed for
free. gives buyers some peace of mind, most are totally strapped out
having spent every cent they can afford and some they cant...

90% of buyers today want a home in move in condition. Making your home
that way gets you a LOT more shoppers and potential buyers. More $$$$

DONT put in a new high end gold plated stuff but a nice home in good
shape thats ready to moive in is a big plus.

FOR CERTAIN some posters will say dont do much of anything, they are
miss guided. some talk of ugly purple walls and not wanting to paint.

I dsuggest you go to some local open houses just for the heck of it to
see what others in your area are up to, compare conditions etc..

..

Many communities have home info on the net. With sales prices dates
addresses comparables etc.

EXCELLENT resource for helping to price home

Our company specializes in the repairs derived from a home inspection. From
my experience over the last three years I would have to say never get a home
inspection before you put your house up for sale. If you hired three
different inspectors you will get three very different lists with little
cross over. None of the inspections are likely to be very thorough.
This is my experience in Arizona.....

cm




"Peter" wrote in message
news
The recent question about handling to do items listed by a home inspector
was thought
provoking.

The general theme was how necessary repairs would impact the selling price
of the house
and should be used as a bargaining tool by the buyer.

Does it make any sense for the SELLER to obtain a home
inspection report prior to selling the property. This would allow him to
repair or
replace those cosmetic items before selling the house and to get an
estimate on the
big ticket items so he could adjust the price of the house accordingly ??

It seems to me two very important things should be done before
placing a home on the market for sale

#1 is to get an appraisal done so you know what the ball park asking
price should be

# 2 is to bring the house up to marketable condition. An adequate home
inspection would
be a good starting point for #2.

Am I being naive ??? Is it possible that no matter how perfect the
condition of a
house, a home inspector will find "somethiing" wrong with it to justify
their fees ???

Your thoughts, opinions and experiences please ???

On Thu, 17 Aug 2006 03:29:37 GMT, "cm" wrote:

Our company specializes in the repairs derived from a home inspection. From
my experience over the last three years I would have to say never get a home
inspection before you put your house up for sale. If you hired three
different inspectors you will get three very different lists with little
cross over. None of the inspections are likely to be very thorough.
This is my experience in Arizona.....

cm



In your opinion and experience

If three inspectors are looking at the same house....why would they
generate three lists with little crossover..

Do standards exost suggesting pass/fail conditions of the house systems Or are
these inspections completely aribitrary at the discretion of the inspector
without comprehensive knowledge of industry or building standards

In all your experience with dealing with home buyers....

Do buyers ever realize that house systems have liimited useful life and that
a used house does not sell for the same amount as a new house (all other things being
equal) due to the fact that there is normal wear and tear... or do home buyers expect to
get a "new" used house for "used" house prices??

Thanks for your response so far...it has been very informative...




"Peter" wrote in message
news
The recent question about handling to do items listed by a home inspector
was thought
provoking.

The general theme was how necessary repairs would impact the selling price
of the house
and should be used as a bargaining tool by the buyer.

Does it make any sense for the SELLER to obtain a home
inspection report prior to selling the property. This would allow him to
repair or
replace those cosmetic items before selling the house and to get an
estimate on the
big ticket items so he could adjust the price of the house accordingly ??

It seems to me two very important things should be done before
placing a home on the market for sale

#1 is to get an appraisal done so you know what the ball park asking
price should be

# 2 is to bring the house up to marketable condition. An adequate home
inspection would
be a good starting point for #2.

Am I being naive ??? Is it possible that no matter how perfect the
condition of a
house, a home inspector will find "somethiing" wrong with it to justify
their fees ???

Your thoughts, opinions and experiences please ???

Do buyers ever realize that house systems have liimited useful life and that
a used house does not sell for the same amount as a new house (all other things being
equal) due to the fact that there is normal wear and tear... or do home buyers expect to
get a "new" used house for "used" house prices??

Thanks for your response so far...it has been very informative...



they want a brand new home at a BIG discount from a new home rice

its likely true different home inspectors will find different stuff.

what you fix are the MAJOR things that will scare off buyers or stuff
that looks bad cosmetically....

its impossible to make everyone happy.


I believe the house flip shows prove nice homes sell faster for more
money, which is probably what most home sellers want!

In article . com, RayV says...


Peter wrote:
The recent question about handling to do items listed by a home inspector was
thought
provoking.

The general theme was how necessary repairs would impact the selling price of
the house
and should be used as a bargaining tool by the buyer.

Does it make any sense for the SELLER to obtain a home
inspection report prior to selling the property. This would allow him to
repair or
replace those cosmetic items before selling the house and to get an estimate on
the
big ticket items so he could adjust the price of the house accordingly ??

It seems to me two very important things should be done before
placing a home on the market for sale

#1 is to get an appraisal done so you know what the ball park asking price
should be

# 2 is to bring the house up to marketable condition. An adequate home
inspection would
be a good starting point for #2.

Am I being naive ??? Is it possible that no matter how perfect the condition
of a
house, a home inspector will find "somethiing" wrong with it to justify their
fees ???

Your thoughts, opinions and experiences please ???

If I was the seller I wouldn't get a pre-inspection. Any defects
discovered must be disclosed to a potential buyer. There are also
legal issues involved about the buyer relying on your pre-inspection if
you give them a copy or say the one you had done showed no issues.
Check with the lawyer your ARE going to use and get their opinion. I
think it opens the seller to unnecessary legal risk.

I woudlnt' use an inspection this way (take a copy and use it to try to 'prove'
something isn't wrong). I'd use it to head off any big discouraging issue that
a buyer's inspection may find. It's a pay now or pay later thing.


Think about it this way:
What difference does it make if a defect like a cracked floor joist is
found before the house is listed or after a buyer puts in an offer and
gets their own inspection? Either way it needs to be fixed, disclosed,
price adjusted or the buyer overlooks it. (I'd be a lot less spooked by
a house with a cracked floor joist than one with a brand new joist, hmm
termites).

The seller can decide whether or not to fix it, with that in mind.


DAGS "seller home inspection" looks like all of the hits are home
inspection companies recommending that both sellers and buyers get a
home inspection on the same property. Does that mean inspectors screw
up 50% of the time?


No - it just means that there are interests that the seller has which may be
served by a home inspection, and there are interests that the buyer has which
may be served by a home inspection. The interests of the person hiring being
those more served, of course.

And, of course, the interests of the home inspectors to be hired more often.
Whether or not it's actually worthwhile to do that depends on the particulars.

My philosophy on disclosure is that one would want to know about, and usually
fix, what's wrong in one's own home anyway. Actually, I recently had an
inspection done on my house which I *don't* plan to sell for maybe a decade, as
a prelude to refinancing to remodel.

Finally, I'd be surprised if *any* house is perfect. New construction usually
has issues which simply haven't had time to manifest. Since my home inspector
(on buying) noted outdated paint and flooring too, well, yes, of course they
always find something.

Banty (not to defend or advocate any particular inspector or home inspection)


--

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5222154.stm

Peter,

OK maybe there is a little more cross over than I let on, but you would be
very surprised at how little there actually is. Each inspector has a form to
follow that appears to be supplied by the franchise they bought or one they
have created themselves. They all cover the house systems.
Here are a few examples of variables between inspectors. You will see that
in each example we have a repair list that varies greatly and the final
repair bill to the seller can vary by several hundred dollars depending on
the inspector. I have been involved in deals where we repaired all the items
on the first inspectors list and the sale of the home did not go through.
The second potential buyer asked for a new inspection and the second
inspector found many items that were not found or reported by the first guy.
The seller had to pay $200 or $300 more than he should have if he would have
ignored the first inspectors list. Remember we are talking about fairly
minor repairs. I have never had an inspector miss any structural or
dangerous items. There is a lack of disclosure on minor items going on
everyday.

1st Example

Inspector #1 may not be willing to test the water stop valves under the
sinks because he may cause a leak himself. He may state on the report that
the valves may need changing due to their age.

Inspector #2 May thoroughly test the valves and report on which ones need
service.

Inspector #3 May test two or three valves and find them faulty and say all
valves need replacing when in fact only those he tested were bad.

2nd Example

Inspector #1 Tile roof inspection. This guy either does not have a ladder
tall enough to get on the third story roof or will not walk on the roofing
because of it's age or composition. He will say so on the report and then
write about the possible condition of a roof of this age.

Inspector #2 Tile roof inspection. This guy walks the roof and reports on
cracked tiles and suggests they be repaired. (Not replaced).

Inspector #3 Tile roof inspection. This guy walks the roof and reports on
the cracked tiles and says they must be replaced. He also notices areas
where the roofing felt is exposed near the ridge cap or near a roof vent and
asks for repair in these areas.

We are hired by the sellers agent. Often we see several things in the home
that need repair but these items are not on the inspection report.

Yes standards exist. Quality of inspectors varies greatly as does their
comprehension of the standards.

We have little or no contact with the buyer. We may have some contact with
the buyers agent. The sellers tend to repair 99% of the items on the
inspection report. Most buyers are reasonable in there request of repairs
and rarely do they use it to negotiate a better price. They just expect the
items to be repaired.

cm


"Peter" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 17 Aug 2006 03:29:37 GMT, "cm" wrote:

Our company specializes in the repairs derived from a home inspection.
From
my experience over the last three years I would have to say never get a
home
inspection before you put your house up for sale. If you hired three
different inspectors you will get three very different lists with little
cross over. None of the inspections are likely to be very thorough.
This is my experience in Arizona.....

cm



In your opinion and experience

If three inspectors are looking at the same house....why would they
generate three lists with little crossover..

Do standards exost suggesting pass/fail conditions of the house systems Or
are
these inspections completely aribitrary at the discretion of the inspector
without comprehensive knowledge of industry or building standards

In all your experience with dealing with home buyers....

Do buyers ever realize that house systems have liimited useful life and
that
a used house does not sell for the same amount as a new house (all other
things being
equal) due to the fact that there is normal wear and tear... or do home
buyers expect to
get a "new" used house for "used" house prices??

Thanks for your response so far...it has been very informative...




"Peter" wrote in message
news
The recent question about handling to do items listed by a home
inspector
was thought
provoking.

The general theme was how necessary repairs would impact the selling
price
of the house
and should be used as a bargaining tool by the buyer.

Does it make any sense for the SELLER to obtain a home
inspection report prior to selling the property. This would allow him
to
repair or
replace those cosmetic items before selling the house and to get an
estimate on the
big ticket items so he could adjust the price of the house accordingly
??

It seems to me two very important things should be done before
placing a home on the market for sale

#1 is to get an appraisal done so you know what the ball park asking
price should be

# 2 is to bring the house up to marketable condition. An adequate
home
inspection would
be a good starting point for #2.

Am I being naive ??? Is it possible that no matter how perfect the
condition of a
house, a home inspector will find "somethiing" wrong with it to justify
their fees ???

Your thoughts, opinions and experiences please ???

Yes standards exist. Quality of inspectors varies greatly as does their
comprehension of the standards.

We have little or no contact with the buyer. We may have some contact with
the buyers agent. The sellers tend to repair 99% of the items on the
inspection report. Most buyers are reasonable in there request of repairs
and rarely do they use it to negotiate a better price. They just expect the
items to be repaired.

cm

The sales where problems dropped the price, we obviously they dont use
your company....

Its true there are lots of poor inspectors but as someone said they
catch the BIG stuff.

If I were selling today I would spend a few hunded for a inspection, a
thrifty buyer MIGHT accept mine and besides it allows ME at MY TIME AND
EXPENSE t fix stuff MYSELF rather than a buyer DEMANDING all the work
by a registered contractor, which will cost ME much more!

I would agree with Ray and CM. As a seller, I would not get a home
inspection done. It is likely the buyer will want their own inspection
anyway. And if they rely on an inspector you choose, you may be
opening yourself to future legal problems if they later find defects.
As a buyer, I would always want my own inspection with me present with
the inspector when it's done. So, if the seller pays for an
inspection, it's just one more opportunity for an inspector to possibly
find defects that the seller never knew about. Once found you have the
obligation to disclose them. If you were selling a car, would you take
it to a mechanic for a report, or let the buyer, if they so choose?

I also think CM has a good point that the list of defects, cautions,
etc may vary a lot from one inspector to the next. By doing your own
and then having a seller likely do one, you've now opened yourself up
for more repairs. IMO, the less inspections the better it is for the
seller. If there is a major disagreement with the findings of the
buyer's inspection, then you can always get an inspection done at that
point.

Peter wrote:
The recent question about handling to do items listed by a home
inspector was thought provoking.

The general theme was how necessary repairs would impact the selling
price of the house and should be used as a bargaining tool by the
buyer.

Does it make any sense for the SELLER to obtain a home
inspection report prior to selling the property. This would allow
him to repair or replace those cosmetic items before selling the
house and to get an estimate on the
big ticket items so he could adjust the price of the house
accordingly ??

[...]

I would have an inspection done, but in the name of, and by, a realtive or
trusted friend for the purpose of plausible deniability.

Cosmetic problems can be painted or covered with ivy. Catastrophic items can
be fixed or rendered inaccessable.

I would have an inspection done, but in the name of, and by, a realtive or
trusted friend for the purpose of plausible deniability.

Cosmetic problems can be painted or covered with ivy. Catastrophic items can
be fixed or rendered inaccessable.\

thats why the home inspection industry exists, paint and cover up