Following is something to get a thread started. Its just an opinion and I am all ears.
Historically, home inspection has been about PROPERTY CONDITION. Those discoveries sometimes pose risk to occupants. According to NACHI Standards a home inspection is NOT ABOUT determining if a home is safe!
Inspectors are often held to an implied Standard. Uninformed inspectors preach what an inspection should do without careful consideration of the Standards wording. Inspectors and inspection articles improperly inform the world that home inspections are about safety. That is wrong. It sets a standard that is not in the standard!
If you conduct a survey you will find that consumers are interested in identifying expensive repairs and life span matters (NACHI excludes life span). If you offer “property condition” and “safety” as two products for two fees the client will almost always be willing to pay for property condition reporting only and certainly first. Most consumers will not pay for a separate safety report. Try selling one.
It is a misconception that home inspection is about assuring a home is safe. Home inspection is about property condition with some discoveries being judged to present unreasonable risk. There is a huge difference.
Want proof. Read NACHI SoP.
- There are 21 uses of the word “safe” or its derivatives. None apply to the client.
- There are 8 uses of the word “hazard” or its derivatives. None apply to the client.
- There are 4 uses of the word “risk”. Only 1 applies directly to other persons.
- MOST words are contained in limitations that state **the inspector is not required to **do something.
- Only “risk” applies to people on the property and again in only one usage.
- NACHI (and all other major SoP) exclude code inspection. Code IS safety.
- Items of “risk” are left to the judgment of the inspector (there is an indirect relationship between “risk” and the definition of “unsafe” in the NACHI SoP)
NACHI Standards DO NOT REQUIRE you to inspect the home to assure it is safe!
IF YOU WANT a safety standard then consider writing a separate SoP that addresses the many code based concerns and offer it as an OPTIONAL product. What a great way to reduce personal injury liability. Two products offered. Let the customer accept or decline. IF they decline give them a “free” home safety check sheet so they can do their own safety inspection with a notice that they can always hire you to come back and do it.
Lastly, unsafe conditions are tempered by inspector judgment and not code (judgment - an opinion on the nature, character, or quality of something). The Scope discusses “unreasonable risk” and without definition it is left to each inspectors judgment. There is the risk a jury could define “unreasonable” and that makes you operate in fear mode; fear mode is costly and inconsistent.
I think that some areas where NACHI can improve its SoP are:
1-Find one word to use for “risk”, “safe” and “hazard”.
2-Very carefully define that “one” word.
3-Eliminate the use of “unreasonable”.
4-Preface “judgment” with “sole judgment”
5-Create and offer a safety inspection that includes all the items you can think of. Start with CodeCheck and work your way through.
Following are the NACHI Standards with everything deleted except derivatives of “safe”, “hazard” and “risk”. You will see that home inspection IS NOT ABOUT SAFETY.
- Definitions and Scope
No mention of “safe” or “hazard” however the following applies
1.2. A Material defect is a condition with a residential real property or any portion of it that would have a significant adverse impact on the value of the real property or that involves an unreasonable risk to people on the property. The fact that a structural element, system or subsystem is near, at or beyond the end of the normal useful life of such a structural element, system or subsystem is not by itself a material defect.
- Standards of Practice
II. The inspector is not required to:
G. Inspect for safety type glass.
2.3. Basement, Foundation & Crawlspace
II. The inspector is not required to:
A. Enter any crawlspaces that are not readily accessible or where entry could cause damage or pose a hazard to the inspector.
2.4. Heating
II. The inspector is not required to:
E. Activate heating, heat pump systems, or other heating systems when ambient temperatures or when other circumstances are not conducive to safe operation or may damage the equipment.
2.5. Cooling
II. The inspector is not required to:
C. Operate equipment or systems if exterior temperature is below 60 degrees Fahrenheit or when other circumstances are not conducive to safe operation or may damage the equipment.
2.6. Plumbing
II. The inspector is not required to:
C. Inspect interiors of flues or chimneys, water softening or filtering systems, well pumps or tanks, safety or shut-of valves, floor drains, lawn sprinkler systems or fire sprinkler systems.
S. Test, operate, open or close safety controls, manual stop valves and/or temperature or pressure relief valves.
2.7. Electrical
Derivatives and “safe” or “hazard” not found in electrical! Isn’t that “special” :o
2.8. Fireplace
II. The inspector is not required to:
2.9. Attic, Ventilation & Insulation
II. The inspector is not required to:
A. Enter the attic or unfinished spaces that are not readily accessible or where entry could cause damage or pose a safety hazard to the inspector in his or her opinion.
2.10. Doors, Windows & Interior
II. The inspector is not required to:
C. Inspect safety glazing.
J. Verify or certify safe operation of any auto reverse or related safety function of a garage door.
- Limitations, Exceptions & Exclusions
3.2. Exclusions:
I. The inspectors are not required to determine:
H. The compliance with codes or regulations. (these documents pertain to safe construction; not a home inspection requirement)
K. The presence of air-borne hazards.
P. The existence of environmental hazards.
R. The presence of hazardous materials including, but not limited to, the presence of lead in paint.
S. Any hazardous waste conditions.
III. The inspectors are not required to:
C. Enter or access any area which may, in the opinion of the inspector, to be unsafe or risk personal safety.
D. Enter crawlspaces or other areas that are unsafe or not readily accessible.
E. Inspect underground items such as, but not limited to, underground storage tanks or other indications of their presence, whether abandoned or actively used.
F. Do anything which, in the inspector’s opinion, is likely to be unsafe or dangerous to the inspector or others or damage property, such as, but not limited to, walking on roof surfaces, climbing ladders, entering attic spaces or negotiating with dogs.
- Glossary of Terms
4.1. Accessible: Can be approached or entered by the inspector safely, without difficulty, fear or danger.
4.23. Inspect: To visually look at readily accessible systems and components safely, using normal operating controls and accessing readily accessible panels and areas in accordance with these Standards of Practice.
4.31. Readily Accessible: An item or component is readily accessible if, in the judgment of the inspector, it is capable of being safely observed without movement of obstacles, detachment or disengagement of connecting or securing devices, or other unsafe or difficult procedures to gain access.
4.35. Safety Glazing: Tempered glass, laminated glass, or rigid plastic.
4.40. Unsafe: A condition in a readily accessible, installed system or component which is judged to be a significant risk of personal injury during normal, day-to-day use. The risk may be due to damage, deterioration, improper installation or a change in accepted residential construction standards. This term is used 4 times in the SoP. The definition implies impact on occupant safety but oddly ALL 4 uses of the word apply to inspector safety. **NONE apply to occupant safety!
OK, who is ready to write an optional “safety” standard.
**