Builder messed up, and blames me!

[Michael Larson]

Can I ask why you didn't get a signed consulting contract on the front side?

[James H. Bushart]

Originally Posted by wdecker

With regards to Jim's well placed concern about the COE.

1) It was not a "home inspection" as defined by Illinois state law (which the COE says supercedes NACHI COE). It was a consulation, and therefore not under the COE.

Illinois definition of a home inspection is not relevant.

2) There was no contract, written or verbally implied, because the client (the builder) didn't pay me. He did not live up to his end of the contract.

The end of this sentence contradicts the beginning. Try again.

3) The "safety" of the building's occupants was in jepordy (much mold), as well as their financial "safety" (I have had 3 buildings that had to be torn down, in just these circumstances). Do I not have a "public safety" duty to the occupants?

No. You have no right to share the results of your inspection without your client's consent. The fact that he refused to pay you because he did not appreciate the quality of your work does not give you the right to share the results of the inspection.

4) While I was inspection a "home" (i.e., a multi-family residential building), I was doing so for the builder, not as part of a Real Estate contract and the guy never paid me because he didn't like the reality that HE had messed up.

Again....you performed an inspection of a home. The fact that you were not paid does not relieve you of your ethical responsibilities.

[William J. Decker]

Originally Posted by mlarson

Can I ask why you didn't get a signed consulting contract on the front side?

Not required, by state law or NACHI COE.

I do these all the time.

[Michael Larson]

Originally Posted by wdecker

Not required, by state law or NACHI COE.

I do these all the time.

How about for your own protection regardless of state requirements?

[Mark Nahrgang]

Originally Posted by jbushart

No. You have no right to share the results of your inspection without your client's consent. The fact that he refused to pay you because he did not appreciate the quality of your work does not give you the right to share the results of the inspection.

In your opinion...

No pay, means the work, and the results of it still belong to Will to do whatever he wishes with. If he can sell that to someone else, all the more power to him.

[William J. Decker]

Originally Posted by jbushart

Illinois definition of a home inspection is not relevant.

NACHI COE is superceded by the Illinois State SOP: "The InterNACHI member shall comply with all government rules and licensing requirements of the jurisdiction where he/she conducts business."

Illinois Home Imnspection Licensing Act:

" "Home inspection" means the examination and evaluation of the exterior and interior components of residential real property, which includes the inspection of any 2 or more of the following components of residential real property in connection with or to facilitate the sale, lease, or other conveyance of, or the proposed sale, lease or other conveyance of, residential real property:"

Not a "home inspection" as defined by state law.


The end of this sentence contradicts the beginning. Try again.

There was no contract (verbal, in this case) because the client (the builder) did not live up to his duty, i.e., to pay me. I always require payment at the time of the inspection. No contradiction.

No. You have no right to share the results of your inspection without your client's consent. The fact that he refused to pay you because he did not appreciate the quality of your work does not give you the right to share the results of the inspection.

There was no "inspection". It was a consulation. Also, there was no consulation because he didn't pay me.

And, to be clear, I did not share the results of the inspection. I merely offered to do a condo building transition inspection for the association, at a later date. Transition inspections are not under the jurisdiction of the State or NACHI.

Again....you performed an inspection of a home. The fact that you were not paid does not relieve you of your ethical responsibilities.

Again, it was not a "home inspection" under the state law or NACHI SOP or COE, because it was a consultation.

Got it?

[William J. Decker]

Originally Posted by mlarson

How about for your own protection regardless of state requirements?

A verbal contract.

My lawyer has told me that if it is a consultation (per Illinois state law) than I am not required to have a writtyen contract. They arer paying me for my opinion.

And, less paperwork.

[Bob Elliott]

So we can Inspect outside SOP more than two building systems as long as we call it a consultation.?

Why bother to even have a Home Inspection License?

[James H. Bushart]

Originally Posted by mnahrgang

In your opinion...

No pay, means the work, and the results of it still belong to Will to do whatever he wishes with. If he can sell that to someone else, all the more power to him.

Grossly incorrect.

[James H. Bushart]

NACHI's COE is not superseded by anyone's state law. Sorry, Will.

In my opinion, your story is just you blowing off steam over not being paid.

If you, indeed, follow through and provide the information that you initially gathered for your client to someone else without your client's consent, and he follows a complaint with NACHI, you could be in trouble.

[Greg Bell]

Looks like someone let captian nachi loose again.

[Brian E. Kelly]

Originally Posted by gbell

Looks like someone let captian nachi loose again.

I thought you took his cape Greg???

[Mark Nahrgang]

Originally Posted by gbell

Looks like someone let captian nachi loose again.

agreed...

[Mark Nahrgang]

Originally Posted by jbushart

NACHI's COE is not superseded by anyone's state law. Sorry, Will.

In my opinion, your story is just you blowing off steam over not being paid.

If you, indeed, follow through and provide the information that you initially gathered for your client to someone else without your client's consent, and he follows a complaint with NACHI, you could be in trouble.

Well if you can give your opinion, then I can give mine.

If Will were in "trouble" with InterNACHI as you state, then InterNACHI isn't an organization worth being a member of.

For a newly converted liberal, you sure do hold a "holier than thou" attitude.

[Dan Bowers, CMI]

No $$$$$ - No Contract - Void - If Void, I will sell my services to ANYONE with the $$$$$.

I'm down with Will