Help! E & O Insurance & Disclaimer Form

[Robert A. Jack]

Can someone please answer my question? Does anyone have problems with customers signing the Pre-Inspection Disclaimer Form? And my E&O insurance requires this Disclaimer form to be signed. So if the disclaimer form is signed, why do I need the E & O Insurance? Thanks!

[Joseph Hagarty, CMI]

What form are you referring to?
Contract?

[Ben L. Garrison]

Because it's not uncommon for your client's to choose NOT to agree to those terms and conditions in your agreement despite signing it. Remember, they are making arguably the largest investment of their life and if something goes wrong, they might think YOU should've been able to predict the future.

Think about it... of those contracts were so iron clad, E&O insurance companies would cease to exist....

[clambert2]

Simple no signed agreement (contract) no inspection..Period.

Also most no signed agreement no insurance coverage.

In 11 years I had only one person try to change my agreement. I went home early that day.

[David Nasser]

Originally Posted by clambert2

Simple no signed agreement (contract) no inspection..Period.

Also most no signed agreement no insurance coverage.

In 11 years I had only one person try to change my agreement. I went home early that day.

I agree with you ...its never happened to me. But I will refuse to do

the inspection also.

David

[David A. Andersen]

Because of that "worthless" disclaimer form, your going to get sued!

Can you insure yourself ($1,000,000) ?

If not, Than you need insurance.

You live in New England in a State that has massive amounts of New Yorkers living there and you don't think you need insurance?

I wouldn't step foot in VT without insurance, even though you have more cows there than people...

[Dan Bowers, CMI]

This is a trick question / Right. You can't possibly be serious. On the off chance its not a joke ...............

No matter what they sign / They can & do sue.

Some courts uphold your agreement / some don't.

[Nick Gromicko]

Can you insure yourself ($1,000,000) ?

??? Who does inspections themselves? Aren't all inspection companies incorporated?

[Ben L. Garrison]

Originally Posted by gromicko

??? Who does inspections themselves? Aren't all inspection companies incorporated?

What difference does that make?

[Roy D. Cooke, Sr]

I think you need to talk to a chartered accountant and a good lawyer to help you make your decision

[Gilles Larin]

I suppose it depends in which jurisdiction you operate in. In any case, a good ambulance chaser will always name the company AND the inspector as co-defendants. I didn't realize Vermont had more cows than people. Must be great cows as the people are fine!

G.

[Nick Gromicko]

What difference does that make?

A big difference, if you have personal assets. No member of InterNACHI should ever accept payment (personally) for inspection services. Never ever.

Members should only work for (be employees of) corporations that offer inspection services, or be stockholders of corporations that offer inspection services.

Never ever offer inspection services personally.

[Robert Sole]

Originally Posted by gromicko

??? Who does inspections themselves? Aren't all inspection companies incorporated?

the problem is that Florida specifically removed any protection from being incorporated. Florida law states that
"No corporation or partnership shall be relieved of responsibility for the conduct or acts of its agents, employees, or officers by reason of its compliance with this section, nor shall any individual practicing home inspection services be relieved of responsibility for professional services performed by reason of his or her employment or relationship with a corporation or partnership."


That basically voids any protection due to being incorporated.

[Joseph A. Ferry]

Somebody should create a website that discusses this very issue.

[Brian A. MacNeish]

Originally Posted by jferry1

Somebody should create a website that discusses this very issue.

Joseph Ferry:

Myth #2- Great article!

Here are some selected comments from it on the "weasel" clause!!! A few years ago I was called "Dumb, Dopey, Stupid" for speaking against it!!

Myth # 2 -The Limitation of Liability Clause Is the Greatest Thing Since Night Baseball

-this completely unnecessary clause that is way past its sell-by date.

-actively encourage their members and franchisees to embrace this evolutionary holdover

-What sophisticated purchaser, in her right mind, would hire a professional home inspector who limited her liability? That’s a rhetorical question that answers itself.

-the “protection” that they provide is in no small measure illusory

-They do not prevent clients from suing home inspectors

-So, to recap, the exculpatory clause provides extremely limited “protection” from clients only, lulls inspectors into a false sense of security and renders the skilled and experienced inspector indistinguishable from the inexperienced lowballers that plague the industry. And on top of all that is completely unnecessary.