Lawsuit vs Texas Inspectors

[Billy Boerner]

Originally Posted by mnahrgang

HVAC = Heating, Ventilation and Air Conditioning.

Therefore what "panel" are you talking about. There are panels all over. I personally remove the panel on the furnace to examine the burners and gain access to the model & serial number label.

Maybe you have a picture of what you are talking about?

Mark they are talking about the furnace. There is no inspection panel on a condensor unit that I'm aware of. If there is someone clue me in as well. If there was any evidence of water stains or mold growth within this location this guy is screwed due to the simple fact he didn't open the panel up and inspect the unit plain and simple. If that's the case he deserves to go to court. That's just stupid.

[Mark Nahrgang]

Originally Posted by bboerner

Mark they are talking about the furnace. There is no inspection panel on a condensor unit that I'm aware of. If there is someone clue me in as well. If there was any evidence of water stains or mold growth within this location this guy is screwed due to the simple fact he didn't open the panel up and inspect the unit plain and simple. If that's the case he deserves to go to court. That's just stupid.

That makes sense. What about electric furnaces?

[David A. Andersen]

First off, a suit was "filed". This is not a Surprime Court Ruling!

Any idiot lawyer can file a suit and not even read the Inspection Report! It happened to me! They didn't even have all the paperwork.

James, this report is inconclusive and there is no information to support anything about licensing. They need to start suing lawyers for filing cases without the facts.

My state law says:
1. You do not have to assess Mold. *“Tennessee Home Inspector License Act of 2005”, T.C.A. § 62-6-301 : The report addresses only systems or components inspected that, in the opinion of the inspector, is significantly deficient or near the end of the system or component's service life. This report does not address environmental hazards, including: Lead-based paint;* Radon;* Asbestos;* Cockroaches;* Rodents;* Pesticides;* Treated lumber; Fungus;* Mercury;* Carbon monoxide; or* Other similar environmental hazards. This report also does not address wood destroying insects and organisms and does not address subterranean systems or system components (operational or non-operational), including: Sewage disposal; Water supply; or Fuel storage or delivery.

2. You do not have to remove any panel that requires a tool. 4. Judgment of system efficiency or capacity is not within the scope of this inspection. Cooling systems are not dismantled in any way. Secured access covers are not removed. The interior components of evaporators, condensers and heat pumps are not viewed. The interior conditions of cooling components are not evaluated.

Home Inspectors are not required to: offer warranties or guarantees of any kind; calculate the strength, adequacy, or efficiency of any system or component; enter any area or perform any procedure that may damage the property or its components or be dangerous to or adversely affect the health or safety of the home inspector or other persons; operate any system or component that is shut down or otherwise inoperable; operate any system or component that does not respond to normal operating controls; move personal items, panels, furniture, equipment, plant life, soil, snow, ice, or debris that obstructs access or visibility; determine the effectiveness of any system installed to control or remove suspected hazardous substances; predict future condition, including but not limited to failure of components; project operating costs of components; evaluate acoustical characteristics of any system or component; or inspect special equipment or address issues that are not listed as components to be inspected by the Commissioner.

3. An HVAC unit "makes water", that's it's job! Water stains inside the unit? Well no kidding!

This is the "LAW" not some ASHI - NACHI SOP or someone's made up business practice.

TREC = Texas Real Estate Commission. Here lies the problem.

We do not know how much or how bad any of the conditions were. Why don't you get that info for us...

[Billy Boerner]

Originally Posted by mnahrgang

That makes sense. What about electric furnaces?

Yes electrical furnaces have panel access as well. Some units also have panels for fuses. Check those as well.

[James H. Bushart]

Lawyers file suits to get settlements from insurance companies. They have no intention of going to court and will be flabbergasted if the insurance company allowed it to go that far.

[Dan Bowers, CMI]

Brian -

To play devils advocate here. I was on the committee that helped write the OLD ASHI SoP which are now modified adapted and being used in AZ.

A readily accessible cover used for normal homeowner maintenance was NEVER considered something like the condensor case cover OR the evaporator coil cover. Homeowners DON'T do normal maintenance inside there. A blower cover - YES, but not the others. Sorry, gotta disagree.

[Dan Bowers, CMI]

Brian or John -

Also, just a thought. Go back and look at the Ohio HI Study. 3 licensed states and 3 non-licensed states. End result - Home Inspectors did NOT get smarter, write better reports, become more accurate, have less problems OR anything WITH licensing than without.

They simply made realestators FEEL better (now they got a lever).

In standing around at MANY trade shows over the past 5-10 years and talking to the insurance company reps, they have almost indicated that lawsuits DID NOT go down in licensed states AND they really DID NOT go down where mandatory E & O insurance was pushed off on us.

[Joe Farsetta]

John M,

If you inspect the house and there is mold, even if you are not a
mold inspector, you can be held liable for the moisture that led
to the mold (and thus get hit for the whole thing).

Show me where detecting moisture is a part of an SOP. How much moistire? 5%, 7%, 10%?

Even if you are not a mold inspector? What is that supposed to mean? This is a home inspection issue, and we are home inspectors.

My advise... buy a moisture meter, IR camera and stop being
afraid of making the realtor mad and write a hard report.

So, I suppose that absent of purchasing an IR camera, you are saying that the inspector is negligent? This is what your statement intimates. Tell me HOW a moisture meter would have DETECTED mold growth inside a cabinet or duct?

Again, your argument is disingenuine.

And, although you disagree, James' negativity toward licensing has NOTHING to do with walk-by inspections or undocumented reports. You have him confused with Russel Ray. James' stance is that licensing guarantees absolutely NOTHING. He is correct.

With Texas having the TOUGHEST home inspection SOP that I have seen, it didnt help this inspector, did it...

[James H. Bushart]

Between my "ignore" command and my porn filter, McKenna's posts never make it to my screen unless quoted.

Did that idiot actually use this lawsuit as a means of pushing his infrared technology course? I suppose, had he not been removed as its president, he would be claiming that the CMI designation would have saved him as well.

[John McKenna]

Originally Posted by jfarsetta

John M,

Show me where detecting moisture is a part of an SOP. How much moistire? 5%, 7%, 10%?

I should have said the visible source of the moisture, even
if it is a tiny gap in the flashing or crack in the caulking
that could allow the entry of the moisture. Also any
moisture related stains, or previous repairs should be
noted in the report.

If the moisture comes from a source not visible, and
shows no visible signs, then that is not within the SoP.
Sorry for not making that clear.

If the moisture comes from a visible source or from
visible poor workmanship or has visible evidence,
then the inspector would responsible for the damage
that comes from the moisture... even if the location
of the entry point is a hair line crack. Some will say
that are not responsible for moisture... but they are
responsible for the visible crack and therefore they
are responsible for the moisture and all the damage
that follows.

If there is a visible entry point or visible evidence, then
all the damage that follows can come back on the
inspector (even the death of the client and his family).

Even if you are not a mold inspector? What is that supposed to mean? This is a home inspection issue, and we are home inspectors.

If we fail to see the visible source of moisture and it leads
to moisture related damage, mold, decay, WDI, or
electrical issues, then it all goes back to the entry point
of the moisture, no matter how small. If it can be seen,
it is our responsibility. We may not see the moisture
with the naked eye, but we are liable for the visible entry
point or the visible signs of moisture or even poor
workmanship that will lead to the entry point later.

So, I suppose that absent of purchasing an IR camera, you are saying that the inspector is negligent? This is what your statement intimates. Tell me HOW a moisture meter would have DETECTED mold growth inside a cabinet or duct?

There is no requirement to use and IR camera or moisture
meter in the SoP. Those that do not find the moisture had
better hope there is no visible entry point or any visible
signs of the moisture issue. Having an IR camera and
moisture meter helps where the eyes may fail sometimes.

Again, your argument is disingenuine.

And, although you disagree, James' negativity toward licensing has NOTHING to do with walk-by inspections or undocumented reports. You have him confused with Russel Ray. James' stance is that licensing guarantees absolutely NOTHING. He is correct.

Our SoP does not allow walk by and undocumented
inspections. That is a fact and makes perfect sense to
me. I am not confused.

With Texas having the TOUGHEST home inspection SOP that I have seen, it didnt help this inspector, did it...

This inspector came to be an inspector during the few
years where they lowered the requirements to about
a third of what they are now. He may have developed
some bad habits as well.

We ALL believe that education and training makes for
a better inspector. You are a teacher and know that.
Some just don't like it enforced.

Training and better tools cannot stop a bad inspector
either, but that does not mean we should stop teaching
and promoting superior tools for the trade.

We ALL believe a SoP is a good thing, some just don't
like it enforced. The SoP cannot stop a bad inspector,
but helps more than it harms. Having no SoP is chaos
and anyone can do anything and call it an inspection. The
consumer may not be able to understand the technical
aspects of a home inspection and may not realize when
it is not done with to the minimum levels of the SoP.

Enforcement will punish those who fail to provide the
minimum level of service of the SoP.

The fact that the inspector is being sued may be the
evidence that the licensing laws are working as intended.
If he is truly negligent, then the law will weed him out
and give the consumer protection with clearly defined
enforcement. Where there is no law, it is harder to
define damage and a crime.

The law cannot stop immoral and poor work ethics. It
can only punish it when it is found. Motivation to avoid
punishment is a good thing for some. The fear of pain
and the rewards of staying in business are a benefit,
but never brings perfection. Having no motivation
produces less benefit.

People just seem to do better when someone is
watching them. We all know that, but we may not
like it when we are the ones being watched.

I think it is up to each state to defines it's own standards.

BTW... moisture levels as low as 16% can activate some
fungi spores.

Have a good one...

[John McKenna]

Originally Posted by jbushart

I suppose, had he not been removed as its president, he would be claiming that the CMI designation would have saved him as well.

I'm still here.

http://www.certifiedmasterinspector.org/cmi/contact.htm

Contact Us

Master Inspector Certification Board, Inc.

Suite 300
1750 30th Street
Boulder, CO 80301
contact@certifiedmasterinspector.org

Executive Director:

John McKenna
Texas
info@texas-inspection.com

President:

Nick Gromicko
Idaho
nick.gromicko@nachi.org

[Brian E. Kelly]

Originally Posted by dbowers

Brian -

To play devils advocate here. I was on the committee that helped write the OLD ASHI SoP which are now modified adapted and being used in AZ.

A readily accessible cover used for normal homeowner maintenance was NEVER considered something like the condenser case cover OR the evaporator coil cover. Homeowners DON'T do normal maintenance inside there. A blower cover - YES, but not the others. Sorry, gotta disagree.

Yeppers Do not recall mentioning the condenser???


And as for the Ohio study, you can use that lame *** study to prove anything you want.

But you should not quote that REALTOR study if at any time you disparage the cleverness of REALTORS.