International Association of Certified Home Inspectors
|
|||||||
| Legislation, Licensing & Legal Issues Use this forum to discuss current and proposed legislation on home inspector licensing, and other legal issues affecting home inspectors. Members of all associations welcome. |
![]() |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
|
Please Note:
Bert de Haan is a non-member guest and is in no way affiliated with InterNACHI or its members.
CLIENT waives any claim for consequential, exemplary, special or incidental damages or for the loss of the use of the home/building even if the CLIENT has been advised of the possibility of such damages. The parties acknowledge that the liquidated damages are not intended as a penalty but are intended
(i) to reflect the fact that actual damages may be difficult and impractical to ascertain; (ii) to allocate risk among the INSPECTOR and CLIENT; and (iii) to enable the INSPECTOR to perform the inspection at the stated fee. What is meant by this paragraph? What is meant by "consequential damages," "exemplary damages," "special damages," "incidental damages," and "liquidated damages." Why are these liquidated damages difficult and impractical to ascertain? Why are these liquidated damages allocated among the inspector and client? Thanks |
| Need a home inspection in Minnesota? Check out InterNACHI's listing of Minnesota certified home inspectors. Or, find a home inspector anywhere in the world with our inspection search engine. |
|
#2
|
||||
|
||||
|
It's pretty much plain English. In return for the inspector being willing to perform the inspection for only $300 or whatever, the client pre-agrees to take some of the risk and not to ever demand consequential damages, especially since such damages are difficult to quantify.
Nick Gromicko, CMI, CPI, IAC2, Infrared Certified Founder, InterNACHI "Just as iron sharpens iron, one man sharpens another." Proverbs 27:17 |
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Special" damages are actual, provable damages resulting directly from the alleged negligence or breach of contract.
"Incidential" damages are sometimes awarded in a lawsuit for a breach of contract as compensation for commercially reasonable expenses incurred as a result of the other party's breach, such as costs of inspecting and returning goods that do not conform to contract specifications. Parties to a contact may agree to "liquidated" damages when actual damages will be difficult or hard to prove. To agree on liquidated damages in a contract is to agree on damages in advance so that the aggreived party does not have to prove actual damages at trial. The typical InterNACHI contract provides that the parties agree to liquidated damages are limited to the amount paid to the inspector as a fee. "Consequential" damages are damages that are not the direct result of the inspector's negligence or breach of contract. For example, let's suppose a client who is a stockbroker and keeps a home office claims an inspector negligently missed a leaky pipe. Water drips from the pipe and destroys the homeowner's business files, and some of the homeowner's clients decide to fire him. If consequential damages are not allowed, the homeowner cannot seek to recover the loss of revenue from departing clients as part of his damages. "Exemplary" damages are the same as punitive damages, damages to punish the wrongdoer. These are generally not available unless the plaintiff can prove that the inspector is guilty of intentional or reckless misconduct. Mark Cohen General Counsel to InterNACHI The Cohen Law Group, PC 1942 Broadway, Ste. 314 Boulder, CO 80302 (303) 546-7937 http://www.cohenslaw.com |
|
#4
|
||||
|
||||
|
Thanks Mark!
Nick Gromicko, CMI, CPI, IAC2, Infrared Certified Founder, InterNACHI "Just as iron sharpens iron, one man sharpens another." Proverbs 27:17 |
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
|
Please Note:
Bert de Haan is a non-member guest and is in no way affiliated with InterNACHI or its members.
Thanks Mark. That's helpful.
Nick: Just because something is written in English doesn't make it plain English. Every occupation has its jargon and this is legal jargon. That is not a bad thing as long as I can ask about its meaning without being made to feel like a fool. |
|
#6
|
||||
|
||||
|
You misunderstood. "Plain English" is itself a legal phrase. It means with minimal legal jargon. That is what I meant by it. All our documents are pretty much plain English documents. See www.nachi.org/documents.htm
Nick Gromicko, CMI, CPI, IAC2, Infrared Certified Founder, InterNACHI "Just as iron sharpens iron, one man sharpens another." Proverbs 27:17 Last edited by gromicko; 2/9/10 at 4:32 PM.. |
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
Please Note:
Bert de Haan is a non-member guest and is in no way affiliated with InterNACHI or its members.
Quote:
|
|
#8
|
||||
|
||||
|
My fault. Lack of inflection on the mb gets us all in trouble at one time or another. We're furiously working toward launching the first video conferencing message board.
Nick Gromicko, CMI, CPI, IAC2, Infrared Certified Founder, InterNACHI "Just as iron sharpens iron, one man sharpens another." Proverbs 27:17 |
|
#9
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Ian Niquette Square One Home Inspection Markesan WI 53946 www.squareonehomeinspection.com Active Rain Network INACHI Awards Portal Want To Exchange Links? What we've got here is......failure......to communicate.....
|
|
#10
|
||||
|
||||
|
Please Note:
kpierce is a non-member guest and is in no way affiliated with InterNACHI or its members.
A video message board with thousands of members? Hehe, yeah.
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| "UFER" Ground? see last paragraph. | jtedesco1 | Electrical | 6 | 9/15/08 7:57 AM |
| Let's talk ESOP | rcooke | General Inspection Discussion | 231 | 2/22/08 8:55 PM |
| Rule of Thumb A/C sizing question from Practice Exam | gliebig | HVAC | 9 | 5/25/06 1:38 AM |
| Case law on Home Inspections | rwand1 | Canadian Inspectors | 10 | 4/5/06 10:08 PM |