CO death in newly built home

[wforsyth]

Russel,

You have a well known reputation for twisting the facts to suit your POV so you will pardon me if I don't take your word as gospel that you didn't just cut and paste all those names and numbers.

Oops! Did I make an accidental reference to religion? I'm sorry.

[Stephen W. Stanczyk]

I bought and sold 7 houses in the last 3 years here in Washington. Not 1 had any mention in the escrow breakdown for the cost of inspections that were paid by me or the other buyers that had inspections. There would be absolutely no reason to have a paid for inspection noted on the HUD-1 Settlement Statement unless there was agreement to have the inspection paid at escrow.

Escrow officers do as little as possible and only plug in numbers that are pre-determined by the parties to the agreement (buyer, seller, mortgage company, title company, realtors, appraisers etc.) Unless they are given specific written directions to add something into the HUD-1, they will not and cannot do it.

[mmorgan]

I'm going to take this thread back to a CO discussion.

I have a Bacharach Combustion Analyzer. I don't test at every house - only when the furnace is old or I smell that aldehyde smell that is often produced along with CO. About a year ago, I inspected such a furnace. The furnace itself was producing very high levels of CO (greater than 1000 ppm, if my memory serves me correctly). I then checked at one of the supply registers and measured 8 ppm CO. I informed the client about this and explained to him the potential danger. He called me a week or so later and told me that the HVAC tech that he had come check out the furnace said there was no problem. I told him that I didn't agree and that he should be careful and at least install a CO alarm. I haven't heard from him since and hope that everything is ok with him and the furnace.

[wforsyth]

Originally Posted by sstanczyk

I bought and sold 7 houses in the last 3 years here in Washington. Not 1 had any mention in the escrow breakdown for the cost of inspections that were paid by me or the other buyers that had inspections. There would be absolutely no reason to have a paid for inspection noted on the HUD-1 Settlement Statement unless there was agreement to have the inspection paid at escrow.

Escrow officers do as little as possible and only plug in numbers that are pre-determined by the parties to the agreement (buyer, seller, mortgage company, title company, realtors, appraisers etc.) Unless they are given specific written directions to add something into the HUD-1, they will not and cannot do it.

No mention was made of the escrow officer doing anything. That does not mean that the buyer and realtor do not make allowances for the inspection in the amount the buyer borrows from the bank.

If you had to buy a house, wouldn't you try to borrow the money at the same time to cover the inspection rather than pulling it out of your own pocket? Not too many people have $4-500 in their pockets for multiple home inspections.

[Stephen W. Stanczyk]

Originally Posted by wforsyth

No mention was made of the escrow officer doing anything. That does not mean that the buyer and realtor do not make allowances for the inspection in the amount the buyer borrows from the bank.

If you had to buy a house, wouldn't you try to borrow the money at the same time to cover the inspection rather than pulling it out of your own pocket? Not too many people have $4-500 in their pockets for multiple home inspections.

Absolutely NOT. Why would I want to pay interest for 30-40 years on a $400 payment. That is almost as bad as people who put their house at risk with a first, second or third mortgage to pay off a credit card. STUPID. You risk your house for fast food, clothes or trips that you shouldn't have bought if you didn't have the money.

[Russel Ray]

Originally Posted by wforsyth

You have a well known reputation for twisting the facts to suit your POV so you will pardon me if I don't take your word as gospel that you didn't just cut and paste all those names and numbers.

And you have a pretty well-established reputation for, well, for not necessarily telling the truth, for shooting from the hip without having all the facts, etc. Some would say for simply outright lieing. As I have said, I'lve always given you the benefit of the doubt, but when someone does prove you wrong, as I have done here, you lose even me.

My employees and friends (that group doesn't include you at this point) say I have a reputation for finding the truth, and digging deep to find it. I think it's been found here.

Originally Posted by wforsyth

Oops! Did I make an accidental reference to religion? I'm sorry.

Why would you apologize for making a reference to religion, accidental or otherwise. Nice segue to get away from what obviously are mistruths, lack of facts, or lack of knowledge on your behalf.

[Russel Ray]

Originally Posted by wforsyth

No mention was made of the escrow officer doing anything. That does not mean that the buyer and realtor do not make allowances for the inspection in the amount the buyer borrows from the bank.

If you had to buy a house, wouldn't you try to borrow the money at the same time to cover the inspection rather than pulling it out of your own pocket? Not too many people have $4-500 in their pockets for multiple home inspections.

Wendy, Wendy, Wendy.
If that wasn't so funny, I'd be crying.
You're way off base.
I don't even know where to start, but I suspect I really don't need to.
I really do think you're more intelligent than that.
Nonetheless.

Who said anything about multiple home inspections? And you're just not going to find a bank that will finance inspections just because. Certainly one could get a signature loan to finance inspections, or even charge them to a credit card (that is a type of bank financing), but to be naive enough to state that the buyer and Realtor make allowances for the inspection in the amount the buyer borrows from the bank is, simply, pitiful.

Although one can finance closing costs, it's going to be rare, extremely rare, virtually unknown, to find a first mortgage bank that finances the closing costs. That would put the cost of the home above the appraised price, which no first mortgagor would agree to. I've financed many properties to the tune of 105% (the 5% is the closing costs), but it always, always, always involves a second trust deed/second mortgage, and it requires the approval of the seller. A good Realtor will advise the seller to seek monetary compensation for agreeing to let the buyer finance the closing costs. Usually $100 per $100,000 of financing. Even 100% financing requires a second mortgage because the first wants a 20% down payment.

[wforsyth]

Originally Posted by sstanczyk

Absolutely NOT. Why would I want to pay interest for 30-40 years on a $400 payment. That is almost as bad as people who put their house at risk with a first, second or third mortgage to pay off a credit card. STUPID. You risk your house for fast food, clothes or trips that you shouldn't have bought if you didn't have the money.

This is absolute BS and you know it.

If someone is going for 100 percent financing, then it's extremely doubtful that they have the cash just laying around to pay possibly multiple inspectors. Would you rather they forego the inspection rather than borrow the money?

I sure would hope not.

[wforsyth]

Originally Posted by rray

Wendy, Wendy, Wendy.
If that wasn't so funny, I'd be crying.
You're way off base.
I don't even know where to start, but I suspect I really don't need to.
I really do think you're more intelligent than that.
Nonetheless.

Who said anything about multiple home inspections? And you're just not going to find a bank that will finance inspections just because. Certainly one could get a signature loan to finance inspections, or even charge them to a credit card (that is a type of bank financing), but to be naive enough to state that the buyer and Realtor make allowances for the inspection in the amount the buyer borrows from the bank is, simply, pitiful.

Although one can finance closing costs, it's going to be rare, extremely rare, virtually unknown, to find a first mortgage bank that finances the closing costs. That would put the cost of the home above the appraised price, which no first mortgagor would agree to. I've financed many properties to the tune of 105% (the 5% is the closing costs), but it always, always, always involves a second trust deed/second mortgage, and it requires the approval of the seller. A good Realtor will advise the seller to seek monetary compensation for agreeing to let the buyer finance the closing costs. Usually $100 per $100,000 of financing. Even 100% financing requires a second mortgage because the first wants a 20% down payment.

You REALLY think alot of yourself don't you? It's sad everyone here has contributed to that swelled head.

Do you think that everyone just finds the right home on the first try? Is it possible that just maybe someone may end up passing on a home and then having to pay for an inspection for the next they decide on?

None of what you posted above is applicable. A load of crap. Kinda like Bryan Lynn and the fact that you have an opinion on every subject and are right about them all. Hmmm... Look who's calling the kettle black.

Has anyone ever actually looked at your "multiple inspector company"? Where is all of that on your website?

One of my favorites was where you claimed to do 2500 inspections a week. Or was it a month? When so many are struggling to do 250 a year. If we called the franchise, would they confirm your record?

[Russel Ray]

Originally Posted by wforsyth

If someone is going for 100 percent financing, then it's extremely doubtful that they have the cash just laying around to pay possibly multiple inspectors. Would you rather they forego the inspection rather than borrow the money?

One doesn't borrow the money for a home inspection as part of the home loan. I think even you know that.

And the property renovation industry would definitely disagree with you about someone going for 100 percent financing not having the casy to pay for multiple inspectors. One can make the most money by using someone else's money to accomplish one's goals.

[Russel Ray]

Originally Posted by wforsyth

You REALLY think alot of yourself don't you? It's sad everyone here has contributed to that swelled head.

I don't necessarily think so much of myself as I am thinking less and less of you. And that's what's truly sad.

Originally Posted by wforsyth

Do you think that everyone just finds the right home on the first try? Is it possible that just maybe someone may end up passing on a home and then having to pay for an inspection for the next they decide on?

Do you perhaps have a point? Feel free to state it, if you can.

Originally Posted by wforsyth

None of what you posted above is applicable.

It's all applicable to the disinformation that you posted. You're not part of the King's disinformation campaign, are you?

Originally Posted by wforsyth

One of my favorites was where you claimed to do 2500 inspections a week. Or was it a month?

Please feel free to post a link to that. I know you can't do it because I never said it. You're just digging a deeper hole, Wendy. Quit while you're ahead. Oh, wait. You've never been ahead. Nevermind.

[wforsyth]

What's really sad Russel, is that like most everyone else here, when called on your crap, you turn to name calling and backstabbing.

That's what is really sad. No facts, just turning on people.

[wforsyth]

Safe challenge isn't it Russel. Telling me to find the post, when your file only shows the last five hundred posts you've made, and sadly enough, that only goes to December 5,2006.

Btw, that was only two weeks ago. Unfortunately the post was made a few months ago.

[Russel Ray]

Originally Posted by wforsyth

What's really sad Russel, is that like most everyone else here, when called on your crap, you turn to name calling and backstabbing.

That's what is really sad. No facts, just turning on people.

Still looking for a link to that post, Wendy? Let me know when you find it.

[Russel Ray]

Originally Posted by wforsyth

Safe challenge isn't it Russel. Telling me to find the post, when your file only shows the last five hundred posts you've made, and sadly enough, that only goes to December 5,2006.

Btw, that was only two weeks ago. Unfortunately the post was made a few months ago.

Learn to use the search function. You can even search the archives, all the way back to my membership date of March 23, 2003.

You'll not find me anywhere claiming 2,500 inspections a week, or a month, or even a year. You will find me telling you about two HomeTeam franchises in Florida (Tampa and Miami) that do over 4,000 inspections a year. Perhaps that's what your faulty memory is remembering. I'll presume that it is.

But if you do find a post by me claiming that my company does 2,500 inspections a week or a month or a year, please, do feel free to post it.