New WDO inspection reporting form.

[Nick Gromicko]

Back to the question. Do the following two sentences mean the same thing to you?

1. No visible evidence of wood destroying insects was observed.
2. Visible evidence of wood destroying insects was not observed.

I say yes. What do you say?

[James H. Bushart]

I don't understand the need to reinvent the wheel. We know that it is only an extremely small percentage of home inspections that ever end up in court. Is the litigation rate for termite inspections higher? Why do insurance companies continue to conceal this data if not to hide the fact that they are overcharging for premiums?

Life insurance premiums vary by age, health, smoking habits...etc. Car insurance varies by age of driver, driving record, etc. E&O providers, however, always assign an almost uniform rate for newby and experienced inspector, alike. And some will throw in ancillary services for "free". How can they do that if there is a high enough litigation rate to justify modifying the form?

[Stephen W. Stanczyk]

Originally Posted by gromicko

We've submitted a WA version of the form to Washington State Department of Agriculture for review, this is the same Department that has already approved our online WDO inspection course. It includes a WSDA control number box and other changes to meet the WDO inspection reporting criteria required in WA.

It is interesting to note the the WSPMA form currently used in WA includes a check box for "Visible Evidence of Active Wood Decay Fungi" and refers to WDO not WDI.

Thats because WA State SPI must also report on wood rot and conducive conditions. They also do not allow a limit of liability due to their bond / E&O requirement. I think you can limit anything over their minimum, but you are stuck with the first $25k.

As you noted, there are other changes in the position and type of information required. I am sure Nick and the staff have already researched this but the information is available HERE and the report information / position starts on page 6

Personally I don't care anymore. I dropped my Pest License when they licensed Home Inspectors. In fact many Pest Control Companies (applicators) no longer have anyone on staff to perform Structural Pest Inspections because the liability is in the inspection and the money is in the treatment.

[Nick Gromicko]

I don't understand the need to reinvent the wheel.

InterNACHI views all inspection related space as its property. All of it. And we view anything or anyone foreign (non InterNACHI) to be occupying that property as temporary squatters, operating at our pleasure, until we find time to get in there and clean it up.

Back to the question. Do the following two sentences mean the same thing to you?

1. No visible evidence of wood destroying insects was observed.
2. Visible evidence of wood destroying insects was not observed.

I say yes. What do you say?

[Stephen W. Stanczyk]

Originally Posted by gromicko

Back to the question. Do the following two sentences mean the same thing to you?

1. No visible evidence of wood destroying insects was observed.

To me this says you did not see any visible evidence.

1. Visible evidence of wood destroying insects was not observed.

This on the other hand says there is visible evidence, you just did not observe it.

Slight difference but there is a difference.

[James H. Bushart]

Originally Posted by gromicko

InterNACHI views all inspection related space as its property. All of it. And we view anything or anyone foreign (non InterNACHI) to be occupying that property as temporary squatters, operating at our pleasure, until we find time to get in there and clean it up.

Back to the question. Do the following two sentences mean the same thing to you?

1. No visible evidence of wood destroying insects was observed.
2. Visible evidence of wood destroying insects was not observed.

I say yes. What do you say?

When interpreting written remarks, I was taught to apply the rule of "what a reasonable person" would conclude from it. In that regard, neither statement rules out the possibility that evidence of wood destroying insects did not exist. They simply remark that such evidence was not observed.

In my opinion, neither of these two statements are relevant to my report since I was hired to find such evidence if it were to exist.

Can I write a home inspection report with the canned phrase that "Evidence of structural damage was not observed" and be protected by that....when I missed a lateral crack running the length of the unfinished, bowing basement wall?

[Nick Gromicko]

In my opinion, neither of these two statements are relevant to my report since I was hired to find such evidence if it were to exist.

One of the statements is the main checkbox in the NPMA 33.

When interpreting written remarks, I was taught to apply the rule of "what a reasonable person" would conclude from it.

In law, when a statement can be interpreted two ways (which I've proven is possible with this thread), the plaintiff may use the interpretation that best supports his claim.

[James H. Bushart]

Originally Posted by gromicko

In law, when a statement can be interpreted two ways (which I've proven is possible with this thread), the plaintiff may use the interpretation that best supports his claim.

Of course they do...but judges do not always side with plaintiffs. Judges do not always respond as predicted, of course....but what one would reasonably interpret a statement to mean is used more often than the convenient choice of the plaintiff...or the defendant, as far as that goes.

"The blind man picked up his hammer and saw"....does not necessarily describe a miracle cure for blindness derived from touching a hammer....even if the plaintiff says so.'

While our choice of words are important in our official correspondence with our clients, the clarity of the message and what it is intended to convey is very relevant and binding on both sides. When the bank accidentally puts a few extra zeroes at the end of your $1,000 deposit, you don't get to keep the money no matter what the official bank balance reads on your ATM printout.

If I am contracted to seek and record the existence of evidence of wood destroying insects, saying that I didn't see it does not mean that it wasn't there. The NPMA 33 clearly communicates that. I'm not afraid to use it and am not aware of anyone who properly completed it to ever have any problems.

[Nick Gromicko]

How much does NPMA charge to use their form?

[James H. Bushart]

Originally Posted by gromicko

How much does NPMA charge to use their form?

Are you wanting me to say it? That...you get what you pay for? LOL

I use an on-line PDF version (from CBS Forms) that can be emailed and I pay nineteen and a half cents per form. I can email copies of it to myself, the client, the bank, the used house salesman, his contractor..etc....all for the same nineteen and a half cents, since I am only paying once for each completed form.

[Nick Gromicko]

Are you wanting me to say it? That...you get what you pay for? LOL

LOL!