Houston Inspection Lawsuit

[Rick Maday]

Originally Posted by gbell

That is why I have this in my agreement.

The Inspection and report are performed and prepared for the sole and exclusive use and possession of the Client. No other person or entity may rely on the report issued pursuant to this Agreement. In the event that any person, not a party to this Agreement, makes any claim against
Inspector, its employees or agents, arising out of the services performed by Inspector under this Agreement, the Client agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless Inspector from any and all damages, expenses, costs and attorney fees arising from such a claim

I have same/similar.

Curious as to how it would apply here?

Do you then sue your client or ask him to pay your legal bills?

[George Szontagh]

Page 7 of the original petition asks for a total of a million.

IMHO getting the client to indemnify you against claims by a third party is unenforceable. Client has no control over what some stranger does, and cannot reasonably be expected to protect you.

Can inspector use E&O for this? Complainant is not the client.

Anybody know if there is a "3 year" life to T&P valves and where that all got started?? May take it out of my reports.

George S.
TREC 2212

[Michael R. Boyett]

Originally Posted by George Szontagh

Anybody know if there is a "3 year" life to T&P valves and where that all got started?? May take it out of my reports.

George...here is a screen snip of the installation instructions for a Watts 10XL TPRV. It's what I used to justify my standard comment regarding TPRV's needing to be inspected every three years by a licensed plumber...not that they have a three year life though.

[Chuck Evans]

Originally Posted by mboyett

George...here is a screen snip of the installation instructions for a Watts 10XL TPRV. It's what I used to justify my standard comment regarding TPRV's needing to be inspected every three years by a licensed plumber...not that they have a three year life though.

Attachment 32143

And the cost to remove and inspect exceeds the cost to replace.

[George Szontagh]

OK Mike, with that it looks like you're going to be dragged into this mess.... Expect a subpoena at any moment.......

Thanks for the reference. Now have to craft some kind of language that valve has likely not been examined for three years blah blah blah. Jeez-louise.

George S.

[Chuck Evans]

Interesting that the seller is attempting to parlay a $10,000 reduction in his contract price for a poorly maintained property with a laundry list of bona-fide defects into a $1,000,000 lawsuit...

I've worked with Fox for years and know both Gordon and Ruben to be both conscientious and highly skilled in the profession. Since this is the first that I have heard of this, I suspect that Gordon is not losing much sleep over it. This may be one case where the TX SOP, which mandates that the inspector give an opinion on foundation performance and requires that the inspector cite as defects many of the other items listed in this report, actually works in favor of the inspector.

I suspect and hope that at the end of the day the plaintiff will be as disappointed in the outcome of his suit as he was at learning the condition of his property. Of course he will force both inspectors to expend an inordinate amount of time and money to defend. Hopefully it will get tossed. Best wishes to Gordon and Ruben in obtaining justice.

[Chuck Evans]

Originally Posted by dmaricic

What total BS. It's amazing what people think they can sue for. I'm sure Gordon will do fine and the sellers will have to pay attorney fee's.

It looks to me like they are suing for $250,000 or $10,000. It's not $750,000 (not that that's the big issue). The stupid part is that they are saying that the report will affect the future sale value. Now, how would that be possible since the report is only between the buyer and seller? Future buyers wouldn't see the same report. Lame!

The suit is for actual claimed damages PLUS exemplary (i.e., punitive) damages of $750,000. Someone is shooting for a payday

The Texas Association of Realtors form (TAR No. 1406) asks for disclosure of any inspections performed in the last four years. The TREC form doesn't include this, but I have only ever seen the TAR form on a sale involving an agent.

[Dominic J. Maricic]

It's an attempt to try and get Gordon to settle and make it go away. They probably figure that with all the inspectors listed on the front page of the report that it's a huge company with lots of money and they'll pay to make it go away. The attorney must be getting paid hourly as few would take a case like this on commission (the most damages that they could come close to winning would be $10,000). Which of course means the plaintiffs are paying out their ears.

[Chuck Evans]

It's almost surely a DIY lawsuit. Plaintiff is an attorney, which seems to be pretty common. I agree that the suit is probably intended just to produce a settlement.

Looks like the house is still being marketed, but it doesn't show up on the HAR site.

[Bob Elliott]

Report says Water Heater is past normal life expectancy and plans should be made in the budget to replace soon.

Seems like standard terminology.

I see the buyer wanted the seller to pay closing costs as a concession on the listed items which included a new water Heater.

What the buyer demands is separate from what Inspector recommended from what I can tell so I hope this is looked at as a frivolous lawsuit.

Of course in today's corrupt society, it all depends on who plays golf with the judge.

[Aaron D. Miller]

Now, how would that be possible since the report is only between the buyer and seller? Future buyers wouldn't see the same report.

In the ideal world perhaps the report should remain in the realm of the buyer and seller. However, it does not work that way in Texas. The seller is required by law to disclose any inspection reports for a period of 5 years.

[Michael R. Boyett]

Originally Posted by amiller

In the ideal world perhaps the report should remain in the realm of the buyer and seller. However, it does not work that way in Texas. The seller is required by law to disclose any inspection reports for a period of 5 years.

Aaron, as I and others pointed out earlier in this thread, the TAR Sellers Disclosure form does require the disclosure of prior inspection reports however the TREC promulgated Sellers Disclosure does not. Realtors are free to use either to my knowledge. Can you point me to the 'law' that requires the disclosure of prior inspection reports? I'd like to bookmark that for future reference.

[John Onofrey]

Originally Posted by mboyett

Aaron, as I and others pointed out earlier in this thread, the TAR Sellers Disclosure form does require the disclosure of prior inspection reports however the TREC promulgated Sellers Disclosure does not. Realtors are free to use either to my knowledge. Can you point me to the 'law' that requires the disclosure of prior inspection reports? I'd like to bookmark that for future reference.

Aaron, are you going to take that crap from a man wearing a dress?

[Michael R. Boyett]

Hey! Don't make me take my pantyhose off and wrap them around your neck!

[John Cahill]

The seller and plaintiff is a lawyer. The home has already sold to another party. The law suit is stupid and will go no where.