Houston Inspection Lawsuit

[Joe Farsetta]

Inspectors need to really stop thinking as the SOP as a minimum standard, and start thinking of it as an accepted industry standard. In cases where the state has mandated an SOP, embrace it and stop trying to re-invent the wheel.

I agree with Mike B...

[Rick Maday]

Originally Posted by jfarsetta

Inspectors need to really stop thinking as the SOP as a minimum standard, and start thinking of it as an accepted industry standard. In cases where the state has mandated an SOP, embrace it and stop trying to re-invent the wheel.

I agree with Mike B...

What if the SOP, itself, states it is a minimum?

Originally Posted by IL SOP

The purpose of these standards of practice is to establish a minimum and uniform standard for licensed home inspectors to provide the client with information regarding the condition of the systems and components of the home as inspected at the time of the home inspection.

[John Cahill]

Originally Posted by jfarsetta

Inspectors need to really stop thinking as the SOP as a minimum standard, and start thinking of it as an accepted industry standard. In cases where the state has mandated an SOP, embrace it and stop trying to re-invent the wheel. I agree with Mike B...

The term "minimum" is used for enforcement purposes.

[Billy Boerner]

Originally Posted by rmaday

What if the SOP, itself, states it is a minimum?

I agree take out the minimum. The SOP should be designed to establish a uniform standard only by which we all should follow. I for one will never go beyound unless the uniform standard is raised.

[Billy Boerner]

Originally Posted by jfarsetta

Inspectors need to really stop thinking as the SOP as a minimum standard, and start thinking of it as an accepted industry standard. In cases where the state has mandated an SOP, embrace it and stop trying to re-invent the wheel.

I agree with Mike B...

Joe what do you think the outcome would be if you was taken to court in a state where inspectors are not regulated by license or a SOP? Are we up the creek with no paddle or in your opinion do you think a state like MO would side with NACHI's SOP which I follow?

[John Cahill]

Would an accepted industry standard be a guideline or a requirement? The answer determines the need for the word minimum.

[Rick Maday]

Regardless of what we think, that is indeed the way the IL Sop reads. It is a minimum standard.

You cannot do any less and be legal.
You can do more.

[John Cahill]

Originally Posted by rmaday

Regardless of what we think, that is indeed the way the IL Sop reads. It is a minimum standard.

You cannot do any less and be legal.
You can do more.

Well then, like Texas, it is a requirement. The word minimum is put there for enforcement purposes. No big deal. Just keep doing your best.

[Greg Bell]

Originally Posted by bboerner

Joe what do you think the outcome would be if you was taken to court in a state where inspectors are not regulated by license or a SOP? Are we up the creek with no paddle or in your opinion do you think a state like MO would side with NACHI's SOP which I follow?

I think that your agreement would be the best protection for your situation. Do you tell what SOP will be followed in your PIA? Do you provide a link to that SOP in your report?

[Joe Farsetta]

Mr. Bell gets it. You must refer to the SOP in your agreement and report. NACHI's COE only requires substantial compliance with our own SOP, which means if you use anoter that is close to ours, you are okay, association wise. We allowed this long alo, and for good reason.

Now te queston becomes when and if you exceed the SOP, do you do so consistently? Is your revised operating standard documented anywhere? Where is the rhyme and reason where you exceed the SOP?

You inspect houst A and house B. They are adacent to each other. You find 10 defects in house A, and 20 in house B. But in house B you decided to exceed the SOP. You are sued for failing to find a defect in house A, which the plaintiff alleges you performed a negligent inspection of. In discovery, it is found out that the same defect you missed in house A you found in house B, because in that house, you exceeded the SOP.

The plaintiff argues that they did notget what they bagained for...

[John McKenna]

One of the largest issues in a home inspection is water penetration (which can be conducive to mold, decay, termites and corrosion in electrical fixtures).

Many times moisture can creep into the building through a very small gap or crack in the exterior (roof or walls) that is indeed visible, but very very hard to see. The results of this will be moisture inside the building.

It can be said the source of the moisture is visible, although very tiny to see (for this example).

So the question is....

#1
Is it better to enhance your ability to find moisture with a moisture meter and an IR camera, because many times the moisture will not create a visible stain or symptom.

or...

#2
Is it better to not use these tools and rely on the SoP to protect you from law suites that may arise from these moisture issues?

....

I know a leader in the Texas area who believed in option #2 for years, until he lost an $80,000 complaint because of moisture issues. He now uses a moisture meter and no longer makes fun of IR cameras. He is now inching toward buying an IR camera.

It is like watching old ideas meet the real world.

Also... try telling all your customers in advance that if there is hidden moisture issues in the building, that you do not feel you are responsible for them. It does not go over very well because MOST customers take it for granted that you will report on this kind of issue.

It is not a good thing for moisture damage to show up after the customer buys the house, when they took it for granted that you would find these issues. It is better to stop the anger and complaints before they get started IMHO.

And...

If I tell the customer that my company has the tools and training to find hidden moisture issues, who do you think they will want to hire?

Some are just looking for the low priced inspector, but many are now looking for a more advanced inspection with more details.

BTW... the more an E&O insurance company knows about IR cameras, the more they are willing to cover them in the policy. Education is sometimes a slow process. My E&O provider covers my thermal imaging, along with the rest of my normal inspection.

[Bruce A. King]

Originally Posted by jfarsetta

Inspectors need to really stop thinking as the SOP as a minimum standard, and start thinking of it as an accepted industry standard. In cases where the state has mandated an SOP, embrace it and stop trying to re-invent the wheel.

Joe, can you give some examples of what inspectors might be doing during an inspection that they should not be doing? This of course is not asking for the obvious examples like cutting sheetrock and taking the heat exchanger out of a furnace but asking for the ones that are not as well known.

[Joseph A. Ferry]

Originally Posted by jfarsetta

Inspectors need to really stop thinking as the SOP as a minimum standard, and start thinking of it as an accepted industry standard. In cases where the state has mandated an SOP, embrace it and stop trying to re-invent the wheel.

I agree with Mike B...

[Emphasis = italics in original]

Tattoo this in your brain.

[Joseph A. Ferry]

Just read the Complaint. Not the most ridiculous lawsuit that I have ever seen but very close to it.

If Gordo's PIA calls for attorneys fees to the prevailing party, I would go after this guy hammer and tongs.

Then I would file a complaint with the Disciplinary Committee of the Supreme Court of Texas against this attorney.

[John Cahill]

Originally Posted by jferry1

Just read the Complaint. Not the most ridiculous lawsuit that I have ever seen but very close to it.

If Gordo's PIA calls for attorneys fees to the prevailing party, I would go after this guy hammer and tongs.

Then I would file a complaint with the Disciplinary Committee of the Supreme Court of Texas against this attorney.

Joe, the seller is the attorney