Whether a buyer is a first-time property buyer or an experienced real estate mogul, they will be encouraged to get a property inspection before closing in order to uncover any defects that may be present. But property inspections are not designed to be a complete diagnostic assessment of a structure and are limited in scope. So, what should be expected from an inspection report?
Property inspections are strictly visual, meaning that the Inspector is not usually trained or licensed to examine within the structure or specific systems of the property, i.e., plumbing, HVAC, or electrical. Inspectors may only look for visual cues indicating or showing defects. While property inspections can be thorough in the sense that they may cover the entirety of the property, inspections are usually limited to surface level observations, and consequently the liability of the Inspector is often Limited as well.
After the property inspection, the inspector will prepare an Inspection Report. This report documents the findings of the inspection including defects, suggested repairs, and suggested regular maintenance. In the report, features of the property are usually described as something like either “operable” or “inoperable.” This binary grading scale helps expedite the inspection process but provides very little context to the party ordering the report and provides little substance with which to allege liability on the Inspector for missed information.
Because property inspections are mostly surface level observations, they do not come with a guarantee or warranty and reports include extensive liability disclaimers. Property buyers must be aware of these disclaimers when they are considering the results of the inspection report. Whether the report is positive or negative, it’s always possible that concealed defects are present, and the lengthy disclaimers make it difficult to recover from an inspector for losses resulting from an undetected defect. For example, in a 2013 case of Gladden v. Palmetto Home Inspection Services, LLC, Supreme Court of South Carolina, the Court made a clear distinction in stating;
“It is one thing to impose greater demands on the builder of a home, who is in a position to know of the home’s defects, and another to impose a similar standard on an inspector who makes only a brief survey of the home with the buyer’s full knowledge of the limited service the inspector is offering”.
Despite the limitations of an inspection report, inspections reports tend to give buyers peace of mind that nothing is horribly wrong and that glaring defects are not present. But it should be known that a clean inspection report is not a guarantee that the property is in perfect working order. And is there are defects, it might be difficult to recover from an inspector.
By: Joseph Krodel
