4 ms·
In the US, at least, inspectors are liable for issues not uncovered during the initial inspection. Seller-hired inspector missed a malfunctioning AC unit? It'
by sgslo 8y ago
In the US, at least, inspectors are liable for issues not uncovered during the initial inspection. Seller-hired inspector missed a malfunctioning AC unit? It's on the inspector - or their insurance - to cover the cost of a fix.
- jandrese 8y agoYeah, they turn it on and cold air blows, check box. Not as many will tell you that the AC unit is 26 years old and likely to die soon. In my experience you have a 50/50 shot of them actually telling you that, but my sample size is very small.
- verelo 8y agoFor large appliances yes (AC/Oven/Stove/HVAC etc), that should happen, but for other issues it's 50/50 on if you'll get covered (probably even less). Single data point: I just (last week) had a title insurance claim for ~$21,000 for re-wiring of a property denied, despite the fact that I have documentation from the purchase process stating "All Knob and Tube wiring has been removed", and a home inspection report (seller provided) that did not uncover any K&T wiring. It was missed because whoever "removed" the old wiring (owner before the previous owner) left old wiring in between circuits and the outlets, which we found by accident when removing part of a wall. Electrical safety code requires that if we need to revise any wiring on these circuits that we bring them to current code, which to confirm there is no old wiring left at all means deactivating the circuit and re-running the entire circuit. Additionally my home insurance does not cover K&T wiring, as such i have 60 days to become compliant or my insurance is void. My option here is now to lawyer up, which at best, I'm going to get $21k out of, for a $1.58m house. There should be stricter and clearer liability here, but unfortunately it's just not how the law is structured here in Toronto.