Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

thefrozendivide t1_j5vgtlh wrote



kingintheyunk OP t1_j5vo7xb wrote

I'm wondering if an inspector would catch this. They would see the strucutal issues, but would they know it's built on a creek? Maybe not all inspectors. My guys knew because they have been in the west philly real estate game for 40 years.


ScoffingYayap t1_j5wbd7p wrote

I mean if an inspector missed something this obvious I feel like there are grounds for legal action against them if it went through


aputhehindu t1_j5wcynl wrote

There’s not. You have to PROVE that they intentionally found and withheld information. Being bad at your job is not illegal.


subgraphics t1_j5wj3ps wrote

Ugh, thank you. Everybody's first instinct is "sue, sue, sue". I'm not saying there's never a place for lawsuits, but maybe parallel & equally important questions more often should be, "Hello prospective homeowner, how many inspectors did you look at and consider? Did YOU do your due diligence? Ultimately, YOU chose this person to represent you and your interests...why?"


mikebailey t1_j5wt6qg wrote

Not to roast the specific commenter but usually if people say “I feel like” about laws it’s wrong


8Draw t1_j5xhqys wrote

This is exactly what regulations and licensing are supposed to be for because the average person isn't an electrician, doctor, lawyer, home inspector and truly has little idea how to vet one beyond the opinions of other people just as unqualified.


atheken t1_j5y9aeg wrote

The fallacy in your argument is that the average home buyer has the time or expertise to (critically) evaluate different home inspectors.

Do they need to hire an inspector? Yes.

Should the inspector have insurance and a certification? Yes.

Beyond getting recommendations from friends and your real estate agent, the typical home buyer mostly “doesn’t know what they don’t know.” - which is why they’re paying $500 to someone to do a basic walkthrough of a house.

This extends to all sorts of areas of our lives where it’s basically impossible for an individual to be fully informed, at some point we make a judgement call and make a decision.


jamin_g t1_j5wkoxj wrote

Yeah a property inspection is really worthless unless you know and trust the inspector


roobinsteen t1_j5xiam8 wrote

As obvious as structural issues, or as obvious as built upon a buried creek? Because if the latter, that is not obvious.


ArsenicLifeform t1_j5xajpg wrote

Inspector would never catch this unless the structural issues were imminent


HyruleJedi t1_j5w0kbw wrote

What if your best friend is a civil engineer, land surveyor, and specifically inspects things for a living?


kilometr t1_j5wbb9y wrote

I’m a civil engineer and unless your friend inspects houses for a living, which is rare for a civil engineer, I would still hire one.

Issues that a home inspector would catch don’t overlap much with what most civil engineers do. structural stuff maybe, but not smaller things involving utilities, etc.


JudgeDreddNaut t1_j5wq37y wrote

Yeah I'm a civil and I still have hired an inspector for all the homes I've ever purchased. I know enough to know I don't know enough.


dannygunz t1_j5wt0hi wrote

A lot of home inspectors just go through a checklist and aren't very thorough. I would recommend people not just feeling safe because they have an inspector. Do as much homework as possible before and scrutinize the hell out of the place with the inspector while walking through, or better yet bring your civil engineer/contractor/whatever friend or family to do it too.


loctastic t1_j5w4lns wrote

How do people even get insurance if they waive inspection?


atheken t1_j5y9yd5 wrote

As far as I know, you can’t get a mortgage if you can’t get insurance.

The insurance company has a lot of data about geographic issues that could generate a claim (such as a pocket of housing built over a creek).

The OP story sounds scary, but they caught the issue, and there are so many different gates you have to go through when buying a house with a mortgage that I think these types of horror stories are the exception, not the rule.


Frummage t1_j5wwoil wrote

We had a good inspector and he saved us from buying a house where the owner had basically nailed sheetrock up over a leak that ran from the roof to the basement.


bushwhack227 t1_j5xl1cz wrote

I hope all these yuppie idiots who made cash offers and waived inspections lose their fucking shirts.


Bumblebeee_tuna_ t1_j5w70pb wrote

In a competitive market it can be a value add. We did this in Wildwood and no problems arised (we were smart about it).

But also, inspectors are a joke. They call out the nail pops, go through the motions, and aren't held accountable for any issues that arise.


joaofava t1_j5wdn8u wrote

Not needed in todays market so who cares.

But, if you obviously need to replace and renovate a lot, it’s arguable that the inspector is needed. I’ve waived inspection ever since a great inspector missed basically all the relevant major issues in my first house purchase. You can’t really catch structural issues especially.

Even when I waive inspection I bring in the inspector later for a punch list of little things.