Yes, and people do hide things all the time. Most people selling their home will make a few cosmetic changes at the very least. We did the typical cosmetic touch ups to show the house had been looked after.
In our case, our realtors had been instructed that we would only seriously consider offers from buyers who would seek an inspection for informational purposes only. Luckily, the market was in our favor to do that.
Our inspector pointed out things at our former home that might raise red flags to a buyer. For example, we hadn’t noticed that there was some wood rot on our detached barn. We had that repaired before putting the house on the market because we didn’t want to spook anyone who might be concerned that things weren’t maintained properly.
Likewise, when we offered on our new house, the inspector pointed out that a dryer duct wasn’t properly ventilated. So it didn’t stop us from wanting the house, but at least we were aware of that potential fire hazard. They are trained to look at things a regular person won’t notice.
When we bought our house 18 months ago the sellers were in a HURRY. They had already left town. We were the first through it and immediately made a bit and asked them what it would take to NOT have the scheduled open house. They were thrilled to take the $ and run. They said they would not pay for anything that an inspection would show up but would take $5K off the selling price in lieu of not paying anything on an inspection.
We did have the inspection knowing that for ourselves and in the quick amount of time that would still let us out of the contract. Nothing big showed up and certainly nothing to total $5k. It was great peace of mind for us though and then we are making a point to on our own get some of those things mentioned in the inspection taken care of.
Depending where you are buying as far as property or perks (like we have a built in pool and a multi level deck going down to the water) the inspection can really be either a stamp of approval or an eye opener. It’s not always just the house itself!
That what the buyer of my old house did. Except we told them if anything turns up during inspection, we won’t bother with any repairs under $5,000. Our disclosure form was thorough. I think we disclosed far more than any inspector could find. The buyer’s inspector was useless as far as I can tell. Made a big fuss on how he couldn’t turn on the oven and that it might be broken. It was a European oven that has two control knobs you have to turn on. Not that rare in the neighborhood, I might add. With an inspector like that, I’d rather take a bargain price and forgo an inspection.
That’s true. In an ideal world where all inspectors are competent, I wouldn’t hesitate to get an inspection. Most of us don’t do a home inspection very often. It will be likely in a new place few haven’t built up any connection yet to know who is good. Getting an inspector could be a hit and miss. That makes the value of getting an inspection done less clear.
I’m with Linda. You aren’t paying for someone to point out that the hose on the washing machine is worn and needs to be replaced. You are paying for someone’s expertise on roofs, gutters, foundation, sewer line…
One caveat about being a seller and hiring an inspector before selling? Anything discovered legally must be disclosed. Find out the septic system is on the brink of failure? Now you know and must disclose. Otherwise, you can state (and I could prove) “has been maintained according to manufacturer and township standards”. My realtor’s have all cautioned me against a pre-sale inspection (as a seller) for exactly this reason.
I had a buyer in the last house who was a jerk about incredibly minor things discovered during inspection. A small hole in a screen … they didn’t like how a grounding wire outside was situated… Instead of me taking $$ off (which I was I thought they wanted), I replaced the screen and my contractor fixed the grounding wire (he was in the area for something else and it took him 5 minutes). It felt like they were going for the ridiculous and trying to nickel and dime us.
Moral of the story: It ended up costing them in the end… We had a workout set in the basement that they expressed interest in. We would have left it for them to save moving it. But my contractor was interested, so he took it and used it (ironically, he saw it when checking the grounding wire issue!). We took all the custom paint for touchups and the extra carpet from the basement (which we have used). We also took the garage fridge (which was an exclusion) that they had said they would use if we left behind. We would have left behind b/c we didn’t want to move it, but we took it instead (and used it for another 5 years).
way to make a short story long. ◡̈
our last house sale? we had 13 offers over a weekend. I rejected the offer with an inspection clause. I let the buyer in to do an inspection but only an “information-only” and they would have had to forfeit their earnest money (which was like $20k). They did originally come in with a cash offer but then changed to a mortgage, but my realtor made it clear that wasn’t a contingency that would be added on. Just meant a little extra paperwork on their part.
Not in my case. I had three inspections two in buying one in selling. One was a hit when we were buying a house. I had a good realtor who recommended the inspector. It’s not the fee, $600 or not, that counts. It’s whether your bid will be accepted as in @lucy_van_pelt case. Not saying inspections are useless. Just that it’s not a clear cut case. It depends. I am not still sure what I’d do next time. Miss out or take the risk.
I was executor of an estate and was in charge of selling a condo.
The buyers insisted on an inspection; it was a slow market and the realtor told me we could be waiting for a while for another comparable offer (no mortgage contingency). So the inspection proceeded. There isn’t that much to look at or examine in a concrete high rise… since the inspection excludes the high priced items anyway.
I fixed some stupid, low end things… they did not want a price concession. Three months after closing I heard from the lawyer that they had GUTTED the condo, to the studs, everything into the dumpster. (all those pesky carpet stains, retouching the baseboards, replacing the built-in microwave with the exact same unit except brand new). All into the dumpster for a gut rehab.
Never told the heirs. They cashed their checks and moved on- as did I!
As buyers we had inspections done (twice), not for bargaining, but so we would know and understand the house. They did a great job, explained to us how things we had no prior experience with worked (whole house fan, oil tank, etc.)
In 2023 we sold our house that we had owned for over 30 years in a very hot market - we had 2 dozen bids in three days. The first buyer’s inspection, which lasted hours and hours, indicated a bunch of stuff which we thought was ridiculous (it was clearly not mold on the beams in the basement, but we cleaned it up with bleach and moved on). They were looking to negotiate the price and delay the close (as they were having problems securing a mortgage).
When that deal fell through, the second buyer’s inspector found an entirely different list of things that they said were wrong with the house. They were looking for a big discount on the price and cited stuff like a non-working fireplace (which had been in our disclosure). We ended up negotiating a little bit with them (not the 10% off they asked for) because by that time we had moved out and wanted to close.
My point is that not all inspections are the same, but I would still never go ahead with a house purchase without one.
I have never sold a house and am still living in the one we bought 30 years ago, so I am rusty!
My neighbor is selling their 58 year old house (they are the orig owners).
Another neighbor’s kid was interested in the house and putting in the sweat equity, so seller was going to sell it basically as is (and not have to even list it).
The potential buyer put a contract on the house and had it inspected.
What was odd to me was that the inspector had a contractor look at the report and the contractor said, based on looking at this written report (not actually looking a the house), that it would be $35k to fix everything.
It freaked the first time home buyers out. Most of the stuff was probably a non-issue (things they wouldn’t fix) because it was things that would be taken care of when this buyer redid the orig 59 year old kitchen (like “monitor” slight corrosion in sink), for example. And yes, the buyer should realize this, but…
My question is - when did inspectors start giving the report to a contractor? It seems kind of…not right. Like even subconsciously, an inspector might note more things than usual.
That contract fell thru so the seller is fixing it up (painting, refinishing floors, etc) to get it ready to list. I can’t help but wonder if another inspection would be the same or “kinder” now that the house looks so much nicer, cleaner, etc.
This mirrors my experience selling my house. Both sets of potential buyers (the first one fell through when they couldn’t secure a mortgage) asked contractors to put prices on the things the inspector discovered. One set was insisting on having their contractor come to the house and do their own inspection to see what the costs would be. We fought over that pretty hard, saying you already had your inspector take several hours looking over the house, we are not letting anybody else in. In the end we gave in and said we would only let a contractor look from the outside of the house, no climbing on the roof, and that person needed to present their insurance and contractor license first. They rescinded that request, I think the so called contractor they wanted to look at our house was not really a contractor at all.
One more thing. Both sets of realtors were very quick to put price tags on stuff in the inspection report. Saying things like a new electrical panel costs about $1,000.
Our realtor got a couple of roofing bids to make sure the sellers believed us that we were not making stuff up during negotiations. This is quite typical.