You Want to Split That?

The primary purpose of a home inspection is to discover things in the house that need repair. Sometimes the repair is needed immediately. The thing to keep in mind is that the inspector discovered the problem; he didn't create it. (Unless he stepped through the ceiling, and then he created the problem and is obligated to fix it - which is why Mark will not step off the service boards in the attic.)

Last week Mark found what he initially thought was a leaking water heater. The homeowner called a plumber immediately. When Mark returned to the property to retrieve a level measure he'd left behind, the plumber was just leaving. It turns out it wasn't the water heater at all, but a broken pipe in the wall behind the water heater.

So we were really surprised when we got a message from the buyer's agent. It seems that the buyer's agent had paid close to $450 for the repair because it "seemed like the right thing to do". (Why would that seem like the right thing to do?) And he wanted to maintain "goodwill". (Whose goodwill? The seller's? This woman let the inspector, the buyers and the agent into her home and didn't disclose that her son had the flu until they were leaving. She interfered with the inspection more than once. She wrangled the money for the repair of a "pre-existing condition" out of the buyer's agent.  No amount of money could buy this woman's goodwill.)  Now he wanted us to reimburse him for half of it. (We had a bit of a chuckle.)

It was a broken pipe in the wall. The inspector detected the leak. He did not cause it. Neither the inspector, nor the buyer's agent was responsible to fix it. Paying for it was the agent's choice. And while he wanted us to pay half the cost of a repair, he never once offered to split his commission with us. Now, does that seem fair?


.

Apples and Oranges

I often get calls from people who are price shopping. That's fine. If "lowest price" is their primary concern, we're probably not the inspection company for them. Wednesday I had a call from someone who wanted us to give him an additional discount. When I explained that the bundled price was already deeply discounted, he said he wanted to speak with Mark about how the zip-level worked. (What he really wanted was to see if Mark would offer him an additional discount.) With no additional discounts forthcoming he said he wanted to shop around. He found out what I already knew - no one else was offering him the option of the fiber-optic sewer line inspection or the foundation level measurement. He called back to get on the schedule.

Then yesterday evening I had a call from a gentleman who wanted to schedule an inspection on a property that he was buying. He wanted to include the fiber-optic sewer line inspection and the digital foundation level measurement. I had already contacted centralized showing and the listing agent and was waiting for a confirmation when he called back.

"I have made a few calls, and you are priced almost $300 more than other inspectors."
"Yes, but the other inspectors are not including the fiber-optic camera in the sewer line and they are not measuring the foundation. Those two items add $350 to the cost of your inspection."
"No, they are doing all of that, too."

Well, I'm pretty sure they're not. I am confident that no other inspector in this area has invested in a sewer-cam - at least not yet. (I know that one is telling clients that you have to have a special license to use one. - Nonsense! And I know of another inspector who is considering it. - He's called Mark to ask advice on different models and pricing.) There are also very few in the area who have the necessary equipment to measure foundations. So the likelihood that there is an inspector who is going to put a sewer-cam down the line AND measure the foundation, and do it for $300 less than we charge is pretty slim.

The client supposes that all inspectors are the same and that they all have the same equipment. You can't convince someone who's already made up his mind. I also sensed that this was my big opportunity to offer to lower my price to match the other guy. But I know the difference between apples and oranges. So instead of offering to lower the price, I responded with "Well, alrighty then. I assume you want to cancel."

I hope that works out for him. 

What Did We Miss?

A week or two before Christmas, Mark inspected an older home that had been remodeled. From the pictures I saw on line and from all reports, it was absolutely stunning. But like many people who are flipping houses, they focused on the things you could see and glossed over the things you couldn't see. Mark found that this house needed to have the sewer line replaced. He also found that one of the supporting piers was at a 45 degree angle. There was a hole in the roof. The moisture levels in the hardwood floors were three times what they should be. Those are just a few of the 84-item list of call outs in Mark's report.

I know the property was on the market for upward of $700K. I also know that the buyers were willing to negotiate on price and repairs. But the sellers weren't, so that listing agent (we'll call him Jim) missed out on a pretty good-sized check.

But I'm not sure why he sent the following email:

"After your Company's Inspection at X Street, I would never refer a Buyer Client to your Company!"

Assuming that as an agent, he is focused on his client's best interests, I can understand that he wouldn't be pleased to see us as the listing agent. But buyers?? Really, Jim? I can only assume that we missed something.