I want to get an inspection on the house I’m buying

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pre-inspection if allowed (which is a less involved inspection prior to putting in the offer) or put an information-only inspection with right to void in the offer (may be a dealbreaker if others offer no contingencies at all).

"Right to cancel/void" inspections are no different than inspection contingencies from a seller's perspective. It is in practice no different than a regular inspection contingency. Best way forward is to do a pre-bid inspection (either before the opens of on Sunday night/Monday morning). Then you know what you need to in order to make your strongest offer. In this market there will be offers waiving inspection (because they did pre-bid), appraisal and financing. You are unlikely to win without waiving.

Not all sellers allow pre-inspections, so then it is either including one for information-only (which is a bit different in practice given that you cannot negotiate off it, but I agree less desirable to sellers than waiving completely) or going completely without an inspection which, personally, I would not do.

Or, as suggested, you tour with your inspector paying him for his time. It isn't a full inspection and if he is asked to leave by the realtor then he will need to but you still get someone's eyes on the property who can give you advice. If you tour with your realtor anyway, you still get good advice just not everything a good, licensed inspector would know.

Our walk and talk inspection was maybe 2 hours. Our viewing was 15 minutes. Some sellers didn’t allow full inspections because it blocked off so much time for other viewings. Make sure you book a viewing long enough for the inspector to do their job.

[Anonymous]

We bought our house as-is with an information inspection. So we kept the right to visit with an inspector which means the agents have to sit around and babysit us during the inspection, but there was no contingency

As previous posters have mentioned, inspections really aren’t typically all that helpful. I’ve had a $20,000 problem missed and they often find a million things that seem to add up to a problem and are aren’t any big deal.

I think the inspection is really helpful, but not critical.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We bought our house as-is with an information inspection. So we kept the right to visit with an inspector which means the agents have to sit around and babysit us during the inspection, but there was no contingency

As previous posters have mentioned, inspections really aren’t typically all that helpful. I’ve had a $20,000 problem missed and they often find a million things that seem to add up to a problem and are aren’t any big deal.

I think the inspection is really helpful, but not critical.

An information only inspection is still a contingency. It gives you the right to void the contract based on inspection. Anything that allows the buyer to void the contract is a contingency.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We put in an offer for asking and "as-is" but with an inspection. I think the understanding was that the offer was as-is unless the inspection revealed something genuinely problematic. It seemed normal to me and the agent was the one who said it would happen this way.

I would never have bought a house without an inspection. The inspection did reveal a bunch of small easily fixable things, but had we discovered a major fault with the foundations, we could walk away.

The misinformation on this board is astounding. "As-is" isn't a legal term. It wasn't a contractual term for you. There are no "understandings," just the legal terms in your contract. You either had an inspection contingency or you didn't. Your contract didn't state that you could void your contract only if the inspection revealed something genuinely problematic. That's very nebulous and would have been malpractice if your agent actually wrote that in your contract.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We put in an offer for asking and "as-is" but with an inspection. I think the understanding was that the offer was as-is unless the inspection revealed something genuinely problematic. It seemed normal to me and the agent was the one who said it would happen this way.

I would never have bought a house without an inspection. The inspection did reveal a bunch of small easily fixable things, but had we discovered a major fault with the foundations, we could walk away.

The misinformation on this board is astounding. "As-is" isn't a legal term. It wasn't a contractual term for you. There are no "understandings," just the legal terms in your contract. You either had an inspection contingency or you didn't. Your contract didn't state that you could void your contract only if the inspection revealed something genuinely problematic. That's very nebulous and would have been malpractice if your agent actually wrote that in your contract.

Legality aside, there’s also the issue for the seller that an inspection could spook a buyer into breaking the contract and giving up the EMD (which would be hard to keep anyway). If I were a seller and had other offers without an inspection at all, the “as is inspection” offer would have to be significantly higher and have a large EMD for me to consider it equal to one without an inspection.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pre-inspection if allowed (which is a less involved inspection prior to putting in the offer) or put an information-only inspection with right to void in the offer (may be a dealbreaker if others offer no contingencies at all).

"Right to cancel/void" inspections are no different than inspection contingencies from a seller's perspective. It is in practice no different than a regular inspection contingency. Best way forward is to do a pre-bid inspection (either before the opens of on Sunday night/Monday morning). Then you know what you need to in order to make your strongest offer. In this market there will be offers waiving inspection (because they did pre-bid), appraisal and financing. You are unlikely to win without waiving.

Not all sellers allow pre-inspections, so then it is either including one for information-only (which is a bit different in practice given that you cannot negotiate off it, but I agree less desirable to sellers than waiving completely) or going completely without an inspection which, personally, I would not do.

Or, as suggested, you tour with your inspector paying him for his time. It isn't a full inspection and if he is asked to leave by the realtor then he will need to but you still get someone's eyes on the property who can give you advice. If you tour with your realtor anyway, you still get good advice just not everything a good, licensed inspector would know.

Our walk and talk inspection was maybe 2 hours. Our viewing was 15 minutes. Some sellers didn’t allow full inspections because it blocked off so much time for other viewings. Make sure you book a viewing long enough for the inspector to do their job.

This is a major issue in a competitive market. The home we bought last summer didn't have an open house, and it was BOOKED for viewings - by the time we asked to see it there were maybe 3 time slots left. I think 20-30 minutes each. We took a few minutes longer that allotted, and the next people in line were very annoyed that we went over time (I wanted to look in the utility closet and check out all the systems because I knew we were making an offer).

There's no way there would have been time for an inspector to come with us.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We put in an offer for asking and "as-is" but with an inspection. I think the understanding was that the offer was as-is unless the inspection revealed something genuinely problematic. It seemed normal to me and the agent was the one who said it would happen this way.

I would never have bought a house without an inspection. The inspection did reveal a bunch of small easily fixable things, but had we discovered a major fault with the foundations, we could walk away.

The misinformation on this board is astounding. "As-is" isn't a legal term. It wasn't a contractual term for you. There are no "understandings," just the legal terms in your contract. You either had an inspection contingency or you didn't. Your contract didn't state that you could void your contract only if the inspection revealed something genuinely problematic. That's very nebulous and would have been malpractice if your agent actually wrote that in your contract.

Legality aside, there’s also the issue for the seller that an inspection could spook a buyer into breaking the contract and giving up the EMD (which would be hard to keep anyway). If I were a seller and had other offers without an inspection at all, the “as is inspection” offer would have to be significantly higher and have a large EMD for me to consider it equal to one without an inspection.

The fact that sellers prefer no contingencies has already been discussed ad nauseum. And it's not "legality aside" - contingencies are contractual terms that provide the legal right to buyers to void the contract.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pre-inspection if allowed (which is a less involved inspection prior to putting in the offer) or put an information-only inspection with right to void in the offer (may be a dealbreaker if others offer no contingencies at all).

"Right to cancel/void" inspections are no different than inspection contingencies from a seller's perspective. It is in practice no different than a regular inspection contingency. Best way forward is to do a pre-bid inspection (either before the opens of on Sunday night/Monday morning). Then you know what you need to in order to make your strongest offer. In this market there will be offers waiving inspection (because they did pre-bid), appraisal and financing. You are unlikely to win without waiving.

Not all sellers allow pre-inspections, so then it is either including one for information-only (which is a bit different in practice given that you cannot negotiate off it, but I agree less desirable to sellers than waiving completely) or going completely without an inspection which, personally, I would not do.

Or, as suggested, you tour with your inspector paying him for his time. It isn't a full inspection and if he is asked to leave by the realtor then he will need to but you still get someone's eyes on the property who can give you advice. If you tour with your realtor anyway, you still get good advice just not everything a good, licensed inspector would know.

Our walk and talk inspection was maybe 2 hours. Our viewing was 15 minutes. Some sellers didn’t allow full inspections because it blocked off so much time for other viewings. Make sure you book a viewing long enough for the inspector to do their job.

This is a major issue in a competitive market. The home we bought last summer didn't have an open house, and it was BOOKED for viewings - by the time we asked to see it there were maybe 3 time slots left. I think 20-30 minutes each. We took a few minutes longer that allotted, and the next people in line were very annoyed that we went over time (I wanted to look in the utility closet and check out all the systems because I knew we were making an offer).

There's no way there would have been time for an inspector to come with us.

On the last house we bid on, lots of rando realtors and potential buyers came in during our pre-offer inspection appointment. So it seems like some sellers agents don't care and allow multiple bookings. It's particularly annoying during these COVID times.

[Anonymous]

Most pre-inspections are "walk and talk" inspections. They're not gonna get into the attic and start going through stuff. Like another poster said, it's mostly going to be foundational stuff, cracks, potential leaks, HVAC, etc. A full inspection probably takes 2-2.5 hours, while a walk and talk is probably an hour. Only reason why a full inspection won't be ideal in this market is b/c the sellers want as many people looking at their house as possible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pre-inspection if allowed (which is a less involved inspection prior to putting in the offer) or put an information-only inspection with right to void in the offer (may be a dealbreaker if others offer no contingencies at all).

"Right to cancel/void" inspections are no different than inspection contingencies from a seller's perspective. It is in practice no different than a regular inspection contingency. Best way forward is to do a pre-bid inspection (either before the opens of on Sunday night/Monday morning). Then you know what you need to in order to make your strongest offer. In this market there will be offers waiving inspection (because they did pre-bid), appraisal and financing. You are unlikely to win without waiving.

Not all sellers allow pre-inspections, so then it is either including one for information-only (which is a bit different in practice given that you cannot negotiate off it, but I agree less desirable to sellers than waiving completely) or going completely without an inspection which, personally, I would not do.

Or, as suggested, you tour with your inspector paying him for his time. It isn't a full inspection and if he is asked to leave by the realtor then he will need to but you still get someone's eyes on the property who can give you advice. If you tour with your realtor anyway, you still get good advice just not everything a good, licensed inspector would know.

Our walk and talk inspection was maybe 2 hours. Our viewing was 15 minutes. Some sellers didn’t allow full inspections because it blocked off so much time for other viewings. Make sure you book a viewing long enough for the inspector to do their job.

This is a major issue in a competitive market. The home we bought last summer didn't have an open house, and it was BOOKED for viewings - by the time we asked to see it there were maybe 3 time slots left. I think 20-30 minutes each. We took a few minutes longer that allotted, and the next people in line were very annoyed that we went over time (I wanted to look in the utility closet and check out all the systems because I knew we were making an offer).

There's no way there would have been time for an inspector to come with us.

On the last house we bid on, lots of rando realtors and potential buyers came in during our pre-offer inspection appointment. So it seems like some sellers agents don't care and allow multiple bookings. It's particularly annoying during these COVID times.

My agent said that a lot of buyers' agents book a time then show up whenever. So there can be a lot of overlap

[Anonymous]

Honestly OP, the inspection process is kind of a scam. They guys who do it have a checklist and run through the checklist, but its not like they are the most knowledgeable people in the world and they only see the most obvious things. Anything even mildly hidden they won't look for or find.

Spend 2-4 hours reading a basic book on inspections or watching youtube videos. Bring your own checklist. Be your own inspector. It's really not all that daunting. It's not that hard to tell if a foundation is cracked, or if a roof is leaking.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Most pre-inspections are "walk and talk" inspections. They're not gonna get into the attic and start going through stuff. Like another poster said, it's mostly going to be foundational stuff, cracks, potential leaks, HVAC, etc. A full inspection probably takes 2-2.5 hours, while a walk and talk is probably an hour. Only reason why a full inspection won't be ideal in this market is b/c the sellers want as many people looking at their house as possible.

+1 Additionally, if timing were really tight, I would send the inspector off to do his thing in the short amount of time while we re-toured and looked at the things that were of particular interest to us. The inspector is perfectly capable of coming back and verbally reporting findings once we all got outside. Don't overthink this, people. Would I pay $400-500 for an inspector to come in and do a quick look at a foundation, garage, roof, HVAC, kitchen, plumbing, electrical while we looked at the other parts of the house? Absolutely. We may be a little different. We won't NOT buy because of something small. It would have to be a major foundation issue that was virtually unsolvable without tearing down the house.

[Anonymous]

We bought our house as-is. The sellers, an estate, had no issue with us doing an inspection and had a builder as a back up but they wanted a family in the house. The needs were great, but we knew that and would only walk for structural issues. It worked out well. I'd worry about what a seller has to hide if they refuse an inspection.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pre-inspection if allowed (which is a less involved inspection prior to putting in the offer) or put an information-only inspection with right to void in the offer (may be a dealbreaker if others offer no contingencies at all).

"Right to cancel/void" inspections are no different than inspection contingencies from a seller's perspective. It is in practice no different than a regular inspection contingency. Best way forward is to do a pre-bid inspection (either before the opens of on Sunday night/Monday morning). Then you know what you need to in order to make your strongest offer. In this market there will be offers waiving inspection (because they did pre-bid), appraisal and financing. You are unlikely to win without waiving.

This isn’t true. We accepted an offer with an information only inspection and what it meant was that we weren’t going to get nickle and dimed for minor repairs. Sale went through fine and nothing on inspection caused any issues. If we allowed a regular inspection we’d probably have had to pay a few thousand to repair stuff.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We put in an offer for asking and "as-is" but with an inspection. I think the understanding was that the offer was as-is unless the inspection revealed something genuinely problematic. It seemed normal to me and the agent was the one who said it would happen this way.

I would never have bought a house without an inspection. The inspection did reveal a bunch of small easily fixable things, but had we discovered a major fault with the foundations, we could walk away.

The misinformation on this board is astounding. "As-is" isn't a legal term. It wasn't a contractual term for you. There are no "understandings," just the legal terms in your contract. You either had an inspection contingency or you didn't. Your contract didn't state that you could void your contract only if the inspection revealed something genuinely problematic. That's very nebulous and would have been malpractice if your agent actually wrote that in your contract.

Legality aside, there’s also the issue for the seller that an inspection could spook a buyer into breaking the contract and giving up the EMD (which would be hard to keep anyway). If I were a seller and had other offers without an inspection at all, the “as is inspection” offer would have to be significantly higher and have a large EMD for me to consider it equal to one without an inspection.

The fact that sellers prefer no contingencies has already been discussed ad nauseum. And it's not "legality aside" - contingencies are contractual terms that provide the legal right to buyers to void the contract.

I said legality aside because yes there are legal rights BUT an inspection gives a NOT legal, NOT written in the contract reason for a buyer to break contract. That’s the whole point. Allowing ANY inspection regardless of any legal protection could spook a buyer leaving a seller relisting.