Inspection for informational purposes?

[Anonymous]

Home inspection for informational purposes only: what doe this mean for the seller and the buyer? Would it be safe to go with it if you want to make an offer in this market?

[Anonymous]

It just means that you can still walk away based on results of inspection but you cannot ask seller to make any repairs.

We sold our home to someone with an information only inspection and also purchased our new one with the same.

[Anonymous]

We did it. It meant we wanted to know what we were getting into. We only would have walked it if was something major/structural but they had a back up/builder if we bailed. They wanted the house to go to a family. We were clear we would not ask for repairs.

[Anonymous]

As a seller, I wouldn't really view it as different than a normal inspection. Yes, it says that they will either walk or accept as is. But they can always come back and say they want X repaired or Y credit or they walk. Of course you, as the seller, can say no. But then they may very well walk and you have to put the property back on the market.

This really is no different than a standard inspection contingency. The seller can always still refuse to make fixes or offer credits (unless you are in a jurisdiction where some types of things have to be fixed before closing) and the buyer can choose to accept this or walk away.

Maybe an information only provision makes it less likely that a buyer will try to negotiate, but if they choose to do so, you really would be in the same position.

[Anonymous]

You have to look at the entire contract. It may mean you waive the inspection contingency (meaning you can't back out no matter the results) but sellers agree to let you inspect purely for your own information to prepare to do the work. What other PPs are describing sounds more like an "as is" sale without waiving the inspection. Regardless, you need to look at the contract.

[Anonymous]

You need to keep in mind that there is quite a bit more benefit to the buyer than the seller on this one so your negotiation may need to reflect that. Some/most sellers may not want to have an inspection, informational or otherwise, without a contract. They may fear that if they learn of significant deficiencies then they will be compelled to disclose to other buyers if your potential sale falls through. Of course they can always change the sale status to "as is"; however, that makes their product significantly less market desirable even if the house is in an area that is a sellers market. As in all things, $ talks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You have to look at the entire contract. It may mean you waive the inspection contingency (meaning you can't back out no matter the results) but sellers agree to let you inspect purely for your own information to prepare to do the work. What other PPs are describing sounds more like an "as is" sale without waiving the inspection. Regardless, you need to look at the contract.

I am the 1643 poster. Ours was specifically called "Inspection with Option to Void" which our realtor always referred to as "information only" inspection.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You have to look at the entire contract. It may mean you waive the inspection contingency (meaning you can't back out no matter the results) but sellers agree to let you inspect purely for your own information to prepare to do the work. What other PPs are describing sounds more like an "as is" sale without waiving the inspection. Regardless, you need to look at the contract.

I am the 1643 poster. Ours was specifically called "Inspection with Option to Void" which our realtor always referred to as "information only" inspection.

not to quibble but that just sounds like "as is" with an inspection contingency, not "information only." But as long as your agent explained how/when you could void the contract, no harm done.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You need to keep in mind that there is quite a bit more benefit to the buyer than the seller on this one so your negotiation may need to reflect that. Some/most sellers may not want to have an inspection, informational or otherwise, without a contract. They may fear that if they learn of significant deficiencies then they will be compelled to disclose to other buyers if your potential sale falls through. Of course they can always change the sale status to "as is"; however, that makes their product significantly less market desirable even if the house is in an area that is a sellers market. As in all things, $ talks.

just another way to say sellers can get all contingencies waived in a sellers market.

I kind of wish the states would make inspections non-waivable. the idea that you'd buy something as big as a house without an inspection is nuts!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You need to keep in mind that there is quite a bit more benefit to the buyer than the seller on this one so your negotiation may need to reflect that. Some/most sellers may not want to have an inspection, informational or otherwise, without a contract. They may fear that if they learn of significant deficiencies then they will be compelled to disclose to other buyers if your potential sale falls through. Of course they can always change the sale status to "as is"; however, that makes their product significantly less market desirable even if the house is in an area that is a sellers market. As in all things, $ talks.

just another way to say sellers can get all contingencies waived in a sellers market.

I kind of wish the states would make inspections non-waivable. the idea that you'd buy something as big as a house without an inspection is nuts!

I agree that buying a house without an inspection is nuts. I think you're misunderstanding my post.

Even in a seller's market a potential purchaser can write an inspection into a contract AND the buyer should unless the buyer knows that the house will be a tear down or complete gut. If the house is a complete gut or tear down then usually an inspection is unnecessary.

If I understand OP's post correctly, OP wants to do an informational inspection BEFORE putting in an offer or writing a contract. That just isn't in the seller's best interest and the seller should turn that down unless OP is the absolute only potential buyer interested in the house. And even then the seller should make sure that OP makes it worth their while.

Like in all things there is give and take. If OP wants to take then OP should be prepared to give, too, unless OP is the only buyer interested. Then OP should gauge just how low OP can go and still get the seller to bite.

[Anonymous]

We just submitted an offer with the "Inspection with Option to Void" box checked. PP is right that it means you can back out based on the results of the inspection but can't ask the seller to make repairs. There was no time for us to do a pre-inspection and we weren't going to waive it entirely. Our agent has communicated to the listing agent that we are wanting the inspection for the purpose of discovering major issues like a cracked foundation, but will not back out over a minor issue. Who knows if it will work, but we're giving it a shot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You have to look at the entire contract. It may mean you waive the inspection contingency (meaning you can't back out no matter the results) but sellers agree to let you inspect purely for your own information to prepare to do the work. What other PPs are describing sounds more like an "as is" sale without waiving the inspection. Regardless, you need to look at the contract.

I am the 1643 poster. Ours was specifically called "Inspection with Option to Void" which our realtor always referred to as "information only" inspection.

not to quibble but that just sounds like "as is" with an inspection contingency, not "information only." But as long as your agent explained how/when you could void the contract, no harm done.

Agreed. But isn't that what "information only" is? "As is" with an inspection contingency?

I've never heard "as is" from a buyer perspective. Is this a term that's actually used in contracts? I've only ever heard "As is" in the advertisement for a home when a seller wants to let the buyer know "I'm not fixing anything for you." But does that term being used by a seller necessarily preclude an inspection? A buyer could still put in an offer in on an "as is" home with an inspection contingency with option to void, yes?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You have to look at the entire contract. It may mean you waive the inspection contingency (meaning you can't back out no matter the results) but sellers agree to let you inspect purely for your own information to prepare to do the work. What other PPs are describing sounds more like an "as is" sale without waiving the inspection. Regardless, you need to look at the contract.

I am the 1643 poster. Ours was specifically called "Inspection with Option to Void" which our realtor always referred to as "information only" inspection.

not to quibble but that just sounds like "as is" with an inspection contingency, not "information only." But as long as your agent explained how/when you could void the contract, no harm done.

Agreed. But isn't that what "information only" is? "As is" with an inspection contingency?

I've never heard "as is" from a buyer perspective. Is this a term that's actually used in contracts? I've only ever heard "As is" in the advertisement for a home when a seller wants to let the buyer know "I'm not fixing anything for you." But does that term being used by a seller necessarily preclude an inspection? A buyer could still put in an offer in on an "as is" home with an inspection contingency with option to void, yes?

Ours was an estate sale and it clearly said As is. Kids were out of state and didn't want to do repairs. We were fine with that as long as we could have an inspection that only stated house needed major updates but was basically sound.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You need to keep in mind that there is quite a bit more benefit to the buyer than the seller on this one so your negotiation may need to reflect that. Some/most sellers may not want to have an inspection, informational or otherwise, without a contract. They may fear that if they learn of significant deficiencies then they will be compelled to disclose to other buyers if your potential sale falls through. Of course they can always change the sale status to "as is"; however, that makes their product significantly less market desirable even if the house is in an area that is a sellers market. As in all things, $ talks.

just another way to say sellers can get all contingencies waived in a sellers market.

I kind of wish the states would make inspections non-waivable. the idea that you'd buy something as big as a house without an inspection is nuts!

I agree that buying a house without an inspection is nuts. I think you're misunderstanding my post.

Even in a seller's market a potential purchaser can write an inspection into a contract AND the buyer should unless the buyer knows that the house will be a tear down or complete gut. If the house is a complete gut or tear down then usually an inspection is unnecessary.

If I understand OP's post correctly, OP wants to do an informational inspection BEFORE putting in an offer or writing a contract. That just isn't in the seller's best interest and the seller should turn that down unless OP is the absolute only potential buyer interested in the house. And even then the seller should make sure that OP makes it worth their while.

Like in all things there is give and take. If OP wants to take then OP should be prepared to give, too, unless OP is the only buyer interested. Then OP should gauge just how low OP can go and still get the seller to bite.

oh, I thought "pre-inspections" were actually a thing?

[Anonymous]

I think informational inspections can happen either before or after a ratified contract. People do pre-inspections so they can waive home inspection contingency on their offer to make it more attractive. In my opinion, the seller doesn't have anything to lose by allowing the pre-inspection as long as he/she does not know the results. Seller does not need the know the results, only the buyer does, since there's no contract. In the same vein, if a buyer does an informational inspection after the contract is ratified with the option to void checked, then he/she can back out for any reason or no reason. Again, seller does not need to know the results, so nothing to divulge. It's actually better for the seller to have the buyer do the pre-inspection because the house doesn't get stigmatized if buyer cancels...you don't need to go back on the market because it was never off the market.

The whole disclosing defects to the next buyer thing is totally based on the honor system by the way. No one ever makes the previous buyer's home inspection report available for the next buyer's reference (and for good reason), so you more or less have to take the seller's word for it. That's why you have your own inspection of course.