Howdy, a collogue of mine who bought a condo 6 months ago tells me that prior to the purchase, the home inspector OKd the fireplace and chimney, said all is good. He had a sweep clean it out this past weekend and was told not to use it as there were holes and breaks up along one side, even saw insulation poking through. My collogue thinks that the home inspector is liable in some way because he OKd it.
Any thought on the matter?
Thanks...
Opps, that's colleague.
Oops - that should be Oops ;-)
Read the contract you had with the inspector. Somewhere it will say something like 'Not responsible for errors and omissions.'
Most home inspectors have no clue about what they are looking at. One house I went to listed all the missing screws from the switches, but didn't mention the condensing unit that was plugged up with grass clippings. AND the condenser didn't have a hail guard!
I agree that a lot of "home inspectors" bring little experience to the job and use contracts that are hedged about with legal loop holes. That's not much different from a lot of occupations. There are some good ones if you check carefully.
TB
When selecting anyone to do work for you, home inspectors to physicians, reflect on the truism that 90% aren't in the top 10%. The challenge then is to identify one in the top 10%.
RB
Tom Baker wrote:
Definitely this home inspection business sets people up with a false sense of security. I would not buy a house without one, and I'd use the best one I could find, but I'd assume they're finding a subset of actual defects.
Probably these chimney faults could be discovered only after a thorough cleaning, and could not possibly have been visible to a pre-sale inspection. The question isn't really whether the inspector missed something, it's whether the limitations of an inspection were communicated. The inspector ought to have said "nothing wrong from what I can see from here, but you'll have to have a sweep look inside", and the better/smarter of them do phrase things in this way. If the inspector said "hey, a perfect chimney, absolutely good to go, nothin' wrong with that baby, mm-hmm" then there may be a case to be made. Definitely a complaint to the inspector or his agency (or whoever recommended him) is not out of line. If he put such a comment in writing then it'd be worth pursuing.
Chip C Toronto
PS A cynical person would also ask whether the sweep is associated with a seller of flue liners.
And speaking of flue liners. A sweep told me that I shouldn't burn anything in my fireplaces until I got them lined. I have two "back-to-back" corner fireplaces in my 1872 Victorian. The chimney is actually a huge 4-flue chimney in which the fireplaces each go to one of the 4-flues. Any suggestions on what kind of flue liner I should be looking at? The fireplaces are used for asthetic purposes as opposed to heating the house. I've heard of both chimney liners and "in the chimney" poured flue liners. All advise is welcome.
Thanks, Joe
Just to throw another wrench in, it may be wise to get another opinion. I had a sweep come out a few years ago who made a big deal about how the liner was cracked, he couldn't risk sweeping it, it'd collapse and block the chimney, it needed a $3500 steel liner, and so on. After he left I called another sweep -- "Nah, it's fine." He cleaned it and it's been fine ever since.
Thanks all...
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.