The professional home inspector, like any professional – doctor, lawyer, certified public accountant – has a professional liability exposure that he must consider if he wants to be a good steward of his business. In the last two years, I have been called upon to consult with home inspectors who have received demands for payment for alleged professional negligence either from their former clients or from attorneys representing those clients.
After review dozens of these claims, I came to the unavoidable conclusion that most claims against home inspectors have absolutely no merit. Of forty-five claims, only two had merit. The rest were completely unmeritorious.
A meritorious claim is one that seeks damages for a defect that the inspector in the exercise of reasonable care should have discovered in the course of his inspection and report but which he did not and which caused the claimant money damages.
An unmeritorious claim is one that seeks damages for a defect that the inspector did not discover notwithstanding that he exercised all due care in the course of his inspection.
The 43 unmeritorious claims fell into one of the five following categories. The claim was for something that is completely outside the professional province of a home inspector. The inspector is not looking for it – a design defect, for example – and is therefore under no obligation to discover it. A determination of the appropriateness of a home’s design would be the province of an architect or an engineer.
The claim was for something that was outside of the applicable Standard of Practice. The detection of mold is outside the scope of virtually all extant Standards of Practice.
The claim was for something that the inspector could not have discovered because the defect was concealed from the inspector’s view by furniture or carpeting or finished ceilings and walls.
The claim was for something that the inspector specifically disclaimed responsibility for in his inspection report. Oftentimes, it is not possible for an inspector to adequately inspect an area of the home due to clutter or some obstruction or locked doors. The inspector is not responsible for discovering defects in areas of a home that are not accessible.
The claim is for a defect that the inspector actually found and called out in his inspection report. I was astonished at how frequently this turned out to be the case.
I am pleased to report that all 43 of the meritless cases were abandoned by the claimants after I had responded to the claims with a letter denying responsibility and pointing out why the inspector was not responsible for the claimant’s damages. The response letter also assured the claimant that, if the claim were pursued, the inspector would defend it vigorously and would seek damages from the claimant following the successful defense.
Of course, the real story is the overwhelmingly high percentage of the claims that were completely without merit. When 95 % of claims against home inspectors are without merit and highly defensible, what does a professional home inspector have to do to protect himself and his family from the scourge of frivolous claims?
To answer that question, I developed the Law and Disorder Seminar.
In this seminar, you will learn:
The 5 HABITS you MUST DEVELOP to lower your risk profile
How to establish the KILLER DEFENSE that will defeat ALL negligence claims
The MAGIC CONTRACT PROVISION that will DECREASE your LIABILITY, INCREASE your INSPECTION FEES, and SMOKE YOUR COMPETITION all at the same time The MAGIC CONTRACT PROVISION that will PREVENT your client from TAKING YOU TO COURT
The 7 KEY FEATURES of a HIGHLY EFFECTIVE RESPONSE LETTER
The 7 KEY PROVISIONS that every Pre-Inspection should have.
How to TRANSFORM yourself from a VICTIM to an ALLY of the claimant