Quote:
Originally Posted by aggrocallerOOP
When making a 200K+ purchase paying an extra 400$ or so for a second opinion is nothing.
Do you not think that the first home inspector could be shoty or maybe missed something?
The first house I look at buying there were chimney problems that actually made the housing structure unsafe to live in. The first inspector said it was OK and just needed minor refacing. The second on said that it all had to be taken down and redone. The quotes I got were 20-30K. I just got out of this house in time.
The house sold 6 months later and first thing they were doning is replacing the fireplaces.
So it saved me 30K or so.
It would depend on the exculpatory clause (sp?) in the contract. sometimes the limitation in liability is restricted to the cost of the home inspection. If this is the case, well you are in a pretty delicate situation if there are problems (not sure, but such clauses might be found more often in last minute inspections where you have a deadline to meet and are more vulnerable).
Without such a clause, the limitation would be higher. The point being, there is a liability aspect to the home inspection report. Your first inspection might be shown to be negligent, and depending on the contract wording, there could be a level of compensation as a result.
At least, this is how I understand it. Laws may be different from one state to another also.
But yeah, getting unlicensed electrical / plumbing is a big no-no. This is another advantage in learning how to do it yourself (homeowners are allowed to do the work and apply for permits - again, state laws might differ).