Your Philosophy On Home Inspections?
All,
I am trying to make a decision regarding the use of a home inspector on a property that I have under contract out of state.
Typically, the home inspector will do a "visual inspection" of the property and will let you know what is wrong. They may or may not be expert in any of the homes systems and do not typically take them apart nor can they give pricing on repair costs.
Usually the main areas of concern (for me at least) when buying an older home are the HVAC, the Roof and the electrical system. I have considered hiring a licenseed contractor in these areas to go in and do detailed system analysis on these systems (AC, Heating and Roof) to check for any defects. The cost in both cases ends up being about the same.
Is there a benefit to one versus the other? What is your philosophy either way?
I have been advised that it is better to use a home inspector because they are an objective third party and will not give you a bogus list of repairs in the hopes of getting the work.
Your thoughts on this issue are well appreciated.
Thanks.
JS
mcole,
I totally agree with the fact that getting a home inspection is absolutely necessary.
However, I am trying to determine if it is better to have the inspection done by licensed contractors who fix things for a living or if it should be done by certified home inspectors who may or may not have expertise in making repairs and will only do a "visual" inspection.
Your thoughts on this plase.
Thanks.
JS.
Ask the home inspector about his experience. I have run into quite a few that used to be building officials.
Also, contractors going to inspect properties to do estimates for prospective buyers usually charge as that is a job that is more uncertain than usual. At least my compnay charges.