Forum Archive Index - May 2003

[qwms-avib@dea.spamcon.org]

Lazy Haggis wrote:
> 
> hired an approved inspector to provide a written report 

I've done this too, on two different occasions.

> The report was good, structurally sound, 

Both of my reports were similar.  

> The inspector admitted in court that he had neglected 
> to inspect the sub-floor,

Neither of my inspectors went under the house (even though
the second time, I told the inspector that I wanted a sub-
floor inspection and got his acknowledgement that he would).

> His reasons for such neglect were that the owners were 
> present having a cup of tea on the deck and he didn't 
> wish to disturb them!!

My first inspector didn't go under the house because he
was "wearing a new suit and didn't want to get it dirty".
The second inspector didn't go under the house because
he "couldn't find the access hole" (an unobstructed wooden 
door on the external wall of the house!).  Hopeless.

Both houses had significant problems in the sub-floor.
If the inspectors had done a proper job, I would have
bought neither house.  A complete waste of money.  

I have to laugh when I hear experts say you should get 
an inspection before buying a house.  

Cheers,
Steven


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
To remove yourself from this list, please use the form at
http://www.sharechat.co.nz/chat/forum/