We're in the process of selling a property and have just received a request neither I nor the agent have seen before. The purchaser has been asked, by their pest inspector, to obtain a statement from us about timber pest activity or damage and some other stuff including "other problems to the property" and "any other work carried out to the property". The purchaser says this is part of the inspector's disclaimer.
We've thrown it to our solicitor, but my first reaction is What are you paying the inspector for?
The inspector will have full access to the property and will know as much as we do. I object to being interrogated and I can't see any justification for it.
Anyone encountered this before? What did do you do.
Thanks,
Ghoti
Any representation that you make may be used against you unless you have some documentary evidence to back up anything you say eg: pest treatment certificates for say termites or borers or an occupancy certificate from council ie not work pointing back to yourselves. However many timbers show some signs of insect damage – it is a natural product so any activity would have occurred whilst the tree was growing not after the timber was installed in the house.
Many exclusions by the pest inspector are cover-all clauses and seek to limit the inspector's liability, the purchaser is trying to fill in the gaps. I would refer them to undertake a building inspection as they are the person best qualified to comment on the building.
Thanks Scott. I'd understand if this was the purchaser trying to fill in gaps for themselves, but they're asking because their pest inspection company "recommends" that they ask these questions "as part of their [i.e. the inspector's] disclaimer." I think the purchaser is being ripped off, and I feel as if I'm getting caught up in something that's really none of my business. It just feels wrong.
OTOH we really want this sale to go through, so maybe I'm just jumpy.
ghotib wrote:….. "other problems to the property" and "any other work carried out to the property". The purchaser says this is part of the inspector's disclaimer.Anyone encountered this before? What did do you do.
I wonder if this is likely to become more frequent ?
I know from experience in the UK, the questions asked are much more wide reaching…
– have you had any disputes with neighbours ?
– when was the central heating last serviced ?
– have you ever suffered flooding / damage to the property etcare all very common questions.
Neil
Don't do it. The only reason I can think for requiring this sort of statement is so the pest inspector can say "subject to the truth of the vendor's disclaimer that there has not been any pest activity, this property does not have any pest issues". What will then happen is that if there is a problem down the track, the pest inspector can say "Well, my report was dependent on the truth of the owner's statement". The pest inspector avoids any claim against him/her and throws it back to the owner.
This is just the pest inspector limiting his/her own liability.
If you really want the sale and there has been no timber pest activity while you have been there, just write a letter saying "to the best of my knowledge there has been no timber pest activity at my property." Make sure that is true though. Definitely don't get into the "other problems with the property" or "other works to the property" questions. They are too far reaching and none of the pest inspector's business. The pest inspector probably won't even read your letter and will be satisfied with you commenting on pest activity while you have been there.
I sometimes get strange requests from purchasers. Recently I sold a brand new house and the purchaser wanted engineering plans, evidence that council had certified the works etc. I simply gave them the development and building approvals from Council. This was not what they asked for but I wasn't obliged to provide them with what they asked for. Rather than get them offside by telling them that, I gave them a bunch of documents that had council and engineering information on it and never heard back from them.
Cheers
K
Cheers
K
Wow, that is new.
The inspector is pretty crafty! You could somehow politely ask the purchasers if they think they are getting
a cost efficient service for their money. I thought you payed the inspectors for the assurance of pest etc. He is essentially palming off the responsibility(come a court battle)?? I would be interested to hear what your solicitor says???ghotib ,I wouldn't be to surprised, and would think that you don't have any obligation to provide any info.
I have recently got a building and pest inspection carried out on a Brissie property last week, and was also taken aback from some of the comments mentioned in the report.
I witnessed the inspection and also asked any comments / queries I had, and the guys gave me a bit of a summary as well at the end of the inspection, which was good. All up gave me the conclusion that the property was in good nick.
However, when I received there paperwork (report) the next day, I was a bit surprised finding that both the building and pest report concluded that they are both highly conducive to timber pest attack and structural damage. Based on this assessment, I had to ring them back to figure out if they mixed up the paperwork with another property, as there written report was somewhat different to the oral report given to me on the day.
The guys are right above in saying that the inspectors are only 'protecting themselves' by putting these disclaimers in there. After ringing up and clarifying the reports, the inspector said that the reports come across quite 'pessimistic'. The reasoning for the 'high risk' was due to several reasons, but was added to the fact of the folllowing:
Building:
1. some areas of the ceiling were visually obstructed with insulation bats, so could not see entire truss
2. some areas of the roof cavity could not be accessed, due to the roof pitch and configuration
3. the furniture inside the house was not moved (obviously), so could not be investigated.
4. Any clothes / boxes, etc, was not moved to check behind / under
5. Carpet was laid, so couldn't see under this.Pest
1. As there was no previous termite barrier or treament / management system in place, it was considered highly conducive to termite attack (even though there were no sign of termites on the property, and there were no mature trees on site).
I tend to agree with an earlier post, that you pay good money for this service, and would like to get some assurance 'in writing' that it is OK. Unfortunately, in this day and age, I guess we will always see such disclaimers in these types of assessment reports.
Cheers,
Bundy.
It may also be as a result of a previous problem on behalf of that pest inspector or one known to him. We recently purchased a house that was known to have had termites (disclosed by owner, and termite bait stations installed). Was advised damage was restricted to area xyz. This was confirmed by both the pest and building reports. Top plate in one external wall revealed damage as suggested. No active termites (as expected). During the reno, it became apparent that the damage was far in excess of what either the pest or building inspector picked up. It turns out that both internal showers had extensive termite damage behind (moist area etc) but as the showers had not been used and the termites were long gone ther was no moisture difference to detect, and as the little buggers had travelled below the top plate, neither inspection picked it up. It was only upon our use we triggered the leaks and when we removed the walls, discovered that the internal frameowrk was swiss cheese.
Basically, unless there are active termites (moisture and temperature can be detected) or visable damage, it can be difficult to ascertain the level of damage. I have no doubt the vendors of our house were aeare of the extent of damage as the original termite treated would have picked up the nests, and they knew about the leaks as they had stopped using the internal showers.
I would be furious with both the pest and building inspectors but they are both relatives and I know they wouldnt do the wrong thing by me. BIL who is the pest inspector has a neat "xray" thingythat lets you see inside walls (picks up heat and or moisture), but of course, cant see damage after the little buggers have gone.
I would suggest the inspector has been caught out like this before and ended up with a furious buyer down the track. If there is nothing to hide, just answer the questions (within reason and get your solicitors OK so you dont leave anything oopen for down the track)
T
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. If you don't have an account, you can register here.
