I had a friend of mine get his house inspected when buying, they never found (so apparently didn't plug a tester into it) multiple loose plugs, didn't note the plumbing line wrapped in an inch thick of electrical tape for a leak, and said the roof was inspected for leaks and "certified" for atleast a year but told 5 years it would need a replacement. When their kitchen ceiling started bubbling a year in I went up into the attic space and it was clear the roof had been leaking since before they bought it by the stains and mold it left on the wood. It was a complete joke of an inspection, and what makes it worse is none of that was hard to access. The attic space was accessible from the garage area with no ceiling and was easily walkable with 10 ft+ height, the loose plugs were in the living room and in plain view right when you walk in, and the taped up pipe was 15 feet into a concrete basement with a mere glance upward. Not to mention the other laundry list of items that weren't broken really but should have been noted by an inspector doing their job.

They tried to get the inspector for the obvious bullshit roof inspection but after getting ran around multiple times to the point of needing to hire lawyer to go any further. But eventually dropped it when some roofing company came by and offered to do the roof for "free" through their insurance because of supposed hail damage in the area that basically replaced half the roofs in the town. That too was probably a scam on the insurance by the roofers because we never had big enough hail for damage, but they weren't going to complain about a free new shingle job.

TL;DR Don't just grab any random inspector, and especially never take recommendations from anybody connected to real estate.

Here’s something I say to my clients: personally, if I am buying a property, I am unlikely to do an inspection because I’ve seen a lot of houses and systems and am generally able to assess for myself the quality of the systems and construction. But - especially for first time buyers - people who buy and sell houses infrequently and who don’t have a background in these things are at an informational deficit. For that reason, while the list of things an inspector checks can never be complete, it’s more information than a buyer may be able to gather on their own. Houses are just like software systems - they will never be bug free, bugs pop up for various reasons, and all an inspector is really doing is telling you the state of the system on a given day.

Also - I’m about to stop recommending one of my recommended inspectors, because he’s at best a “B”. He catches most issues, but the level of care isn’t what I want for my clients. There’s another guy I used to recommend but again, he’s nearing retirement and getting sloppy.

I agree, it feels really odd that making a huge ticket item purchase, if something goes wrong the max liability it the inspection price. A drop in the bucket for some issues they should have brought to light.

Those issues would require engineering judgment to assess. An inspector would be qualified to verify function and presence of the heating system.

Building inspections are not really the same as purchase inspections, or at least don’t seem to me like they should be. Purchase inspection generally might not see a partially-constructed building or blueprints or otherwise be able to verify the engineering plan is being followed—They’re looking for broken/nonfunctional appliances/mechanicals/systems, clear fire hazards, mold, infestations, and the like.

The outcome of a building inspection is a certificate of occupancy where the authority is stating the home is safe to live in, the outcome of a purchase inspection is a report of things to ask for a discount on, part of the purchase negotiation.

The Chatham County thing is crazy, I’m hoping the family manages to find someone accountable in that mess — clearly either the original architect, the builder, or the county let them down somehow. I’m just not sure it’s really an indictment of the “inspector” profession as discussed in this thread.

The problem isn't whether they find a problem. Even the best inspector will miss things occasionally. The problem is they have zero legal liability for that miss. The buyer is making the biggest purchase of their life on a report that cost ~$1000 and has no legal backing (beyond maybe recovering the ~$1000 inspection fee).

And then you have home insurance which isn't a whole lot better. They might fix the problem or they might manage to declare is pre-existing and deny coverage, but even if they do fix it, it'll be the lowest bidder installing the cheapest parts possible.

"And he found absolutely every single imaginable problem even down to the most hysterically unimportant detail."

The fact an inspection document is impressive to read doesn't mean it is accurate. If he blew you away with his ability to name 100 minor things, but missed a structural issue, you'd be screwed, and would have no way to know this until the structure starting cracking.

It's highly variable.

Sample of 1, but my agent was frequently closing several homes/week during peak season (Spring, early Summer). At the time (2017), typical listing would be $500-$1 million (Fairfax County, VA).

So I'd guess 20-30/year for her.

Broker keeps 30-50% of the commission.

So, a good agent in NoVA is probably making $250-$500k/year (but has to pay their own payroll taxes and stuff out of that, IIRC).

Ok I’ll rephrase: We software engineers tried to buy/sell houses using algorithms, and failed to the tune of $550m. I think we collectively would have similar success (or lack thereof) as actual real estate agents.

Yep - it's tricky, but not full on sales. Just a definitions thing - I'm not in sales either.