Virginia Regulatory Town Hall
Agency
Department of Professional and Occupational Regulation
 
Board
Virginia Board for Asbestos, Lead, and Home Inspectors
 
Previous Comment     Next Comment     Back to List of Comments
6/14/18  1:09 pm
Commenter: Charles Aulino, All In One Home Inspections

Possible pitfalls with regard to SB 627
 

Greetings,

 

I'd like to point out a few possible pitfalls that I see with the proposed legislation in SB 627.  First, it appears to be too broad and vague; it simply strips the contractual liability limit protections from the home inspection profession outright, and in such a manner that exposes the home inspection profession to the potential for frivolous or unscrupulous lawsuits.

 

Second, the proposed legislative change fails to recognize the very nature of a home inspection.  Namely, it is a visual inspection of the house and related systems, and inspectors are actually forbidden to conduct the type of probative activities that would detect latent or intentionally concealed defects.  As such, a home inspection and its related report are a snapshot in time, akin to a balance sheet statement, and the inspector cannot speculate, predict or determine when any particular system might fail in the future, but can only comment upon what he or she can observe during the time of inspection.

 

Next, consider the effects this proposed change could have with regard to creating an environment of frivolous or unscrupulous litigation.  As it stands now, a home inspector ordinarily carries E&O insurance, typically with $1 million in coverage.  If an inspector truly does miss a finding that results in significant financial harm, a homeowner can certainly litigate, and if it is determined that there was genuine negligence, the possibility of a judgment is real.  With this proposed change, the incidence of litigation will undoubtedly increase, along with almost certain increases in cost for said insurance.

 

The legislature prudently revised the code in July of 2017 when it required home inspectors to be licensed through DPOR.  Doing so created a minimum level of knowledge and proficiency and undoubtedly increased the standard of service for all home buyers in the Commonwealth.  However the same cannot be said for this proposed legislative change.  This appears to only increase the potential costs and risks for home inspectors, without providing any increase to the level of service that home buyers can expect.  I urge you to reconsider. 

 

Warm regards,

 

Charles Aulino

 

 

 

CommentID: 65397