I don't know if this replaces my original posting but I'd like to reply given the seriousness of my…read moreconcerns with this service.
First, being called "nasty" by a professional I paid hundreds of dollars to is... pretty telling. Instead of addressing the substance of my concerns, he's leaning on the fact that he produced a 61-page report, as if page count automatically equals quality.
Here's the reality from my side:
Yes, I got a 61-page PDF. But a huge portion of that is boilerplate disclaimers, generic safety blurbs, and repeated headers/footers that could be dropped into any inspection on any house. What I actually needed was clear, direct communication about this house and its real risks.
During the inspection, he acted like it was basically a great house, and to his credit he spent a lot of time explaining various things to us. But, nothing in his tone suggested what the "totality" of the report later revealed: that this place is a mold and moisture time bomb, with a ventless gas fireplace (hello, carbon monoxide risk) and questionable electrical work that any normal person would want flagged loudly and clearly.
That's nothing to mention of the total exclusion of the fact that we learned (only because I was moving stuff and asking questions) during the inspection that the original structure had burnt down and the built date was updated to reflect a new build despite the original foundation post fire (fire weakens concrete/brick significantly).
We found this entire chimney structure, active water bleeding through the basement walls AND a waterlogged ceiling that the "visual - meaning I won't touch a single thing" inspection would have missed.
He refused to document certain holes in the walls, fence, etc because they were not specifically "defects."
In my so called "nasty" email I wryly asked what he'd discussed with the owners before my arrival (it was awkward for everyone that they were there, also to his credit). I guess I just found it odd that he knew the terms of our offer hinged on "defects" and even more odd that he wouldn't document every single issue found - not just those that are, in his opinion, deal breakers.
If you're a first-time or even experienced buyer, you are naturally going to rely on what the inspector says and how they frame things in real time. I was not warned in a clear, "this is serious" way about:
* The basement moisture and efflorescence that point to long-term water intrusion and mold risk.
* The ventless gas fireplace, which is exactly where you do not want extra CO and moisture hanging around (more mold).
* The overall messy electrical situation, which should have been presented as a major safety concern, not just another buried note. It was advertised as a smart home by the sellers - when the reality is they had so many switch configurations they probably had to walk across the house half the time they wanted the lights to actually turn on, they depended on Alexa to get around the seriousness of the bad electrical work.
After the fact, he's pointing to the length of the report like, "See? Look how thorough I was." But stuffing a report with generic text and legal CYA language is not the same thing as giving a buyer clear, practical warnings about a house that may have serious health and safety issues.
My honest opinion:
* If you want a thick packet of boilerplate and to be called "nasty" when you question it, this might be your guy.
* If you want someone who will speak plainly on-site, highlight serious issues in real time, and not hide behind page count later, I would look elsewhere or at least get a second inspection for anything even slightly complex.
This was a stressful lesson for me, and a near miss on a financial disaster. I'm leaving this review so the next person walks into it with eyes open.
