A&J HomeSafe Inspections of Colorado

[redacted] We are in receipt of the complaint # [redacted] Our response is simple, the AC unit was not tested at the time of inspection since the ambient temperature was below degrees FThis is standard inspection practice and avoids the risk of damaging the unitWithout testing any operational defects could not reasonably be identifiedThe furnace was reviewed with the lid removed and showed no apparent defectsHomeSafe employed standard inspection practices and is therefore not responsible for forward events.In addition the customer signed an inspection agreement that limits our liability to the value of the inspection fee.Gerald T [redacted] President and CEO [redacted] jt [redacted] @ [redacted]

[redacted] We received the latest comments on the referenced complaint and find it contains misrepresentations by the ClientIt should be made very clear that we use industry standards for inspection and reportingThese practices call for operating appliances to determine functionality using controls During the test the furnace was found to operate properly and was reported that wayAs stated before the A/C unit was not tested due to an average ambient temperature of less than degrees.The client makes claims that the inspector never removed the cover from the furnace, which is totally incorrectWe have pictures to substantiate that the cover was removed and in order to get the units serial number the cover has to be removed that serial number was included in the reportRemoval of covers from an A/C plenum is not a standard inspection practice.Also the client claims there was no signed inspection agreementThis accusation is totally as we have an inspection agreement signed by the client The client was provided a copy that agreement at the time of inspection.Gerald T [redacted]

Complaint: ***
I am rejecting this response because:
The unit did not need to be operated to find the damageThe damage was clearly visible on the outer surface of the units without removing any covers and without operating the unitsThree different HVAC professionals visually inspected the units after we moved in to the house, and all three said that the corrosion on top of the furnace should have been noticed by the inspector, even without operating the unit or removing any coversThey all explained that the corrosion was a clear indicator of water leaking from the A/C, and pointed out the damage without turning on the units or removing any coversAlso, in your response you state that, "The furnace was reviewed with the lid removed and showed no apparent defects." This is a flat out lieThe inspector never removed the lid on the furnaceWe were present at the time of the inspection and specifically asked the inspector why he wasn't looking inside the units and were told that it wasn't standard practice, even though when I had called to schedule the inspection I was told that the HVAC units would be thoroughly inspectedAlso, if the inspector had removed the cover from the furnace to look inside, then the same thing should have been done on the A/CIn the report that was provided by the inspector, it is specifically stated that "The heating system shows no visible evidence of major defects." The corrosion and staining that were found on top of the furnace are clear evidence of a major defect on the heating systemThis shows negligence on the part of the inspector for not mentioning the corrosion and staining in his report.At the time of the inspection, we had not been provided with any form of written contract, so we were operating strictly on a verbal contractI had specifically asked about whether the inspection would include looking inside the HVAC units and testing them when I scheduled the appointment, and I was told that it would, with no mention of a contingency based on outside temperature at the time of the inspection
Regards,
*** ***

We were not given reports by any of the HVAC companies that looked at the system, just estimates to replace the partsThe card for the guy that looked at the system is attached with the estimateHe took pictures of all the damage and made notes of everything.The attached pictures show some of the corrosion on top of the furnaceThe report from HomeSafe Inspection specifically says "Furnace shows no visible evidence of major defects" on page As shown in the pictures, the corrosion was clearly visible, without removing any covers from anything or operating any part of the HVAC system, and corrosion on an indoor unit is obviously a sign of a major defectWe had three different HVAC companies look at the system and all of them stated that the corrosion should have been noticed by the inspector, and that it should have been mentioned in the report

*** *** *** ***
*** ***
*** *** *** *** *** ** *** **
*** *** *** ***
*** ***We received the latest comments on the referenced complaint and find it contains misrepresentations by the ClientIt should be made very clear that we use industry standards for inspection and reportingThese practices call for operating appliances to determine functionality using controls During the test the furnace was found to operate properly and was reported that wayAs stated before the A/C unit was not tested due to an average ambient temperature of less than degrees.The client makes claims that the inspector never removed the cover from the furnace, which is totally incorrectWe have pictures to substantiate that the cover was removed and in order to get the units serial number the cover has to be removed that serial number was included in the reportRemoval of covers from an A/C plenum is not a standard inspection practice.Also the client claims there was no signed inspection agreementThis accusation is totally as we have an inspection agreement signed by the client The client was provided a copy that agreement at the time of inspection.Gerald T***

Complaint: ***
I am rejecting this response because:The latest response from the business contains severe misrepresentations of the order in which things happened.You claim that the cover was removed from the furnace and the inspector checked inside, however no pictures have been provided anywhere to prove this.You are blatantly ignoring the fact that the corrosion was very obvious and visible on the top of the furnace but was never mentioned in the report, which states that "Furnace shows no visible evidence of major defects," quoted exactly word for word from the reportCorrosion was very visible and is very clearly evidence of a major defect, yet you keep ignoring this factAlso, you keep claiming that it is industry standard to not remove the cover from the A/C plenum during an inspection and to not operate the system if the ambient outdoor temperature is below degrees, but you never provide any proof to support the claim that it is industry standardYou have been unable to provide a reasonable explanation for why you are willing to open the cover on the furnace but not the A/CIndustry standard should be to at least visually inspect anything that is not operated during the inspection.I was not provided a written agreement until AFTER the inspection and been performed and AFTER my credit card had already been chargedThere was no signed agreement before this and I was never given a chance to read the contract until after I had already been charged for everythingTherefore, at the time inspection we were operating under a verbal contractI had specifically asked if the A/C unit would be opened up and the components inside inspected and was told that it would be, without any mention of it being weather dependentThis means that it was a breach of contract for the unit to not be inspectedI would not have hired an inspector if anyone had said that the inspection of the A/C unit would be weather dependent, as this was one of the main things I wanted to have checked
Regards,
*** ***

*** *** *** ***
*** ***
*** *** *** *** *** ** *** **
*** *** *** ***We are in receipt of the complaint #***Our response is simple, the AC unit was not tested at the time of inspection since the
ambient temperature was below degrees FThis is standard inspection practice and avoids the risk of damaging the unitWithout testing any operational defects could not reasonably be identifiedThe furnace was reviewed with the lid removed and showed no apparent defectsHomeSafe employed standard inspection practices and is therefore not responsible for forward events.In addition the customer signed an inspection agreement that limits our liability to the value of the inspection fee.Gerald T***President and CEO***jt***@***

[redacted]We received the latest comments on the referenced complaint and find it contains misrepresentations by the Client. It should be made very clear that we use industry standards for inspection and reporting. These practices call for operating appliances to determine functionality using normal controls.  During the test the furnace was found to operate properly and was reported that way. As stated before the A/C unit was not tested due to an average ambient temperature of less than 60 degrees.The client makes claims that the inspector never removed the cover from the furnace, which is totally incorrect. We  have pictures to substantiate that the cover was removed and in order to get the units serial number the cover has to be removed that serial number was included in the report. Removal of covers from an A/C plenum is not a standard inspection practice.Also the client claims there was no signed inspection agreement. This accusation is totally false as we have an inspection  agreement signed by the client.  The client was provided a copy that  agreement at the time of inspection.Gerald T[redacted]

[redacted]
[redacted]
[redacted]
[redacted]We are in receipt of the complaint #[redacted]. Our response is simple, the AC unit was not tested at the time of...

inspection since the ambient temperature was below 60 degrees F. This is standard inspection practice and avoids the risk of damaging the unit. Without testing any operational defects could not reasonably be identified. The furnace was reviewed with the lid removed and showed no apparent defects. HomeSafe employed standard inspection practices and is therefore not responsible for forward events.In addition the customer signed an inspection agreement that limits our liability to the value of the inspection fee.Gerald T[redacted]President and CEO[redacted]jt[redacted]

HomeSafe Inspection inspected a home for me. During this inspection they failed to accurately report the condition of several windows in the home.

On September 14, 2012 HomeSafe Inspection inspected a house that I was under contract to purchase. During this inspection, they overlooked the fact that the windows on the french doors in the master bedroom and the french doors in the kitchen showed evidence of a broken seal that has allowed signification moisture penetration. The window failure is evident because visibility through the window is significantly obscured and blurry.

I emailed [redacted] and [redacted] regarding this matter on October 9, 2012, October 17, 2012, and November 5, 2012. Their only response to date is that HomeSafe does not provide a guarantee regarding the quality or thoroughness of inspections performed. Furthermore, they have stated that the windows showed no defects during the inspection and that "rapidly changing weather conditions" caused the windows to fail in the three weeks between the inspection and when I noticed the defect in the windows.

I have asked several window professionals if the windows could fail within a three week span and none thought they could fail to the extent shown in that amount of time. Furthermore, I asked the seller about the windows and they stated that the windows have been defective since 2007.

I am very dissatisfied with HomeSafe's complete lack of responsibility. They market themselves as certified home inspection professionals who are there to look out for their clients best interests. However, when they fail to find a problem during the inspection process they immediately claim they have no responsibility and that they do not guarantee their work.