Linkhorn Home Inspections

Good Morning- We have addressed this complaint with the client(s) over the past few months. The issue revolves around an opening in the foundation that was covered with OSB plywood at the time our company performed a pre-purchase home inspection. It is now understood that the previous owner of the home at some point removed a window from this area and elected to install built in shelving on the interior of this area.

I want to begin by making sure that we all have an understanding of a home inspection, what it is and what it isn't. A home inspection is the process by which an inspector visually examines the readily accessible systems and components of a home and describes those systems and components using the ASHI SOP. Readily accessible means available for visual inspection without requiring moving of personal property, dismantling, or destructive measures. Additionally, inspections performed under the ASHI SOP are not technically exhaustive, and are not required to identify or to report: concealed conditions; latent defects; or consequential damages. The inspector IS NOT REQUIRED TO DETERMINE; compliance of systems and components with past and present requirements and guidelines (including, but not limited to, codes, regulations, laws, ordinances, specifications, installation.

The basis for the client's complaint is that had we pointed out to them that the OSB plywood was used on the exterior of the foundation, they would have found $15,000 worth of needed repairs and not purchased the home or renegotiated the terms of the sale. Furthermore, it has been suggested that OSB plywood is not considered an acceptable exterior covering by the Ohio Building Code.

1) As mentioned in the above paragraph, a home inspection is not a code compliance inspection. While I can agree that OSB plywood is not a proper siding material, the area in question was never an area made to be covered with siding, and therefore was not part of the exterior siding system.

2) Home Inspections are visual, non-invasive, and do not involve any type of demolition or dismantling. The issue was a concealed condition, and not discovered until items in this area were dismantled and removed.

3) There was no visible evidence of moisture or wood destroying insect damage to the area accessible and visible by our inspector.

4) The outcome of discovering $15,000 worth of damage/repairs is subjective. While the client may have requested the previous owners to remove the plywood, the previous owners could have responded in a number of ways. They could have denied the request, they could have obliged the request and not reported the evidence of wood destroying insect damage or water damage, or the parties could have agreed on some dollar amount as a credit to the client to handle it later. As possible as it may have been for this issue to have been discovered and dealt with during the real estate transaction, it is also more likely that the issue was not discovered until after the transaction occurred as it did here.

The clients reviewed and signed an agreement for service prior to our company conducting their home inspection. That agreement outlines the terms of the service provided, the standards of practice regarding a home inspection, and an understanding that our company provides a 200% refund if the client is not satisfied with the service they received. The clients were in no way forced to sign this agreement, they certainly could have chosen not to, and found a different inspection company to perform the services they requested, but they did.

Ultimately in this situation we have exercised the full extent of the agreement and offered the clients a 200% refund of our fees. They have been offered in $1,380.00 to bring this matter to a close.

In regards to settlement offer, we did ask the clients to remove a negative review from our social media sites as it inaccurately reflects the performance of our company and the service we provide. The client has been blocked as they were interacting negatively with clients on our social media sites who were sharing their own positive experiences. A negative review is understandable, as I'm sure they are upset however, harassment of our social media sites is not tolerated.

The offer of settlement is still available to the ***'s should they choose to accept.

Regards

Good Morning-The clients reviewed and signed an agreement for service prior to our company conducting their home inspection. That agreement outlines the terms of the service provided, the standards of practice regarding a home inspection, and an understanding that our company provides a 200% refund if the client is not satisfied with the service they received. The clients were in no way forced to sign this agreement, they certainly could have chosen not to, and found a different inspection company to perform the services they requested, but they did. This agreement also defines the following. The Client understands and agrees that the Company is not an insurerand that the payment for the inspection and report is based solely on the value of the service provided by the Company in theperformance of the limited visual inspection and production of the report as described herein. The contract also clearly states;inspections performedunder the ASHI SoP are not technically exhaustive, and are not required to identify or to report: concealed conditions; latentdefects; consequential damages.
Ultimately in this situation we have exercised the full extent of the agreement and offered the clients a 200% refund of the fees they incurred. They have been offered in $1,380.00 to bring this matter to a close. We have turned this matter over to our legal team prior to this complaint being filed with the Revdex.com. Any further communications should be directed to them regarding this matter.

Good Morning- Our company did perform a home inspection (visual, non-invasive inspection) for a potential home buyer at this home's address however, Mr *** was not our client, and did not pay for services from our company. I have spoken with Mr. regarding these concerns over the phone, and in person on a follow up visit to the property. There were several allegations that Mr. attempted to lodge against our employee, none of which we found to be true.

In regards to the sump pump that Mr. has referenced, we found the pump to be in poor condition, and rather than the automatic float switch operating, it had to be operated by hand. The following is a statement of condition that we provided our client at the time of this follow up visit. The sump pump and discharge piping does need to be improved. The sump pump discharge piping came apart in my hand very similarly to what our inspector experienced on Sunday. The piping is not installed properly and needs to be corrected. The pump itself has a float switch that is sticking. We were able to get it to work, however I had to use my hand to push the float up and down for the switch to work right. Based on this information and the visible condition of the pump I would recommend replacing it, as it may not work reliably in the future.

In regards to the flooring that Mr. has alleged was damaged, I found no damage to the flooring at the time of my follow up visit, (after our employee performed the inspection). There are gaps in between the flooring pieces. Mr. has a snap together vinyl floating floor installed in his kitchen. Based on the information that he shared with me on the premises, and via text messages between myself and Mr ***, it was determined that the floating floor was improperly installed, which is causing the gaps in his flooring. Floating floors are not designed to have cabinets or heavy appliances placed on top of it as the flooring can expand and contract with seasonal changes in humidity, and the floor system is designed to do this as a unit, not the individual pieces. Since Mr.' flooring system was installed first, and the cabinets and appliances placed on top of it, the floor system can no longer "float" as one unit, and as a result the pieces of flooring that are not under these heavy objects are expanding and contracting as designed because they can float freely.

Mr. has alleged that we agreed to pay for repairs to him home based on his allegations. What I communicated to Mr., before, during, and after my visit was that if we found any of these allegations to be true (which they were not) that our company would do whatever was needed to remedy the situation. The following is an email between myself and Mr *** after my follow up visit to this home, reiterating my explanations in relation to his allegations.

Mr.- After visiting your home last week, we have determined that the allegations you have made regarding our inspection are patently false. While your sump pump may pump, it only did so because we used our hand to reach down and operate the float switch, you were standing there with me. Furthermore, upon all of the water pumping out we again had to reach and force the switch down in order for the pump to shut off. While you may view that as “operable”, I view it as not operating properly, and similar to an inoperative pump, it should be replaced. You and I looked at the discharge piping together, and could plainly see that it was poorly put together and not holding up well.

I did not tell you that we would not fix your floor because it’s too much work, I informed you we would not fix your floor because the problem exists due to improper installation of a floating floor, not due to our inspection damaging it. There is no damage to your floor. Whomever installed the floor did not understand that floating floors are not designed to have cabinets, counter tops and heavy appliances sitting on top of them. You see the whole concept behind floating floors is that they will expand and contract with seasonal changes in humidity. When heavy objects are placed on top of them around the perimeter they can no longer expand and contract in those areas, only in the areas where there aren’t heavy objects on top of them. Upon making my determination, I reviewed the listing photos of your home that are on the internet, they show the small gaps in the flooring. Due to the floor sliding easily, it was almost effortless to slide those small gaps that were spread out over 3 pieces of flooring in to one big gap at the end.

I apologize if there was any misunderstanding or miscommunication, I did not refute these repairs due to the cost or effort that might be involved. I refuted these repairs because the allegations are patently false, the home inspection/inspector did not cause these problems.

I will advise our attorney of your plans. Please keep any further communication to our company in writing.

While Mr. might feel angry that we discovered and reported deficient conditions within the home that he is selling (The purpose of a home inspection), that is our job. Mr. may view this as a way to creatively have someone else pay for these conditions to be corrected, we view it as extortion, and will not be a party to that.

We have not and will not be making any offers to resolve this matter other than the explanations we have provided.

Regards

To Whom It May Concern,

The missed damage that Mrs. claims our company missed is attic mold. We have spoke to the inspector and reviewed his photos and inspection report. The inspector not only pointed out this mold like substance to the buyer during the inspection, he also included it in his inspection report, both on the summary of major items and in the body of report. I have attached the inspection report to this response and highlighted this portion of the findings.

Please note that without mold testing we are unable to say for certain if what appears to be mold actually is. The inspector went over testing options when this was found during the inspection with the buyer and noted his recommendation for further testing on page 27 of the report. Mrs. declined further testing and backed out of the purchase contract for this home.

We feel that Mrs. must have been satisfied with this inspection because when she entered into contract on another home, she hired us to inspect that home. There were no complaints regarding the second inspection, other than she felt like we should have given her a bigger discount since it was her second inspection with us. (We gave her $100 Off the second inspection)

Please see the following pages of the attached report.

Page 5 – Summary Page

Insulation/Ventilation

Page 26 Attic observation

• Repair: Exhaust vent pipes from the bathroom(s) should be vented to the building exterior.

Page 27 Ventilation observation
• Repair: Evidence of what appears to be mold was observed in the attic. This condition is usually the result of insufficient ventilation, past or current moisture intrusion, or bathroom fans venting into the attic. Recommend further testing to determine the substance and the scope of clean up that may be needed

Page 26 – Attic Observations – Probable cause of mold like substance in the attic.

• Repair: Exhaust vent pipes from the bathroom(s) should be vented to the building exterior.

(Pictures included in report.)

Page 27 – Ventilation Observations - Evidence of Mold like Substance.
• Repair: Evidence of what appears to be mold was observed in the attic. This condition is usually the result of insufficient ventilation, past or current moisture intrusion, or bathroom fans venting into the attic. Recommend further testing to determine the substance and the scope of clean up that may be needed
(Pictures included in report.)

Please let us know if you have any questions after reviewing this information.

Thank you for your time.

I believe we need to take a step back and make sure that we have a mutual understanding of what a home inspection is and what it isn’t. A home inspection is a visual inspection of visible and accessible areas. Home inspectors are not required to enter completely into or traverse attic spaces, you will find this in both standards of practice that are in place nationally for home inspectors. Home inspections are not technically exhaustive, meaning a home inspector does not determine the root cause, severity, or solution to all potential problems. Home inspectors have a wide variety of knowledge and training, however that knowledge isn’t all encompassing. Did you know that mold is actually exempt from home inspection standards of practice? We don’t actually have to report on it at all. But the inspector did, and based on that finding you were unable to negotiate the purchase of the home, and chose to keep looking elsewhere. As for the pricing concern with your 2nd inspection, while there may have been a miscommunication regarding it’s price, you were given $100 discount on the service, you received an email which included the price of the inspection prior to our company performing your inspection. You also signed a service agreement that included the price of the inspection. The opportunity to question the pricing would have been very appropriate when you received the email or upon the signing the agreement not after the fact. To ensure that we are clear here is our 200% guarantee copied directly from our website. The guarantee clearly states “at the end of the inspection”. It does convey to a couple weeks later. If you are not completely satisfied at the end of the inspection, not only will we refund the inspections fee, we will also pay for another certified inspector of your choice… We are so confident in what we do that we are willing to back it up 200%.

We have provided all of the documentation that shows you received the services that you not only agreed to, but paid for. We consider this matter closed.

Thank you.

Here are our comments that are in this inspections report. You will see our comment that says a certified fireplace tech should be contacted to inspect fireplace inside and out prior to use. Also you will see that there were stucco damage and that a qualified stucco contractor evaluate the stucco system to see if there are hidden damages. It was dry the day of the inspection and no active leak was detected with our inspector infrared camera which will detect moisture. I would like to know if she asked for these items to be further evaluated in her request to remedy before she bought this house?

if not the buyer needs to take responsibility if they decide not to have these items evaluated as we reported.

Maintenance Item: The fireplace and chimney should be inspected inside and out, and cleaned by a certified fireplace technician prior to operation Inspection of the fireplace is very limited since not all areas of fireplace can be seen.

Repair: Localized damage of the stucco exterior walls (staining and or cracks) should be repaired at (garage). There is extra risk of hidden damage in such areas caused by previous or present leaks that should be repaired. It is recommended that a qualified stucco contractor be consulted to further evaluate the stucco system to determine if additional hidden damage may be present. Unfortunately, stucco/stone exteriors are very vulnerable to moisture intrusion, and can cause damage that is not visible in the course of a home inspection.

This person did not pay for our services. They are the seller for a house we inspected. They never did call us about this problem. Also they are mad because we identified all the problems with the house and now the buyer is asking for these to be repaired before they proceed to buy the house.

This has been resolved and the buyer said they removed the complaint. Please check to see if they have removed. Thank you