Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below [To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, we would like to know your view on the matter.] I firmly feel that MrArmbruster did an inferior inspection He was willing to overlook key problems such as the cat odor, the drainage issue which he stated was just a landscape issue - despite it being apparent that water had ran underneath the crawl space from a recent storm Even his Blaise statement that a non functioning light was probably the light bulb showed he did not do a thorough inspection This should have been investigated as it could have had a short in the light fixture which is a safety issue.As a concerned buyer I felt I had to have a house inspection showing the deficits in order to get our earnest money returned That is the only reason I agreed to pay for his inspection If not for that I would not have paid him I since have had another home inspected by a different agency and was quite satisfied with the quality of their inspection MrArmbruster mentions we had never seen the house prior to the inspection and that is true as we are from out of state (Georgia) and we were unable to get into the property beforehand However, this fact does not alleviate MrArmbruster from doing a thorough inspection, representing us as his customer It felt more like he was representing the sellers as he glossed over all the defiencies we noticed.Therefore I am requesting a full refund from MrArmbruster Regards, [redacted]
Regarding this complaint. I inspect to ASHI standards. I conducted this inspection IAW those standards.I use a 36 page checklist to ensure all requirements are met. Upon completion of the checklist I...
review the findings with the customer and summarize major issues on the last 2 pages of the report.The customer is correct in saying I did not notice the pet odor at first. It was emanating from a front register and I had not yet gone to that location. She had some relation at the inspection that were particularly offended by the odor and one gentleman went around the house sniffing to find the location it was most obvious. When he located it I went to the register and found a strong pet urine odor. I completed the inspection and began to summarize the findings. There is no specific check for pet odor in the ASHI standards so I waited to make remarks in the additional comments section of the report. Which I did. I completed the report reviewed it with the customer. The purpose of a home inspection is to give the customer a fair assessment of the home on the day it is inspected, so the customer can decide if the home is worthy of the purchase price. This customer made a purchase offer without seeing the house. According to the customer the day of the inspection was the first time she saw the house. The fact that she found issues with the house, particularly strong pet odors, that in her assessment made her not want to purchase the house, in no way diminishes the quality of the inspection. Upon completion of the inspection she was well aware of the condition of the house on the day of the inspection. The fact she noticed the odor before I had completed my inspection in no way diminishes the fact that I conducted a quality inspection. She could have visited the home prior to the inspection and made her assessment without incurring cost. She scheduled this inspection ; then upon entering the home noticed deficiencies that were substantial enough to influence her buying decision.I understand her frustration with the home not being in the condition she wanted. The issue is not with the inspection but the condition of the home. This customer said nothing to me about being dissatisfied with the inspection. We reviewed the findings, I asked if she had any questions for me and she paid for the report. Now after abandoning the purchase she wants to recoup all expenses because she doesn’t want the house. Not because the inspection was not done to standard, but because the house did not meet her expectations. ThanksTomThomas L ArmbrusterTA Home Inspections LLC
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, we would like to know your view on the matter.]. I firmly feel that Mr. Armbruster did an inferior inspection. He was willing to overlook key problems such as the cat odor, the drainage issue which he stated was just a landscape issue - despite it being apparent that water had ran underneath the crawl space from a recent storm. Even his Blaise statement that a non functioning light was probably the light bulb showed he did not do a thorough inspection. This should have been investigated as it could have had a short in the light fixture which is a safety issue.As a concerned buyer I felt I had to have a house inspection showing the deficits in order to get our earnest money returned. That is the only reason I agreed to pay for his inspection. If not for that I would not have paid him. I since have had another home inspected by a different agency and was quite satisfied with the quality of their inspection. Mr. Armbruster mentions we had never seen the house prior to the inspection and that is true as we are from out of state (Georgia) and we were unable to get into the property beforehand. However, this fact does not alleviate Mr. Armbruster from doing a thorough inspection, representing us as his customer. It felt more like he was representing the sellers as he glossed over all the defiencies we noticed.Therefore I am requesting a full refund from Mr. Armbruster.
Regards,
[redacted]
Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below [To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, we would like to know your view on the matter.] I firmly feel that MrArmbruster did an inferior inspection He was willing to overlook key problems such as the cat odor, the drainage issue which he stated was just a landscape issue - despite it being apparent that water had ran underneath the crawl space from a recent storm Even his Blaise statement that a non functioning light was probably the light bulb showed he did not do a thorough inspection This should have been investigated as it could have had a short in the light fixture which is a safety issue.As a concerned buyer I felt I had to have a house inspection showing the deficits in order to get our earnest money returned That is the only reason I agreed to pay for his inspection If not for that I would not have paid him I since have had another home inspected by a different agency and was quite satisfied with the quality of their inspection MrArmbruster mentions we had never seen the house prior to the inspection and that is true as we are from out of state (Georgia) and we were unable to get into the property beforehand However, this fact does not alleviate MrArmbruster from doing a thorough inspection, representing us as his customer It felt more like he was representing the sellers as he glossed over all the defiencies we noticed.Therefore I am requesting a full refund from MrArmbruster Regards, [redacted]
Regarding this complaint. I inspect to ASHI standards. I conducted this inspection IAW those standards.I use a 36 page checklist to ensure all requirements are met. Upon completion of the checklist I...
review the findings with the customer and summarize major issues on the last 2 pages of the report.The customer is correct in saying I did not notice the pet odor at first. It was emanating from a front register and I had not yet gone to that location. She had some relation at the inspection that were particularly offended by the odor and one gentleman went around the house sniffing to find the location it was most obvious. When he located it I went to the register and found a strong pet urine odor. I completed the inspection and began to summarize the findings. There is no specific check for pet odor in the ASHI standards so I waited to make remarks in the additional comments section of the report. Which I did. I completed the report reviewed it with the customer. The purpose of a home inspection is to give the customer a fair assessment of the home on the day it is inspected, so the customer can decide if the home is worthy of the purchase price. This customer made a purchase offer without seeing the house. According to the customer the day of the inspection was the first time she saw the house. The fact that she found issues with the house, particularly strong pet odors, that in her assessment made her not want to purchase the house, in no way diminishes the quality of the inspection. Upon completion of the inspection she was well aware of the condition of the house on the day of the inspection. The fact she noticed the odor before I had completed my inspection in no way diminishes the fact that I conducted a quality inspection. She could have visited the home prior to the inspection and made her assessment without incurring cost. She scheduled this inspection ; then upon entering the home noticed deficiencies that were substantial enough to influence her buying decision.I understand her frustration with the home not being in the condition she wanted. The issue is not with the inspection but the condition of the home. This customer said nothing to me about being dissatisfied with the inspection. We reviewed the findings, I asked if she had any questions for me and she paid for the report. Now after abandoning the purchase she wants to recoup all expenses because she doesn’t want the house. Not because the inspection was not done to standard, but because the house did not meet her expectations. ThanksTomThomas L ArmbrusterTA Home Inspections LLC
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, we would like to know your view on the matter.]. I firmly feel that Mr. Armbruster did an inferior inspection. He was willing to overlook key problems such as the cat odor, the drainage issue which he stated was just a landscape issue - despite it being apparent that water had ran underneath the crawl space from a recent storm. Even his Blaise statement that a non functioning light was probably the light bulb showed he did not do a thorough inspection. This should have been investigated as it could have had a short in the light fixture which is a safety issue.As a concerned buyer I felt I had to have a house inspection showing the deficits in order to get our earnest money returned. That is the only reason I agreed to pay for his inspection. If not for that I would not have paid him. I since have had another home inspected by a different agency and was quite satisfied with the quality of their inspection. Mr. Armbruster mentions we had never seen the house prior to the inspection and that is true as we are from out of state (Georgia) and we were unable to get into the property beforehand. However, this fact does not alleviate Mr. Armbruster from doing a thorough inspection, representing us as his customer. It felt more like he was representing the sellers as he glossed over all the defiencies we noticed.Therefore I am requesting a full refund from Mr. Armbruster.
Regards,
[redacted]