Building and Pest Inspection commissioned by the Vendor

Hi All,

Looking at buying first home (BNE) and a property we looked at is going to auction. The vendor/RE agent has had a building and pest inspection done for the property already, and is providing this to interested buyers.

Part of me thinks "great - I dont have to pay for the B&P!"

The other part thinks "can I trust this B&P?"

Interested in the PC forums thoughts. Am I too sceptical?

Edit: The inspecting company has glowing reviews on google, all 5 stars, and plenty of them. Gives me more confidence.

thanks in advance, Tip

 

It seems to work well in the ACT but there may be some legislation to protect the buyer. The reports (building, pest and energy rating plus title details etc) are with insurance for the eventual buyer. The buyer pays as part of settlement so the contract between buyer and insurer is valid.

For me the beauty is that you can do your online checking before inspecting the property and can visually verify the reports once there. You can put in an unconditional offer at the inspection if it looks right. Also you only pay if you are the successful purchaser. It cost about $1,200 when I last bought a place.

 

Can you pay for a copy of the report to be in your name if you are the successful bidder therefore giving some comeback on the BnP company if you're not happy later on?

 

If it is provided free to you, why not just take it and read it?
If you like what you read and still want to pursue, then consider the points they have raised, and those that arent raised.
Check total number of pages vs number of Disclaimer Pages.

I've seen one that specifically said the only do a "visual" inspection, and no termite checks.
Nothing beats taking an old/senior/learned friend along to just see it with your own eyes.
After that you can decide if you need a second Inspection Report.

 

I don’t think you’re too sceptical. I’ve always had the same thoughts. Depending on the state you have no comeback whatsoever.

The cost of a B&P has saved me buying a potential lemon a few times. That being said I’ve always been interstate so can’t view myself.

 

Thanks all for your replies.

Ive read the report and no glaring issues. The house is 11 years old and apparently (according to RE) the vendor fixed the issues they inherited based on previous BnP. So this rings true.

The report doesnt seem very detailed, but this is literally the first one ive read so have nothing too compare it with. Disclaimer, im also an engineer so used to reading (and writing *sigh) detailed reports, so may have different opinion of "detailed".

I dont think we will bid on this one, but it may pop up again. Paying for a copy in our name is good idea, I like that.

I know BnP have their own insurance and liability to worry about, but i cant help fearing this could result in a mates rates deal for a favourable report. Will consider getting my own or paying for a copy in my name if this pops up one we are serious about

 

Any company that did “mates rates” and gave a dodgy report would not last long in business. I doubt any firm would risk their insurance, reputation and entire business anyone.

If it bothers you, get your own report. And just cross your fingers that the company you choose does not have an unknown connection to the vendor!

 

What did your solicitor advise ? They may identify you are not a party to their duty of care. And the contract may exclude reliance on it like most sale contracts do. The often exclude anything advised or not advised by any third party and require you to seek your own knowledge - ie true caveat emptor.

I encountered a client who had a P&B and termites were soon highly evident. Massive damage. The P&B that was subcontracted was uninsured and the primary P&B company was liable. That alone took several months of legals before the main party insurer accepted liability. Whole of house replacement is now covered and will also cover the $20K of legal accrued (maybe only in part ! eg $10K out of pocket) Cost of a independent insured inspection will pay itself endlessly. I would hate to get to a potential claim and its denied as you were not a party to the report.

A bad report may be through being lazy and incompetent more than deliberate - In the above case he never entered the manhole (painted on and just needed to be cracked) and would have seen the destruction if he did. He had filmed everything else and lacked any evidence of opening the manhole.