sue36: "There is no such thing as "unlicensed practice" here because there are no licenses. If they are not supposed to obvious find safety and code violations, what exactly are they looking for?" If there is no code enforcement via licensing, Im not clear on how code violations are determined at allcan you provide a bit more info? That said, even if ones state does not license HIs, it is very easy to determine what is and is not included in a home inspection in accordance with the nationally accepted standards of practice of the HI professional organizations. One can easily review the SOPs (and the COEs) of all of the major organizations on line..or call them to obtain a copy. Otherwise, it is impossible for a buyer to know what to look for in a contract if they have no clue what a home inspection includesor does not include, as the case may be...and this is exactly what leads to these apparently rampant misconceptions. If one reviews the ASHI SOPs for instance, it clearly states that the compliance with regulatory requirements (codes, regulations, laws, ordinances, etc.) is an exclusion.and one would therefore not assume the HI will be performing an inspection inclusive of such. Home inspection and Code Inspection are two separate and distinct professions. This however does not preclude a buyer from searching for an HI who is also a Code Inspector.however, as each code discipline is separateelectrical, plumbing, etc they would have to hire someone who has a proven track record in all. Im not sure how one does that in a state that does not license code officialsbut one could check on how the state determines that a code official is competent enough for hireand go from there. In addition, such an inspection would cost much, much more and take far more time than a home inspection, as much more is involved...and, because of how involved such an inspection would be, most code officials I know who also have an HI license do not perform code inspections for the public. They do so only for municipalities. As far as safety is concerned, a home inspection does include citing safety issues. However, in your state, since the profession is not regulated, the HI can pretty much call his own shots. It is up to the buyer to request the pre-inspection agreement before they hire, and read over what the HI is including in the inspection for the price. If he is not including the items that they expect, keep looking.and of course, check references. Most if not all HI contracts that I have seen waive liability. However, I have also known more than enough HIs who have been sued nonethelessand, if it was a valid caseand not just a buyer looking for home improvement funding, the buyer has won. However, if a buyer signs an agreement which specifically does not include the inspection of certain itemsor the exclusion of certina things...they will be hard pressed on winning a case regarding those issues....especially in a state without regulation. Last but not least, without seeing the contract regarding what was agreed to, and without seeing the report to see what may have been obscured or inaccessible on the day of inspection, it sounds as if the inspection was indeed the typical $250.00 job.

"You only pay him $1k (or whatever it is) or so to help you this time and already you try to beat him out of his next commission? I'd have to decline the offer and say, when the time comes to sell, we'll talk about it." Bernie, I suggested that because I know several realtors that offer a discount on the listing side of a "round-trip". That is, if they get a full commission representing you as a buyer, then they let you know up front that they will list the house at a discount when you're ready. In fact the realtor I use does the listing entirely for free. The realtor in this case didn't get a full commission, but it doesn't hurt to ask the question. Some realtors may hate the idea, but as a consumer it's a marketing tactic that has definitely worked on me.

The only dependable "cost plus" contract (if cost control is important) is a cost plus with a guaranteed max. With this type of contract an owner has assurance that the maximum construction cost will not exceed the guaranteed max, as long as there are no approved change orders. Cost plus contracts often have a provision to split any savings below the guaranteed max with the builder, commonly on a 50%-50% basis. This provides an incentive to the contractor to stay below the guaranteed max sum. To achieve a guaranteed max, the contractor will include a sizable (undesignated) reserve to protect him/her from surprises. The same thing happens with lump sum construction contracts. Construction contracts are all about risk sharing and who bears the risk. Cost-plus, like time and materials, puts all the risk on owners. Every builder has their own preferred contracts which favor them. Thus, for custom homes, owners have to identify what protects their owner's interests and negotiate the type of contract. For tract homes and for builder subdivisions, many builders may not negotiate the type of contract. I have no idea what a "turn key" contract is.

I'm leaning toward the CAZA group reply. I am a county appraiser and have read literally thousands of deeds. I would strongly urge you to, as a minimum, use a title company and get insurance on your title. We have one neighborhood in our county where the developer never actually finished buying the land, so title reverted to the previous owner. A title company can write the deed. The realtor is usually most often needed to find and match buyers and sellers. In this case you've been found. When I see major errors in a deed, it's almost a guarantee there was no Realtor and no title company. There are two properties in our county where the purchaser thinks he owns it, but the deed describes other property nearby. Both those were self written and one was by a bank that never really foreclosed on the correct property. Title companies don't make that kind of mistake, although the out of town title companies are more frequently in error.