Advantages of selling with building inspection report

[miket]

Would selling one's property with a building report from accredited mob be advantageous in selling?

ie. Better descision making on the purchasers part with ofcoarse an option to get independent inspection always available.

How do you see it? Would it work? Some countries use this practice and I believe they wanted to introduce this system in NSW some time ago?

Ta,
MikeT

 

[thefirstbruce]

I'd certainly appreciate it. I can't understand why multiple buyers have to fork out $500 for multiple reports to discover what one report would. Also, seems the current setup favours the vendor in any attempt to hide problems with his property. A vendor who is open and honest wouldn't have a problem paying for a property inspection, even if he negotiated to be reimbursed by the successful buyer.

 

[geoffw]

I have viewed a property where the inspector had told me that he had conducted the inspection and produced the report for the vendor (paid for by one of the TV shows).

There was no mention of the inspection having been performed- although the inspector's card was available.

I'm now in the position of attempting to buy a property where the sale had fallen through. I have the option of paying the buyer who could not get the finance for their reports- but in that situation, having had my offer accepted, I feel more comfortable having and inspection done for myself.

But for a property up for auction- I would be a little more open to getting a vendor report.

If there was an independent authority which monitored reporting procedures, I'd feel a LOT more comfortable about accepting reports from the vendor.

 

[Sunstone]

Dear Mike,

Actually it is a good idea and one building inspector I know actually does this.

He targets agents so that a listed property can have an inspection done, then serious buyers can visit his website to type in the address and download as a .pdf the report for the property.

It is also good for you to know what type of problems there are on your own property. Being aware means you can fix them so that buyers can't use them to negotiate prices down.

Also know that Queensland Rail typically have building inspections done that the public can see when they put their properties out to auction.

Cheers,

Sunstone.

 

[geoffw]

Sunstone

If an agent had had the report done, I might be a little happier.

But I'd still be worried that the vendor had perhaps slipped a little under the table to the inspector.

The inspector I mentioned earlier was somebody whose work I did respect, and somebody I knew who could be trusted to produce an honest report.

But I just don't know anything at all about the industry to be 100% sure that a report which is paid by somebody who has an interest in a good sale price for the property will be accurate.

I'm not casting any aspersions on anybody- it's just that my SANF is higher with somebody I choose and pay for.

 

[Sunstone]

I'm not casting any aspersions on anybody- it's just that my SANF is higher with somebody I choose and pay for.

Dear Geoff,

Actually I agree with you and I ALWAYS get my own building inspector to go through before going unconditional on any purchase.

However the question was:

Would selling one's property with a building report from accredited mob be advantageous in selling?

I believe that it is. Mainly from getting the inspector to go through and point out the things that you should have fixed before allowing the general public through with their own building inspectors.

Later if it was going to auction then it would be more advantageous to the buyer.

However if you knew there were serious problems wrong with the property and this was not seriously reflected in the pricing of the property then providing an inspection report could be a bigger negative than a positive.

Cheers,

Sunstone.

 

[simonjulie]

Hi All
From July 1 ACT vendors have to have a building,pest, EER(Energy Efficiency Rating) and a contract prepared by their solicitor before marketing a house. The building and pest costs are then passed on to the purchaser at settlement. If the purchaser wants to do their own B and P report they still have to pay for the vendor's as well.
It is typical of the ACT that the rules often are made to apply before the paperwork is available (to my knowledge, solicitors are still waiting for thr new standard contract to be issued.)
What a nightmare. another bottleneck and in the wake of another first home owners boom.
Interesting times ahead for the ACT.
I have always in the past not done pest and building reports on any of my purchases for two reasons. 1. It has in the past enabled us to move quicker into a sale. 2. My focus is on the land fisrt. The building is used to support the holding of the land through obtaining a market rent.
But I might add that I do have a background in Construction(not a pro though)
Kind regards
Simon

 

[superted]

This reminds me of a house I sold in 1996 that had a several pest/building reports done.

The first buyer had one done which said the house a termite problem they then tried to leverage this against me to get the house cheaper. The report was done by one of their freinds, which i found out about (people always blab down the pub ;-)

Incidently there was no termite activity but there had been a termite presence along time before i bought it that really left some mud but no structural damage.

The sale then fell through because i wouldnt come down in price. I then had my own report done by a neutral party and the place sold to the next buyer at full price on the back of this fair report.

Thats my experience and if there has/ is any problems i would definately get in first...

 

[asy]

Would selling one's property with a building report from accredited mob be advantageous in selling?

It's a damned good idea especially if there are any visable faults with the property.

We have one property on the market at the moment, where there is a little wood rot in the fascia boards, but the property isn't in pristine condition anyway, and is located well, and priced VERY well.

We had all sorts of ppl looking at it and claiming it was termite damage, but now we are offerring the building inspection from when the vendor purchased the property (18 months ago) as preliminary (And I MEAN preliminary) indication that it is only woodrot, and there were no active termites on the property 18 months ago.

Needless to say, we are telling ppl that this report is 18 months old, and advising that they have their own done, but at least it alleviates the problem of people thinking it's termite ridden.

so, I really think that, especially if there is an evident problem, it's a damned good idea, wish we could talk every vendor into doing one...

asy