flhughes

Has anyone seen an electronic air cleaner plugged or wired into the same electric box as the emergency gas switch?

I've always respected Chris's opinions,but... I disagree that E&O should be a criteria for choosing an inspector. Having E&O doesn't demonstrate your competence as a home inspector any more than having insurance on your vehicle does. I don't carry it for several reasons. It's far too expensive for what you get, the deductibles are outrageous, neither claims-made nor occurrence policies cover for all situations without purchasing additional riders, and I don't want to paint a target on my business for an aggressive attorney. There are two interesting articles in the Communicator Magazine about E&O insurance related to home inspectors. The first, in Issue 42 Fall 2006, http://communicatormagazine.com/page147.aspx discusses how a $3600 claim escalated into a $36,000 claim and suggests the inspector would have been better off settling at $3600 to begin with. Forget the merits of the claim. If the inspector had settled, he would have paid most, or all, of the $3600 to satisfy the deductible. How would having E&O have helped him? The article also suggests that the inspector ignored a red flag when the client asked several times before the inspection if he had E&O. If a client asks me that question, I politely decline the job. The second article is in Issue 43 Fall 2006 (not on the website yet). This relates a horror story about an inspector who didn't have enough E&O coverage to satisfy the claim. Again, the article suggests he should have settled early. Maybe if he didn't have any coverage, he wouldn't have been sued to begin with.