What do you charge for re-inspections?

[Tom Raymond]

The mess I looked at in Dansville 2 1/2 weeks ago is still being renegotiated, and my client is requesting that I reinspect all repairs prior to proceeding with the transaction. I have no problem with doing the work but have no idea what to charge for it. Some input would be greatly appreciated.

A little background; the house is 70 miles away (3 hour round trip), there are serious electrical issues, a few plumbing problems, a roof leak, serious structural issues with c1500 SF of decks, 4 sets of stairs designed to trip people, HVAC problems, and I'm still not convinced there is a C of O, or any permits for that matter. The seller, in addition to concessions, is proposing to have all repairs done by EOM.

The re-inspection will be at least as involved as the initial and will likely require multiple trips; considering that it took the seller 12 years to screw the place up, I doubt they'll be able to fix it in 28 days. I want my fee to be fair, but I don't like to work for free.

So, how would you charge for you time in this scenario?

[Jim Morrison]

The mess I looked at in Dansville 2 1/2 weeks ago is still being renegotiated, and my client is requesting that I reinspect all repairs prior to proceeding with the transaction. I have no problem with doing the work but have no idea what to charge for it. Some input would be greatly appreciated.

A little background; the house is 70 miles away (3 hour round trip), there are serious electrical issues, a few plumbing problems, a roof leak, serious structural issues with c1500 SF of decks, 4 sets of stairs designed to trip people, HVAC problems, and I'm still not convinced there is a C of O, or any permits for that matter. The seller, in addition to concessions, is proposing to have all repairs done by EOM.

The re-inspection will be at least as involved as the initial and will likely require multiple trips; considering that it took the seller 12 years to screw the place up, I doubt they'll be able to fix it in 28 days. I want my fee to be fair, but I don't like to work for free.

So, how would you charge for you time in this scenario?

I wouldn't do it at all, but if it took me a day to do it, I'd charge them a day's pay.

[Tom Raymond]

Because the seller is doing the repairs? I advised my client not to go down that road. Because of the location, the season, and the time frame of closings these days, the only repair I'd allow the seller to make is the little roof leak, but I'd budget to redo it once I'd taken possession.

Or do you have another aversion?

[Mark P]

I'd probably not do it either, sounds like a bag of worms I don?t want to own; especially the structural stuff; but if I did agree to it - I would charge enough to make the buyer think twice about wanting to hire me. In this case I?d quote an hourly fee that included travel time.

When I get those calls, I tell them to save their money hiring me and get the sellers to provide receipts from the all the contractors who did the work along with a description of what work was actually completed. They should have a receipt from a licensed electrician, and licensed plumber, a licensed roofer, etc. You?ve heard it said before the last person to look / touch it owns it.

[Jim Baird]

I have done similar returns. I just tell them I will bill a flat hourly rate, including travel time.

[Nolan Kienitz]

I don't do "re-inspections" either.

I do similar to what Mark P. said ... have receipts provided for all work done with the contractor's name, contact information, license number, etc. (if required by the state or other agency).

[hausdok]

I explain my reinspection fee policy to folks up-front before I start the initial inspection. Consequently, I don't get hired a whole lot for reinspections.

I charge them a set fee that includes my time on the road coming and going, my time on-site, my time preparing any follow-up reports and any time I have to spend on the phone talking about it to the client, the owner, contractors, etc..

That set fee is twice my normal hourly rate. It's that way because reinspections are usually a huge waste of time - especially when a homeowner decides to do the work or to pay someone to do the work and takes that choice out of the hands of the buyer. By the time I fight my way through traffic, spend ten minutes on site to look at whatever it is they want looked at, talk to them about it, drive home and prepare any follow-up reports they want, I've pretty much blown a day. If someone had called me looking to get an inspection done on that day, and could only do it that day and none other, and then hires someone else to do it, I've essentially lost a full inspection for that day, so the reinspection fee has to ensure I'm fairly compensated.

I also charge a distance surcharge for every 20 miles I drive from my base for both the initial and any follow up inspections; so, in a case like your's the distance surcharge is tripled and added to the doubled hourly fee.

I tell folks that if they think my reinspection fees would be too expensive that they should be careful to insist that, for anything I discover during the inspection they want fixed, they should insist that it be repaired by a reputable seasoned pro and not the homeowner or the youngest guy on the builder's crew. When they ask why, I ask 'em if they would ever go back to their family doctor after having brain surgery and ask the family doctor to open up their head to see whether the brain surgeon did a good job. Most get it.

Despite all that, I do end up doing 3 or 4 reinspections every year anyway; however, those folks can never say that I didn't warn them.

ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!!

Mike

[stubrooks]

For normal travel distance, 70 miles one-way isn't normal for me, $150 first hour, $100 each additional hour on .5 hour minimum increments. Some clients may have choked a bit at first but when I found really screwed up repairs, they came to realize it wasn't such a bad deal after all. Obtain list of exactly what they want inspected as related to your report. Make it clear that unless the repair is obviously wrong that you are looking for conditions for which you would not have reported a deficiency in the original report. It is not a total inspection. You cannot be responsible for materials and workmanship used in the repairs.

[allseason]

If you can do one or two inspections in that same time frame that's what you would need to be compensated for. Sounds like a mess.

How much snow do you have on the ground?

[Tom Raymond]

Snow? At the day job, which is half way between home and the nearest ski resort, there's 6-8". Home is 9 miles due West toward Lake Erie and there's about 4". If I had to guess we're about 3' below average, although we haven't had anything approaching average in years.

70 miles is about twice what I usually drive for an inspection, but lately is about the norm for CEUs. Biz is slow so I took the job. I get a respectable fee, but with the multitude of stupid stuff in this place I worked hard for it. I think I'd rather inspect another house for my guy, but...

[allseason]

....not allowed to give purchase advice to clients. I'm licensed in NJ and NY and it's the same both places, even though you want to tell them to run away yelling and screaming while waving both hands above their heads.

[Tom Raymond]

...my day job is sales for a Mom and Pop home improvement company, I hate leaving money on the table.

[kurt]

I don't turn down anything nowadays. I'd charge him hourly for the reinspection, and get at least a couple hundred bucks for driving there and back.

If he didn't want to pay that, fine. If he did, I'd be driving.

Cans of worms are a mainstay of my business. It pays good if you can get the work.

[Jerry Simon]

I don't turn down anything nowadays.

You can say that again. I stole this bit of boileplate from WJ years ago, and include it as a footnote at the end of each report. If circumstances warrant, I'll change the fee, but only upwards. As Kurt said, at least a couple C-notes if not more.

Re-Inspection Policy: I'm often asked if it would be possible to re-inspect the problem areas disclosed in the inspection, after repairs are made. The fee is $250.00 for this service, and includes a written follow-up report.

[Bain]

I try to avoid these things. Besides the actual real-time involved, there are always follow-up phone calls and e-mails when I trash something that was allegedly repaired, but winds up being poorly wrought.

Too, you're signing off on someone else's work, and you generally don't know who that someone was. Can one truly say the chimney leak was repaired if the flashing can't be seen? Or . . . just 'cause the A/C is working during the recheck, how can you be certain the two pounds of refrigerant that was added to the system won't leak out again in a month or two?

Second looks are often unavoidable in our business but, for me, they're typically net losses because people don't want to pay a fair price for my time. The counter-position, of course, is that I'm successful because I provide exemplary service and don't want my peeps to feel as if I'm not looking out for them.

[Jerry Simon]

Too, you're signing off on someone else's work, and you generally don't know who that someone was.

Never understood that oft-chanted mantra; aren't you doing the exact same thing for the entire initial inspection?

[Bain]

Too, you're signing off on someone else's work, and you generally don't know who that someone was.

Never understood that oft-chanted mantra; aren't you doing the exact same thing for the entire initial inspection?

I don't think so. You're telling them the roof leaks and it needs to be repaired--not how to repair it. You're telling them the A/C ain't working--not what the exact reason is.

The pro forma stuff is straightforward, of course. But the more delicate issues can be problematic.

[Jim Katen]

. . . So, how would you charge for you time in this scenario?

$170 per hour plus a flat fee for travel.

[Bain]

. . . So, how would you charge for you time in this scenario?

$170 per hour plus a flat fee for travel.

That would be fair, but it wouldn't fly in my area. I understand what's up, but the buyers--and I've seen the looks on their faces a gazillion times--invariably feel as if they're victims of a bait-and-switch scheme when the fee for a recheck approximates the initial fee.

Again, I get it. But the buyers seldom do.

[Marc]

If the repairs involve 2 or more systems, I charge the same amount as the initial inspection and complete a regular HI. SOP here requires it.

If it's a single repair that they want me to inspect, $120 for the first hour, $80 thereafter. No mileage charge if it's in my parish. My town's small.

Marc

[Jerry Simon]

Too, you're signing off on someone else's work, and you generally don't know who that someone was.

Never understood that oft-chanted mantra; aren't you doing the exact same thing for the entire initial inspection?

I don't think so. You're telling them the roof leaks and it needs to be repaired--not how to repair it. You're telling them the A/C ain't working--not what the exact reason is.

The pro forma stuff is straightforward, of course. But the more delicate issues can be problematic.

No, you said "you're signing off on someone else's work". You're signing off at the initial inspection for anyone who ever worked on or built the house, whether the work is proper or deficient, whether it's original work or previously repaired (and probably unbeknownst to you if repaired).

IMHO,that is.

[Bain]

Too, you're signing off on someone else's work, and you generally don't know who that someone was.

Never understood that oft-chanted mantra; aren't you doing the exact same thing for the entire initial inspection?

I don't think so. You're telling them the roof leaks and it needs to be repaired--not how to repair it. You're telling them the A/C ain't working--not what the exact reason is.

The pro forma stuff is straightforward, of course. But the more delicate issues can be problematic.

No, you said "you're signing off on someone else's work". You're signing off at the initial inspection for anyone who ever worked on or built the house, whether the work is proper or deficient, whether it's original work or previously repaired (and probably unbeknownst to you if repaired).

IMHO,that is.

I hear what you're saying, and it makes sense. It's just that the original gig consists of finding problems, whereas the second gig is more about evaluating the work of others. And we all know how that work of others--paid for by a seller that's trying to get off as inexpensively as possible to mollify a buyer--is typically performed.

I do plenty of reinspections. I just don't like them.

[Jerry Simon]

"And we all know how that work of others--paid for by a seller that's trying to get off as inexpensively as possible to mollify a buyer--is typically performed."

That's a great point. . .

[Jim Morrison]

Too, you're signing off on someone else's work, and you generally don't know who that someone was.

Never understood that oft-chanted mantra; aren't you doing the exact same thing for the entire initial inspection?

During a regular HI, you're inspecting something that presumably has been in service for some period of time.

When you do a reinspection, you're looking at a brand-spanking new repair that (in my experience) has not even been glanced at by an AHJ.

It's not exactly apples and oranges, but they aren't the same either. The risk is higher on a reinspection.

[kurt]

Yes, the risk is higher.

I find myself explaining pricing to the folks that don't understand why the reinspection should cost so much. If they don't get it, I don't care. I only want them to pay me.