One of the things that I find great about Active Rain is that it can be a great sounding board as there is so much experience and varied opinions on so many items. As home inspectors, we are often lambasted for either being too picky or not picky enough. This came to mind yesterday while inspecting a 17 year old property in Nashville.
About a year or so ago, an agent hired us to do an inspection for their client because they were miffed at the inspector they were using because they missed rusted racks in the dishwasher. To make a short story long, the buyers complained, and the agent wound up replacing the washer out of his pocket because it was cheaper to replace the washer than to replace the racks. Nothing lasts forever, and certainly durable appliances like dishwashers are approaching the end of their service life when they reach 12 years or so. After this many years of use and abuse, there is going to be rusted or damaged dish holders. As home inspectors, we are to look at items of function. Is the item performing its intended duty? So is it our job to report this as a defect or just normal wear and tear?
My take is normal wear and tear that can be expected due to normal use. However; I do make a note in the comments section as an item to monitor. Damaged or non-functioning racks, rollers or other components other issues which should be addressed by licensed professionals.
I thought that the agent was mad because they had to dole money out of his pocket to appease their customer. The result was the inspector was a dolt for not reporting this and the agent will never, ever use this inspector again. So you decide, is this considered an item or function or cosmetic damage...
Wishing all my fellow drips and tweeps a G-r-r-r-reat day... 8-)
Your building consultants for life...
Follow me on Twitter...
By TwitterButtons.com
By TwitterButtons.com
You can follow me on FaceBook too...
© 2009 michael thornton | complete home inspections, inc. | brentwood, tn | 615.661.0297 | www.completehomeinspectionsonline.com
Large enough for excellent service... Small enough to care...
Is the item performing its intended duty? Yes. Like you said, you note it as an item to monitor, it's normal wear and tear but performing it's function. Should we expect anything other than this from you?
As long as it works.. it passes the test. Reasonable wear and tear is expected. You have to realize that you will be replacing any appliance one day. . .well unless is a Maytag!
Hmmm. They usually take a quiick peek and run the washer. I would expect an older DW to have wear and tear and maybe some rust. Some consumers think they are buying new when they buy anything. If it was really rusty the inspector should have said something but I don't think they could have changed the deal because of it.
I always hear home inspectors say "functional" when referring to appliances. Did the dishwasher work? If so, then it shouldn't have been replaced unless the new buyers wanted something a bit more spiffy. Then, it is up to them to buy it.
Unless it is new construction items in the homes are used.
In my opinion, if the dishwasher was performing it's intended function, it shouldn't go on the summary page of the inspection report. That rusty rack was nothing more than typical wear and tear on an older appliance.
The buyers were not buying a new home and should not have expected to receive one.
Michael, looks like we have consensus going here:) Cosmetic----if I saw severe rusting on a one year old unit I would treat it differently than a 10 year old unit. I would be more likely to mention the "lack" of rust on a 10 year old unit---just kidding:)
Michael,
I think most people forget that we inspectors usually inspect appliances as a courtesy. Most standards do not mandate that we be experts at appliances. Almost everyone I know does appliances to some degree but I think they are a slippery slope. Like Charlie wrote about one time, is the refer really cold enough....maybe there is a crack in a rack or in the bottom of the refer under a crisper. Maybe the dishwasher only leaks sometimes.
That is simply a normal wear and tear item and should be noted as such.
If that agent couldn't overcome something that easy she has probably gone through inspectors one at a time.
If an item is nearing the end of it's serviceable life but is still functioning as it was intended to function then what's the problem. However, sell them a home warranty and be done with it. The item worked and functioned as it intended and then it stopped and would have been covered - right?
Definately a cosmetic issue here and really should never wind up in a home inspection report.
Maybe in the report but not on a summary or request to remedy.