TOPIC: Interesting Inspection Legal Case

I came across this on the ASHI board and found it interesting and thought I'd post it here for your reading. It's about an IL case where a new home has problems with it's foundation, moisture and a few other issues. The inspector & builders get sued but the inspector gets off based on limiting his damages to his inspection fee, and it being past his contractually stated 2 year limitation.

www.state.il.us/court/opinions/Appellate...December/5100066.pdf

Thoughts? In the past I've always heard that the inspection fee clause has not normally stood up (yes I realize the $175 is an inexpensive inspection!).

Hard to say what the implication is off hand.
Will it translate to other cases?
Seems like so many cases depend on which Lawyer the Judge last played golf with.

They all play together. I used to play basketball during lunch at a local gym. The judges, DA's & Public Defenders all played together.

Without a doubt it will get used in other cases as it sets a precedence. Will it affect the outcome of other cases? Who knows!

Thanks for posting this however as I saved a copy.

According to some local attorneys in Ohio ( cleveland ) the limitation of damages to the inspection fee holds little weight and is not even pursued by defense attorneys as historically it has proved to be a fruitless endeavor.  I am not sure of the statute of limitations.

A side note: It is scary out there as it seems everyone wants a perfect home without any problems.  Stuff does happen, and lawsuits should only be pursued in only the extreme cases of negligence.  Just my opinion.

Illinois is known as a "contract state" and a "four corner state". The judges usually default to what is in the contract and what is in the four corners of the contract. If it is in the contract that his liability is only the inspection price, then most likely that is all they will get; I have that in my contract. I am not sure about the 2 year limitation, because we have to keep records for 5 years. Anyway, if it is in the contract then the judges usually allow it; I know a guy who was sued, and when it got to court the judge ruled in his favor because the contract stated that the client would go to arbitration before filing a lawsuit, the client did not go to arbitration, thus she had breached the contract and she lost the suit. That is the "four corners" approach.