What is the name of your state? Kentucky
am not sure if this falls under Contract Law, Civil Law, or Real Estate Law. I put it under civil litigation the other day.
I made a verbal agreement with a home inspector to perform a home inspection for me on that same day, at a specied time, for a specified amount. I agreed to arrive toward the end of the inspection to review the findings and pay the inspector. That was the extent of our verbal agreement.
I arrived at the appointed time, reviewed the situation with the home inspector and paid him. Then, he produced an inspection agreement that he told me I was required to sign before he would release the results of the inspection. There had been no mention of the written agreement at the time we discussed the inspection arrangements.
I signed for a number of reasons, most of which boil down to not knowing that I had the option not to sign, and believing there was a sense of urgency to comply with a home inspection contingency in my contract to purchase the home. I was new to the area (had been there for 10 days max), and hadn't found any other home inspector to be available, or even in business, at the time that I sought the home inspection.
The agreement had a clause for arbitration to be filed within one year of the date of the inspection. I did not understand that the home inspector had any liability for misrepresenting conditions, and disguising defects until about 2.25 years after the inspection. And they continue to this day, 3.25 years after the inspection.
The inspector is saying that it is too late for me to seek any redress because the one year time frame has past.
I say that I had a verbal agreement that was completed when I paid him. I signed the written agreement because I saw no other options to get the report I needed to respond to the home inspection contingency. I say that the written agreement is not valid, because the inspector did not receive any payment for anything after I signed the agreement. I also say that even if the agreement is considered valid in general, the limitations are not enforceable based on the concept of Contract of Adhesion.
Am I all wet?
am not sure if this falls under Contract Law, Civil Law, or Real Estate Law. I put it under civil litigation the other day.
I made a verbal agreement with a home inspector to perform a home inspection for me on that same day, at a specied time, for a specified amount. I agreed to arrive toward the end of the inspection to review the findings and pay the inspector. That was the extent of our verbal agreement.
I arrived at the appointed time, reviewed the situation with the home inspector and paid him. Then, he produced an inspection agreement that he told me I was required to sign before he would release the results of the inspection. There had been no mention of the written agreement at the time we discussed the inspection arrangements.
I signed for a number of reasons, most of which boil down to not knowing that I had the option not to sign, and believing there was a sense of urgency to comply with a home inspection contingency in my contract to purchase the home. I was new to the area (had been there for 10 days max), and hadn't found any other home inspector to be available, or even in business, at the time that I sought the home inspection.
The agreement had a clause for arbitration to be filed within one year of the date of the inspection. I did not understand that the home inspector had any liability for misrepresenting conditions, and disguising defects until about 2.25 years after the inspection. And they continue to this day, 3.25 years after the inspection.
The inspector is saying that it is too late for me to seek any redress because the one year time frame has past.
I say that I had a verbal agreement that was completed when I paid him. I signed the written agreement because I saw no other options to get the report I needed to respond to the home inspection contingency. I say that the written agreement is not valid, because the inspector did not receive any payment for anything after I signed the agreement. I also say that even if the agreement is considered valid in general, the limitations are not enforceable based on the concept of Contract of Adhesion.
Am I all wet?