1) You have to know where it is to “leave the stuff alone”.

2) If it’s in a popcorn ceiling, a little boy could easily disperse it simply by bouncing a ball in his bedroom.

I don’t know anyone under 50 who would be OK with not knowing whether or not they have asbestos and where it is.

I relate such testing to the way I’ve seen it done on the East Coast as to Radon. Radon testing was separate from the home inspection and an additional cost. Often the home inspector would do both, as in placing the canisters and sending them to the lab, but the cost was not included in the inspection fee.

I’m not shooting anyone…I’m talking to homebuyers who often do not realize that the presence of asbestos is not something they can rely on a “home inspection” to determine. As long as home buyers fully understand that many, many homes in the Seattle area contain asbestos and that the presence of asbestos is not determined in the home inspection…that’s the word I went to get out. Blame is not my motive…making sure buyers are well informed in that regard it my motive.

When you pay for my liability insurance premiums (which is nearly 8% of the inspection fees), I may listen to you, instead of insurance agent and the attorney who insist that I must have a disclaimer for lead, asbestos etc. Why are you shooting the poor messenger, instead, why can not you hurl a word at the lawmakers and the insurance mafia who made that mess in the first place? And the person who suggested sending the sample to lab for positive testing, must understand that clients are balking to pay me $ 15.00 an hour, and you want the inspector to pay from his fees for $ 300.00 for asbestos test?? Why do not you write to the legislators and do some thing about? We too live like every one else in the same homes, just like every one else. Your comments against home inspectors are misdirected and totally misplaced without any sense of ground reality. You were too happy to be selling homes and taking your stash to the banks every day and look what greed did to all of us. Now we have to pay nearly a trillion dollars, perhaps much more, only because there were totally unrealistic expectations from the home purchases, be it how to fund it or how to maintain it. Of-course the grass is always green on the other side of the fence. You should ask the State that Asbestos inspection should be part of the standards, so the every home inspector and figure out the cost & quote according and every one would be on the same level playing field. Without either I price myself out of the business or I have no other recourse but to disclaim it. Sorry that is the capitalist’s way!!

First, love the name! Second, if every buyer in the country took a little chip of the “presumed to be asbestos material” and put it into a baggie and sent it to the lab, as part of the inspection process, then we would not be living with asbestos today.

Second, you can’t make the seller take it out, you can only say I don’t want the house with asbestos in it. Then if no one ever wants to buy a house with asbestos in it we will finally be rid of asbestos. But by sending it to the lab and giving the seller a report, the seller would be forced to disclose the asbestos to future buyers…which would be a step in the right direction.

Third, unfortunately same scenario with fence. You can say, then I don’t want the house, but you can’t make the neighbor, who is not a party to the contract, take his fence down. Fences are rarely spot on a property line.

You knew there was asbestos and you knew there was a fence issue, you had all of the info. In order to maybe get it all taken care of you have to say “I don’t want this house unless this is done, and MEAN it.” Then if someone else is willing to take it with these two issues, you don’t get the house. If no one else wants it, then the seller can choose not to sell it, or fix those things. But no one can make a seller anything.

In essence, your agent was correct. Your option was to buy it or not buy it. If you loved everything else about the house, then you likely made the correct choice.

How much of your property was “over the fence”?

Exception might be if a building was built over the property line, then a lot adjustment by an attorney would be in order for many reasons. A fence is not as permanent as a building.

We have a lot of homes built in the early 1900s with low windowsills. The whole lead based paint thing started when little children were biting on windowsills while looking out the window.

There are other issues, of course, but low windowsills in old houses are key…would think you would have them there. It’s more about “save the children” than “caveat emptor”…Caveat Emptor only exists when buyer’s refuse to be represented. There is NO caveat emptor anymore if the buyer has an agent…regardless of local laws.