Is an inspection contract clause, which limits the inspector's
liability to the cost of the inspection, enforceable?
HOME INSPECTION SERVICES
Most home buyers today are aware that they are entitled to have a property inspected at
their expense for an opinion as to the condition of the structural and mechanical systems;
many would be surprised, however, to discover that some home inspection contracts limit
the inspector's liability to the cost of the inspection only. Consider the difference of
opinion in the following court cases.
Brainard v McKinney, 220 Ga App 329; 469 SE2d 441 (1996).
QUESTION BEFORE THE COURT: Is an inspection contract clause, which
limits the inspector's liability to the cost of the inspection, enforceable?
FACTS: Plaintiff home buyer alleged that Defendant home inspector was
negligent by overlooking numerous problems in a condominium she purchased. Plaintiff had
signed an inspection contract that limited the inspector's liability to the cost of the
inspection; she testified that she had not read the clause, but asked that the court void
it as being against public policy, and sued for damages in the amount of $23,700. The
trial court found in favor of Defendant, whereupon Plaintiff appealed to the Georgia Court
of Appeals.
DECISION: The Georgia Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's
ruling by noting that: (1) such a clause is not void as against public policy and is
enforceable; (2) it is a general rule of contract law that the parties are free to
contract on any terms for a legal purpose; (3) if Plaintiff had sued over a contract for
the construction, repair or maintenance of a building, or for property damage caused by
the inspector's negligence, the claim would have been valid; and (4) Plaintiff could not
hide behind the fact that she failed to read the contract before signing it.