Home inspector isn't responsible for high sales price

Dear Mr. Azrael,

I had a contract to sell a large barn in Maryland with settlement date set for April 2, 2001. The contract consisted of a bill of sale which did not mention a home inspection (or barn inspection).

Two business days before settlement, I received a report from a home inspection company listing a substantial number of problems. Subsequently, I received a phone call from the buyer's lawyer desiring to lower the sale price.

Since time was of the essence and no effort had been made to lease the barn beyond the settlement date, I reduced the price and went to settlement a day later on April 3, 2001.

Since the inspection was made without my permission or knowledge and nothing in the contract allowed for an inspection, do I have any legal right to sue for damages for the difference between the contract price and the actual sale price, or could I file trespass charges against the home inspector?

Rudolph S. Stewart Sherwood Forest

Dear Mr. Stewart,

I don't believe the property inspector is legally responsible for the reduction in the sales price of your barn.

You could have refused to change your agreement and could have held the buyer to the bargain he made. You reduced the sales price voluntarily. You can't blame the inspector for that.

I doubt that a civil action against the inspector would be successful under the law of trespass, interference with a contract or any other legal theory. It's also highly unlikely that a judge could find the inspector guilty of criminal trespass under the facts you present.

Unless there's more to this transaction, you should have stuck to your guns and told the buyer's lawyer that you would sue the buyer for breach of contract if he did not complete settlement and pay the agreed price.

Blaming the inspector is not a law case. It's a case of sour grapes.

Jonathan A. Azrael is a principal with the law firm of Azrael, Gann and Franz in Towson.