Oakville Homes

September 8, 2011

Fact checked Blog: Shark fin soup or house inspectors – what’s your priority?


Brantford has banned it and Mississauga, Toronto and Oakville are looking into it.

What’s all the fuss about – bad builders, broken building code or illegal wiring?

No, Shark Fin soup.

Seems that the politicians are putting in a lot of overtime working out the particulars on whether or not this is a municipal or federal function and want to ban the sale of Shark Fin soup within their municipal borders.  I’ve had this soup but must agree that to just cut off the fin and throw away the shark is a terrible waste of a resource and an unnecessary cruelty to the shark (although us Navy guys might think differently if you consider the fate of the Indianapolis in WWII).

But, this blog isn’t about soup – as they say, No soup for you.  No, I find it ironic that they will spend considerable time and resources fighting over the shark fin soup but when offered an idea that would protect homebuyers, they shy away from it and say – Not my job man.

The T0wn of Oakville, under the then leadership of Ann Mulvale, had the opportunity to pass a bylaw that would ensure the homeowner the right to a house inspector.

You say they already do.

Yes, it is standard practice now that a potential homebuyer for a RESALE can put in an offer that the sale is dependant on an inspection by a house inspector.  Try that with a NEW home.  Mattamy is already on record as banning one house inspector from assisting with PDIs and I understand they demand a house inspector sign a form that limits their input during a PDI.

*Fact Check – if this is wrong Mattamy, please let me know*

Now, any reasonable person knows that checking a house after it is built is somewhat limiting.  Most house inspectors can’t follow the documented “Mike Holmes” method of checking a house – ripping out walls.  A good inspector should be able to spot issues via the clues that they leave – stains, recent repairs, etc and this can help a lot but, it is limiting.

Those who build commercial buildings – owners, are able to have a person/people on site that check the construction and ensure quality and building code standards for their projects.  Matter of course.

So, why can’t a homebuyer do the same thing.  Hire a professional and licenced house inspector to monitor the construction and make sure all that hidden stuff is done properly.  It’s their investment.  Unless you are a poor quality builder, what is wrong with this picture?

Well, according to our Provincial government, they can’t pass this legislation as it will cost the homebuyer money.  Unlike the McGuinty specials we have seen in the last 4 years – HST, hydro, etc, etc.  I guess they feel that doesn’t cost us money.


And to think, we actually elected this type of thinking.

Now, our esteemed municipal politicians do in fact plan ahead, sometimes.  We call it the “Official Plan“.  How the community is going to be developed over time.  Obviously there are those not always in favour – landowners and developers but, they do have input and there is a final plan so everyone can understand the game plan.  Donations might bring slight changes though.

If our municipal leaders are so concerned  about our growth and welfare why can’t they legislate into the official plan that any developer who wants to do business in the municipality must allow a homebuyer the RIGHT to have a house inspector check their construction.

Oh, right.  The taxpayer pays for building inspectors to enforce THE CODE.  Well, if you’ve read this blog, we all know how building inspectors have done – Town of Oakville building inspection allowed furnace to be illegally wired for sale.  Kind of overlooked the issue I guess.

Also, for those into tract housing, most building inspectors do not visit every home in the sub-division.  They select (is it the one with the liquor bottle on the stoop) a sampling and if it is up to snuff, they all get passed.  I guess they don’t understand that the same crew does not build each home – different guys on different houses = different quality.  Simple formula to understand.  Some build quality and some build shit. Simple.

So, I ask those in charge – how about looking into having a “right to a house inspector” bylaw made and I’ll stop having shark fin soup.

Remember – one saves the sharks and the other saves the lives and promotes the safety of your constituents.  Who gets to vote for you?

*Note to Mattamy lawyers – all the facts stated in this blog are true to the best of my knowledge.  If you feel there is something wrong – you know how to get hold of me.  I’m open to any suggestions. Sorry Peter – not that one, I need to sit on it.

*No sharks were de-finned in the writing of this blog.

Construction Blogs - Blog Catalog Blog Directory



* The above is intended to show the reader examples of how to obtain a house inspector, no matter which builder you buy from. Remember, awards and advertising are designed to make you buy, not ensure you quality. We’ve shown that awards are not the standard on which to base your decision on. My use of my experiences are not made to embarass Mattamy Homes or Peter Gilgan but, are used because they are based on fact and show the larger picture that a house inspector is a requirement when buying a house, new or old from any builder. My experience only shows that in fact it can happen and is a fact of life. Your experiences with Mattamy may have differed.


Leave a Comment »

No comments yet.

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: