--- title: US Home Inspector Liability Landscape description: >- Research on home inspector E&O risk, common claim types, contract and limitation-of-liability norms, and insurance market dynamics in the US. canonical: 'https://www.swiftreporter.com/research/us-home-inspector-liability-landscape' pathname: /research/us-home-inspector-liability-landscape date: '2026-08-08' --- ## 1. Claims Landscape and Allegation Trends The U.S. home inspection sector operates at a critical junction of real estate transactions, contract law, and tort liability1. Home inspectors are engaged to perform visual, non-invasive evaluations of residential properties to identify material defects existing at the time of the assessment2. However, when post-closing defects manifest, buyers frequently turn to inspectors for financial restitution1. Professional claims within this domain fall into two primary insurance categories: Errors and Omissions (E&O) and General Liability (GL)4. Errors and Omissions coverage addresses allegations of professional negligence, misrepresentation, or omissions in the inspection report—essentially claims alleging that the inspector failed to observe, correctly diagnose, or report an existing defect5. General Liability, by contrast, covers direct physical property damage or third-party bodily injury occurring during the physical execution of the inspection4. A standard GL loss scenario involves physical mishaps while traversing a property, such as an inspector stepping off attic ceiling joists and breaking through drywall, causing structural and cosmetic damage to the living space below6. PRIMARY INSURANCE EXPOSURE BUCKETS \+-------------------------------------------------------------+ | | v v ERRORS & OMISSIONS (E&O) GENERAL LIABILITY (GL) • Omissions, Missed Defects, Negligence • Direct On-Site Physical Damage & Injury • Unreported Roof Leaks & Moisture Intrusion • Attic Ceiling Breaches & Drywall Holes • Unidentified Foundation Settlement • Damaged Plumbing Valves or Fixtures • Plumbing Material Misidentification • Slips, Falls, or Ladder Accidents Historical loss data compiled by specialized program managers indicates that moisture intrusion and water-driven degradation dominate E&O claim frequency and financial severity7. Water damage claims—comprising both roof-related leakages and non-roof water intrusion—account for nearly half of all claims filed against home inspectors over multi-year evaluation periods8. Water acts as a primary catalyst for secondary structural and environmental failures, directly triggering timber decay, foundation instability, and microbial contamination8. WATER INTRUSION CASCADING LOSS DYNAMICS \+-----------------------+ | Primary Water Leakage | \+-----------+-----------+ | \+------------------------+------------------------+ | | \+-----------v-----------+ \+-----------v-----------+ | Structural Decay | | Microbial Growth | | (Wood Rot / Framing) | | (Sub-surface Mold) | \+-----------+-----------+ \+-----------+-----------+ | | \+-----------v-----------+ \+-----------v-----------+ | Foundation Settlement | | Air Quality Claims | \+-----------------------+ \+-----------------------+ Inspectors face systemic exposure because moisture intrusion often remains latent during brief inspection windows, manifesting only after seasonal precipitation shifts or altered occupancy patterns following a purchase6. | Allegation Category | Loss Frequency Rank | Primary Risk Drivers & Alleged Failure Points | Structural & Financial Consequences | | --------------------------- | ------------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | | **Water Damage (Non-Roof)** | 17 | Sub-surface drainage failure, plumbing line leaks, appliance hose breaches, site grading errors8. | Saturated subflooring, wall timber rot, interior drywall decay, basement flooding8. | | **Water Damage (Roof)** | 27 | Compromised or missing flashing, shingle degradation, clogged gutters, unsealed roof penetrations8. | Ceiling staining, truss rot, insulation saturation, roof deck failure6. | | **Foundation Defects** | 37 | Unreported masonry cracking, differential settlement, soil movement, compromised retaining walls6. | Underpinning costs, pier installation, structural destabilization6. | | **Plumbing Systems** | 47 | Pipe material misidentification (e.g., polybutylene vs. PEX), concealed supply leaks, drainage obstructions10. | Complete re-piping expenses, pipe burst flooding, systemic concealed water damage10. | | **Mold & Microbial Growth** | 57 | Unnoticed moisture accumulation, hidden leaks behind tile, carpet, or within wall cavities6. | Specialized hazmat remediation, indoor air quality litigation, tenant health claims6. | | **Structural Integrity** | 67 | Sagging roof trusses, undersized load-bearing headers, severed floor joists, unpermitted structural alterations6. | Framing reconstruction, structural engineering intervention, temporary relocation costs2. | | **Pests & Wood Organisms** | 77 | Failure to detect mud tubes, frass, or damaged framing (often subject to separate state licensing)6. | Concealed framing destruction, hollow structural members, secondary infestation liabilities6. | | **HVAC Systems** | 97 | Heat exchanger fractures, seasonal testing limitations (e.g., cooling units in winter), compressor failure6. | Full system replacement demands, carbon monoxide hazards, heating loss6. | | **Electrical Systems** | 107 | Unidentified knob-and-tube wiring, missing GFCI protection, over-fused panels, double-tapped breakers2. | Shock hazards, electrical fire exposure, full panel replacement costs2. | Second-order analysis demonstrates that claim severity scales exponentially when primary defects trigger secondary damage. A minor, unnoted $200 drain line leak under a subfloor can evolve months later into a $40,000 toxic mold remediation and timber restoration claim6. Third-order systemic factors also arise during real estate market surges. When buyers waive specialized inspections—such as dedicated sewer scopes or pest evaluations—they may later attempt to hold general home inspectors liable for sub-surface, non-visual, or latent defects that fall outside the visual scope of a general inspection6. ## 2. Pre-Inspection Agreements and Standards of Practice The primary legal defense for a home inspector relies on a well-drafted Pre-Inspection Agreement (PIA) combined with strict adherence to recognized professional Standards of Practice (SoP)1. Standardized SoPs published by national associations—such as the International Association of Certified Home Inspectors (InterNACHI) and the American Society of Home Inspectors (ASHI)—or state licensing boards define an inspection strictly as a limited, non-invasive visual examination of readily accessible systems1. LIMITS OF A VISUAL, NON-INVASIVE INSPECTION \+-------------------------------------------------------------+ | | v v EXCLUDED ACTIONS EXCLUDED AREAS • Dismantling Equipment or Components • Wall Cavities & Sub-surface Drain Lines • Moving Furniture, Storage, Soil, or Snow • Inaccessible Attics & Concealed Framing • Destructive Moisture or Materials Testing • Underground Septic Systems & Wells • Removing Drywall, Paneling, or Floor Coverings • Concealed Insulation & Roof Underlayments Under standard SoPs, inspectors are not required to dismantle equipment, move personal property, snow, soil, or floor coverings, or conduct destructive testing3. Latent, concealed, or intermittent conditions are expressly excluded11. Furthermore, general home inspections exclude code compliance checks, municipal zoning evaluations, specialized environmental hazard testing (e.g., radon, asbestos, toxic mold), structural engineering calculations, and sub-surface geotechnical assessments1. | Contractual & Procedural Provision | Structural Purpose | Risk Mitigation Impact | | -------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | | **Pre-Execution Contract Signing** | Secures client assent to all scope limits before the inspection begins1. | Prevents claims that liability limits were imposed retroactively without agreement14. | | **Inaccessible Area Documentation** | Creates a written record of obstructed or unsafe spaces (e.g., locked rooms, cluttered attics)1. | Refutes allegations of failing to inspect concealed or blocked property components1. | | **High-Density Photo Logs** | Captures conditions of defective and non-defective systems during the inspection7. | Provides time-stamped proof of baseline conditions at the time of inspection7. | | **Pre-Repair Notice & Access Clauses** | Requires written notification (e.g., within 10–14 days) before repairing alleged defects11. | Preserves the inspector's right to re-inspect and verify alleged omissions before evidence is altered12. | | **Statute of Limitations Reduction** | Contractually shortens the claim window (typically to 1 year from the inspection date)3. | Truncates exposure windows compared to standard multi-year statutory breach-of-contract limits16. | | **Third-Party Disclaimers** | Restricts report reliance strictly to the named client in the transaction11. | Shields inspectors from claims brought by subsequent home buyers or unassigned third parties11. | Ensuring that the client signs the pre-inspection agreement _prior_ to the physical inspection is essential1. Failing to secure a signed contract beforehand can render exculpatory terms and scope limitations unenforceable, exposing the inspector to open-ended common-law negligence claims14. Documenting inaccessible areas serves as a key risk-transfer tool1. When heavy storage blocks crawlspaces, framing is concealed by insulation, or high roof pitches prevent mounting, the inspector must explicitly cite these physical restrictions in the written report1. ## 3. Legal Enforceability of Limitation-of-Liability Clauses The enforceability of Limitation-of-Liability (LoL) clauses in home inspection contracts remains a heavily litigated area of professional liability law2. An LoL provision attempts to cap the inspector's financial liability to a specific maximum, typically set at the inspection fee itself (e.g., $300 to $600) or a minor multiple thereof (e.g., two times the fee)2. State courts across the United States are sharply divided on whether these liability caps represent enforceable contractual risk allocations or void terms that violate public policy2. JUDICIAL SPLIT ON LIABILITY LIMITATIONS \+-------------------------------------------------------------+ | | v v PRO-ENFORCEMENT JURISDICTIONS ANTI-ENFORCEMENT JURISDICTIONS • Uphold Freedom of Contract • Void Terms as Unconscionable Adhesion • Nominal Fees Reflect Limited Risk Allocation • Eviscerates Professional Duty of Care • Recognized in SC, TX, MD, OH • Conflicts with Mandatory E&O Statutes • Key Precedent: Gladden v. Boykin (SC) • Key Precedent: Lucier v. Williams (NJ) Jurisdictions that enforce LoL provisions prioritize freedom of contract, holding that commercial and residential parties may freely allocate risk19. A foundational decision upholding liability caps is _Gladden v. Boykin_, 402 S.C. 140, 739 S.E.2d 882 (2013), where the South Carolina Supreme Court enforced an LoL clause capping liability at the inspection fee17. The court rejected unconscionability arguments, noting that the fee was nominal relative to the potential exposure and highlighting the absence of a state statute prohibiting liability caps17. Courts in Texas, Connecticut, Maryland, and Ohio have similarly enforced well-drafted LoL provisions under freedom-of-contract principles14. Conversely, jurisdictions that invalidate LoL provisions view home inspection contracts as consumer contracts of adhesion marked by uneven bargaining power and specialized reliance16. The landmark case invalidating these caps is _Lucier v. Williams_, 841 A.2d 907 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2004\)16. The New Jersey court struck down an LoL clause capping damages at half the inspection fee ($192.50), ruling it unconscionable and contrary to public policy23. The court determined that the provision removed any meaningful incentive for the inspector to exercise due care, effectively eviscerating the fundamental purpose of the contract16. Crucially, the court pointed to New Jersey’s statutory requirement that home inspectors carry mandatory E&O insurance as evidence of a clear legislative policy to protect consumers—a policy that a nominal contract cap directly undermines20. A similar position was established in Mississippi in _Pitts v. Watkins_, 905 So. 2d 553 (Miss. 2005), where the court struck down an LoL clause on public policy grounds, emphasizing that statutory licensing and insurance requirements would be rendered meaningless if inspectors could limit liability to nominal fees20. In California, state law under California Business and Professions Code Sections 7195–7199 explicitly declares contractual terms limiting an inspector’s liability to the inspection fee to be contrary to public policy and void18. | Jurisdiction / State | Statutory or Case Law Baseline | Legal Enforceability Status | Core Judicial Rationale & Key Precedent | | ---------------------------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | | **South Carolina** | _Gladden v. Boykin_, 402 S.C. 140 (2013)19. | **Enforceable** \[cite: 17, 19\] | Valid risk allocation; nominal fee reflects limited liability; no statutory E&O bar against caps19. | | **New Jersey** | _Lucier v. Williams_, 841 A.2d 907 (N.J. App. 2004\)23. | **Unenforceable / Void** \[cite: 23\] | Unconscionable contract of adhesion; eviscerates contract purpose; conflicts with statutory E&O mandate16. | | **Mississippi** | _Pitts v. Watkins_, 905 So. 2d 553 (Miss. 2005\)20. | **Unenforceable / Void** \[cite: 20, 24\] | Violates public policy; limits compensatory damages unfairly; undermines licensing laws20. | | **California** | Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code §§ 7195–719918. | **Statutorily Prohibited** \[cite: 15, 18\] | Express statutory prohibition against capping liability at the inspection fee15. | | **Texas** | Texas Common Law / Industry Regulations22. | **Generally Enforceable** \[cite: 22\] | Freedom of contract enforced in inspection contexts when clauses are clear and conspicuous19. | | **Restricted States (AK, CA, CT, MA, NJ, NM, RI, WV, WI)** | Case Law & Administrative Statutes15. | **Restricted / Void** \[cite: 15\] | Courts or statutes deem caps unconscionable or enforce them only at higher fee multiples15. | Contract drafting techniques have adapted to address these jurisdictional divisions15. To reduce unconscionability risks in neutral or swing states, practitioners utilize specific contractual mechanisms: > - **Conspicuous Drafting**: Utilizing boldface, ALL-CAPS font, and dedicated initial blocks for the liability limitation clause to prevent procedural unconscionability claims18. > - **Structured Fee Multiples**: Establishing liability caps at multiples of the fee (e.g., 2x to 3x the inspection fee) or set dollar limits (e.g., $1,000 to $2,000) rather than capping exposure strictly at the fee amount15. > - **Alternative Dispute Resolution**: Incorporating mandatory mediation procedures and binding arbitration clauses to bypass unpredictable jury trials11. > - **Gross Negligence Exceptions**: Explicitly limiting liability caps to ordinary negligence, as courts uniformly strike down exculpatory clauses attempting to limit exposure for gross negligence, reckless conduct, or fraud2. ## 4. Insurance Market Dynamics, Underwriting, and Policy Mechanics The market for home inspector E&O and General Liability insurance is led by specialized program administrators and risk retention groups, such as InspectorPro Insurance, EliteMGA, and OREP4. Regulatory requirements play a central role in driving coverage demand; currently, 31 states (representing 62 percent of the U.S.) mandate professional liability insurance for home inspector licensure5. CLAIMS-MADE INSURANCE POLICY MECHANICS \+-------------------------------------------------------------+ | | v v ACTIVE POLICY COVERAGE PERIOD EXTENDED REPORTING PERIOD (TAIL) • Incident Must Occur After Retroactive Date • Protects Against Delayed Latent Claims • Claim Must Be Reported While Policy Is Active • Critical for Retiring or Exiting Inspectors • Requires Continuous Coverage Without Gaps • Extends Reporting Window Post-Cancellation Home inspector E&O policies are written on a **claims-made** basis rather than an occurrence form5. This requires that the alleged error occur after the policy’s retroactive date _and_ that the resulting claim be formally reported to the insurer during the active policy period or an established Extended Reporting Period (ERP or "Tail Coverage")15. An important operational distinction in insurer loss-control practices is the difference between a **complaint** and a **claim**4. A complaint represents an informal expression of client dissatisfaction, often resolved through technical explanation, report review, or a courtesy fee refund4. A claim involves a formal demand for financial compensation, legal defense, or court intervention4. To encourage early incident reporting, insurers have introduced risk-management programs like "Worry-Free Reporting" models4. Under these programs, inspectors are encouraged to report informal complaints and early-stage disputes immediately4. If the insurer investigates and resolves the matter without paying indemnity damages, the insured incurs no deductible cost and faces no premium penalty at renewal4. | Policy Element & Mechanism | Standard Market Structure | Underwriting & Risk Management Function | | ------------------------------------ | ----------------------------------------------------------- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | | **Standard Policy Limits** | $100,000 / $300,000 to $1,000,000 aggregate27. | Aligns with state statutory licensing minimums or commercial requirements5. | | **Combined E&O \+ GL Package** | Bundled dual-coverage policy structure4. | Eliminates coverage gaps between physical site damages (GL) and reporting errors (E&O)4. | | **Defense Within Limits (DWL)** | Legal defense expenses erode total available policy limits. | Controls carrier defense expenses, though it reduces available funds for indemnity payouts. | | **Tail Coverage (ERP)** | 1-year to multi-year or lifetime tail options15. | Protects retiring or exiting inspectors against delayed latent defect lawsuits16. | | **Pre-Inspection Contract Warranty** | Policy condition requiring 100% signed PIA execution1. | Failure to secure a signed contract prior to inspection can increase deductibles or void coverage7. | Market dynamics are also influenced by the adoption of specialized inspection tools15. Underwriters often require specific training endorsements or policy riders when inspectors utilize infrared thermography, sewer scopes, or aerial drones15. While thermal imaging can help detect hidden moisture, improper interpretation by an untrained inspector creates new liability exposures by generating documented thermal images that the inspector failed to evaluate correctly1. ## 5. Strategic Risk Management Framework and Conclusions Managing professional liability in the home inspection industry requires an integrated strategy combining sound legal agreements, standardized field operations, and comprehensive insurance coverage. Because judicial enforcement of limitation-of-liability clauses varies significantly by state, inspectors cannot rely solely on contract caps to protect against major loss claims15. A complete risk-mitigation framework integrates three essential operational practices: > - **Jurisdiction-Specific Contract Alignment**: Pre-inspection agreements must be tailored to local case law and statutory requirements15. In states where liability caps are void or restricted, contracts should emphasize alternative risk-shifting tools, including mandatory pre-repair notice windows, clear scope definitions, shortened claim timeframes, and binding arbitration provisions12. > - **Standardized Operational Protocols**: Inspectors should maintain strict evaluation procedures that align directly with recognized professional Standards of Practice7. Written reports must routinely identify non-inspected or obstructed areas, supported by time-stamped photographs documenting both defective and non-defective systems1. > - **Proactive Insurance Management**: Errors and Omissions and General Liability policies must be actively maintained to match operational scope4. Inspectors must maintain continuous claims-made coverage, utilize insurer pre-claim assistance programs to resolve early client complaints, and secure extended reporting endorsements upon retirement or business restructuring4. ## Works cited > 1. Tips for Risk Management for Home Inspectors - EliteMGA, [https://www.elitemga.com/articles/basic-risk-management-for-home-inspectors/](https://www.elitemga.com/articles/basic-risk-management-for-home-inspectors/) > 2. Can You Sue a Home Inspector for Missing Problems? - Ilabaca Law, [https://ilabacalaw.com/blog/real-estate/can-you-sue-a-home-inspector-for-missing-problems/](https://ilabacalaw.com/blog/real-estate/can-you-sue-a-home-inspector-for-missing-problems/) > 3. Agreement, Standards of Practice, 4M Inspections Corp, Home/Commercial Inspections, Wind mitigation, 4 Point, Snowbird, Termite, Mold, Plam Beach, Martin, St Lucie, Browrd Counties, [https://4minspections.com/agreement.html](https://4minspections.com/agreement.html) > 4. How to Handle Home Inspection Claims by Your Clients - EliteMGA, [https://www.elitemga.com/articles/how-to-handle-home-inspection-claims-by-your-clients/](https://www.elitemga.com/articles/how-to-handle-home-inspection-claims-by-your-clients/) > 5. Errors and Omissions Claims Examples for Home Inspectors - InspectorPro Insurance, [https://www.inspectorproinsurance.com/insurance-101/errors-and-omissions-claims-examples/](https://www.inspectorproinsurance.com/insurance-101/errors-and-omissions-claims-examples/) > 6. Top General Liability Claims Against Home Inspectors - EliteMGA, [https://www.elitemga.com/articles/top-claims-home-inspectors/](https://www.elitemga.com/articles/top-claims-home-inspectors/) > 7. Avoiding the Top 12 Claims Against Home Inspectors, [https://www.inspectorproinsurance.com/top-claims/top-12-claims-against-home-inspectors/](https://www.inspectorproinsurance.com/top-claims/top-12-claims-against-home-inspectors/) > 8. How to avoid the two most common claims against home inspectors, [https://www.inspectorproinsurance.com/top-claims/avoid-the-two-most-common-claims-against-home-inspectors/](https://www.inspectorproinsurance.com/top-claims/avoid-the-two-most-common-claims-against-home-inspectors/) > 9. Common Claims Against Home Inspectors: Foundation Damage Claims - InspectorPro Insurance, [https://www.inspectorproinsurance.com/top-claims/foundation-damage/](https://www.inspectorproinsurance.com/top-claims/foundation-damage/) > 10. Common Claims Against Home Inspectors: Plumbing Claims - InspectorPro Insurance, [https://www.inspectorproinsurance.com/top-claims/plumbing/](https://www.inspectorproinsurance.com/top-claims/plumbing/) > 11. PRE-INSPECTION AGREEMENT - AWS, [https://cdck-file-uploads-global.s3.dualstack.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/internachi/original/3X/1/1/11e88d3e23df98a6abac79819fa3ff74dee511e0.pdf](https://cdck-file-uploads-global.s3.dualstack.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/internachi/original/3X/1/1/11e88d3e23df98a6abac79819fa3ff74dee511e0.pdf) > 12. Inspection Agreement - Superior Home Inspections, [https://www.choosesuperiorinspection.com/inspectionagreement_printpage.html](https://www.choosesuperiorinspection.com/inspectionagreement_printpage.html) > 13. Home Inspection Agreement Template - AI Lawyer, [https://ailawyer.pro/templates/home-inspection-agreement-template](https://ailawyer.pro/templates/home-inspection-agreement-template) > 14. Home Inspectors: Key to Limiting Liability - Working RE Magazine, [https://www.workingre.com/key-limiting-liability/](https://www.workingre.com/key-limiting-liability/) > 15. Limitation of Liability: A Critical Clause in Your Pre-Inspection Agreement, [https://www.inspectorproinsurance.com/contracts-and-reports/limitation-of-liability/](https://www.inspectorproinsurance.com/contracts-and-reports/limitation-of-liability/) > 16. Home Inspection Contract | Enforceability | Time Period to Sue | Arbitration, [https://pittsburgh-litigation-lawyer.com/home-inspection-contract-enforceability-arbitration/](https://pittsburgh-litigation-lawyer.com/home-inspection-contract-enforceability-arbitration/) > 17. A Disclaimer of Disclaimers - Limits on Limitation of Liability - Goldberg Segalla, [https://www.goldbergsegalla.com/blog/professional-liability-matters/risk-management/a-disclaimer-of-disclaimers-limits-on-limitation-of-liability/](https://www.goldbergsegalla.com/blog/professional-liability-matters/risk-management/a-disclaimer-of-disclaimers-limits-on-limitation-of-liability/) > 18. Notes on the Limitation of Liability - Working RE Magazine, [https://www.workingre.com/notes-on-the-limitation-of-liability/](https://www.workingre.com/notes-on-the-limitation-of-liability/) > 19. Why Should You Include a Limitation of Liability Clause and What Should The Limit Be?, [https://gibbesburton.com/why-should-you-include-a-limitation-of-liability-clause-and-what-should-the-limit-be/](https://gibbesburton.com/why-should-you-include-a-limitation-of-liability-clause-and-what-should-the-limit-be/) > 20. I Liked It When I Signed It– But I Don't Like It Now: Limitation Of Liability Clauses - Primerus, [https://www.primerus.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Collins-Lacy_ILikedItWhenISignedIt%E2%80%93ButIDontLikeItNow-LimitationOfLiabilityClauses_Fall2013.pdf](https://www.primerus.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Collins-Lacy_ILikedItWhenISignedIt%E2%80%93ButIDontLikeItNow-LimitationOfLiabilityClauses_Fall2013.pdf) > 21. S.C. Supreme Court Holds Limit of Liability Provision Is Neither Unconscionable nor Against Public Policy - Collins & Lacy, [https://www.collinsandlacy.com/s-c-supreme-court-holds-limit-of-liability-provision-is-neither-unconscionable-nor-against-public-policy/](https://www.collinsandlacy.com/s-c-supreme-court-holds-limit-of-liability-provision-is-neither-unconscionable-nor-against-public-policy/) > 22. Limitation of Liability Provision Enforceable in Construction Context, [https://www.gstexlaw.com/limitation-of-liability-provision-enforceable-in-construction-context/](https://www.gstexlaw.com/limitation-of-liability-provision-enforceable-in-construction-context/) > 23. LUCIER v. WILLIAMS LTD (2004) - FindLaw Caselaw, [https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/nj-superior-court-appellate-division/1141669.html](https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/nj-superior-court-appellate-division/1141669.html) > 24. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI NO. 2004-CA-00062-SCT MICHAEL L. PITTS AND STEPHANIE A. PITTS v. CHARLES D. WATKINS DATE OF, [https://courts.ms.gov/images/OPINIONS/CO25219.PDF](https://courts.ms.gov/images/OPINIONS/CO25219.PDF) > 25. Terms of Service | Inspection.re, [https://inspectionre.com/terms/](https://inspectionre.com/terms/) > 26. One Clause Too Late - American Society of Home Inspectors, Inc., [https://www.homeinspector.org/reporter-articles/one-clause-too-late/](https://www.homeinspector.org/reporter-articles/one-clause-too-late/) > 27. How to choose the right home inspector insurance limits, [https://www.inspectorproinsurance.com/insurance-101/choosing-your-home-inspection-insurance-limits/](https://www.inspectorproinsurance.com/insurance-101/choosing-your-home-inspection-insurance-limits/)