Should the decision to get an inspection be based on purchase price?

[Mathew A.]

I would like to hear your guys' thoughts on whether or not to get inspections on cheaper homes. Since the price of inspections are pretty much tied to the size of houses, inspections for expensive houses represent a smaller percentage than for cheaper houses. For example, a $300 inspection for a $20,000 house represents 1.5%, while a $400 inspection on a $200,000 house is only .2%. Is it still worth it to get an inspection on the $20,000 house?

1.5% of the purchase price is huge. After 67 inspections, I will have paid for an entire property! When dealing with $200,000 houses, I will have had 500 inspections before totaling the cost of one property.

However, the costs to replace/repair things shouldn't depend on the price of the house. For example, the cost to replace the water heater is going to be about the same in the $20,000 house as in the $200,000 house. A $20,000 house can have $30,000 in repairs like any other house, and may even be more likely to have those repairs.

Then again, you hear more about a $10,000 foundation problem on a $200,000 house than you do on a $20,000 house. Why do you think that is?

So, would you (assuming you're a novice investor) get an inspection on a $20,000 house?

[Account Closed]

i think the best thing to do is learn to inspect yourself, so nobody can take you for a ride....i paid for an inspection on my first property and quickly found out it was a waste of money. now, i walk a property with my main contractor..between him and myself, i know what i'll have to spend..if i'm not sure, as noted in another thread, i'll bring in the specialist of that trade to give me a hard quote (such as foundation, plumbing, etc.) besides, the inspector will just tell you wha'ts wrong, while your contractor will find the problem and tell you the price to correct it..what's a better use of your time and money?? after doing this a few times, it won't seem necessary to pay for inspections