Law Requires Disclosure of Lead Paint

QUESTION: Is there a new law requiring the removal of lead paint from older homes?

I’m buying a home that is 35 years old, and the seller says she’s not aware if there is any lead paint in the house. The home inspector did not reveal any lead paint because he doesn’t test for it. I’m afraid of exposing my family to hazardous conditions that may be present in these older homes. What do you suggest I do?

ANSWER: To begin with, there is no law requiring removal of lead paint from older homes. There is, however, a new disclosure requirement for sellers to divulge any knowledge regarding the presence of lead paint. This new rule, however, is of marginal benefit, since most sellers have no way of knowing the composition of old paint in their homes.

As a general rule, lead paint is almost certain to be found in most older buildings, but professional testing is needed to be absolutely sure. There are some home inspectors who perform lead tests, and you can find them in the Yellow Pages under the heading of Lead Testing and Consulting.

Before 1978, most wall and trim paints contained lead, a component that significantly improved the ease of application and the durability of the material.

Lead paints were phased out because of health problems that were found to exist among some children. It should be stressed, however, that the mere presence of lead paint does not pose a significant health hazard, because actual exposure to lead toxicity occurs only when particles of the material are inhaled, as when painted surfaces are sanded, or when chips of paint are ingested, such as when small children teethe on the woodwork.

If you’re buying an older home, you can assume that some of the paint probably contains lead. If you plan to remove any of the old finish, have the paint tested before commencing work. If lead content is verified, removal should be assigned to a qualified professional.

Inspection Insurance Is an Individual Option

Q: We purchased a home two years ago and hired a home inspector to find the hidden defects. Since then, we’ve experienced numerous problems that were not disclosed in the inspection report. When we called the inspector, we discovered that he does not carry malpractice insurance. Isn’t it required that licensed home inspectors be insured?

A: In most states, home inspectors are neither licensed nor required to maintain insurance coverage. Those inspectors who carry insurance do so as a matter of choice; as an expression of their professional commitment to quality and accountability.

In so doing, they recognize that any inspector can make a mistake in the course of an inspection and that steps should be taken to protect themselves and their clients from damages that might thus be incurred.

Insurance for home inspectors, by the way, is commonly referred to as errors and omissions insurance, not malpractice insurance.

There are two basic types of this coverage, with differences that can have serious long-term consequences.

The most common type is called a “claims-made policy.” The less common but preferable type of coverage is a “per-occurrence policy.” With claims-made insurance, coverage for an inspection remains in effect only as long as the inspection company maintains its policy. Any lapse in continuous coverage results in cancellation of insurance for all past inspections.

Further, an insurance company that issues a claims-made policy may cancel coverage of all past inspections when a policy is due for renewal. Companies usually do this if claims are filed by the inspector. This means that an inspector may be insured on the date of the inspection but uninsured when it’s time to file a claim.

On the other hand, a per-occurrence policy offers permanent, noncancelable coverage for every inspection performed during the policy period, even after the policy has been discontinued.

Gas Company Shuns Perilous Copper Pipes

Q: Last month, we bought a 35-year-old home. The property was very well maintained, so we decided not to waste money on a home inspection. Now it seems that we made a big mistake. After we closed escrow, the gas company discontinued service because the gas pipes are made of copper. They say that copper is unsafe and steel pipes should be installed. How can the old pipes be a problem if they’ve worked properly for all these years?

A: Copper gas piping is very rare and is usually found only in homes constructed during the mid-1950s. Copper was disallowed many years ago because natural gas contains traces of sulfur, and sulfur has a corrosive effect on copper. Corrosion in a gas line can cause leakage, a decidedly unfavorable occurrence.

Fortunately, deterioration to that extent is very rare. More commonly, sulfur-induced corrosion produces loose particles of debris, which can clog gas orifices, reducing the safe and efficient operation of burners and regulators.

In your home, the gas system has apparently been operating for decades without noticeable problems. But this does not mean an incident cannot occur in the future. The interior pipe surfaces have been exposed to sulfur for many years, and the cumulative effect of this exposure could be significant.

Old copper gas pipes, however, are often coated with an interior lining of tin to protect the copper surfaces from sulfur exposure. If that is the case with your piping, there should be absolutely no need to repair or replace the lines. To determine whether your pipes are tin-lined, a licensed plumber should evaluate the system.

Had you hired a qualified home inspector before purchasing the property, copper gas piping would most likely have been brought to your attention at that time, rather than after the close of escrow.

Corrective work, if needed, could have been negotiated.