Let’s be honest—pre-listing inspections make agents and sellers nervous.
“Why reveal issues the buyer might never notice?”
“I don’t want to uncover problems we have to disclose.”
“This could increase our liability.”
“I’ve seen these reports kill deals before.”
“Sellers don’t want to spend the money.”
I hear these concerns all the time. And I get it.
As the owner of a home inspection company, I spend a lot of time thinking about how to reduce liability—for everyone involved. I’ve had long conversations with brokers, attorneys, and real estate professionals. This part of the industry is evolving, and there’s no one-size-fits-all answer. But based on what I’ve seen, this approach seems to be the safest, smartest way forward. If there’s a better way, I want to hear it.
What Are Agents Actually Required to Do?
A lot of hesitation around pre-listing inspections comes from uncertainty about disclosure laws. Let’s clear that up.
1. Agents Must Seek and Disclose Material Facts
In North Carolina, agents are legally required to actively seek out and disclose material facts.
Even if a seller marks “No Representation” on the Residential Property and Owners’ Association Disclosure Statement (RPOADS), an agent must still disclose any material fact they know about.
If a buyer’s inspection uncovers a major issue, and it was something an agent reasonably should have known, they could be held liable.
“A real estate broker has a duty to discover and disclose material facts.“
— North Carolina Real Estate Commission (NREC)
2. What’s Considered a Material Fact?
A material fact is anything that could influence a buyer’s decision. That includes:
✅ Structural issues (foundation cracks, roof leaks, water damage).
✅ Malfunctioning systems (plumbing, electrical, HVAC problems).
✅ Environmental concerns (mold, radon, lead-based paint, flood zones).
✅ Title or legal issues (property liens, zoning violations).
✅ Neighborhood factors (planned developments, road expansions).
3. The “Walk-and-Talk” Approach Isn’t a Safe Workaround
Some agents look for quick, informal assessments as a way to gauge a home’s condition without triggering disclosure obligations.
The problem? North Carolina law requires home inspectors to provide a written report if they evaluate more than two systems.
A verbal “walk-and-talk” doesn’t avoid liability—it creates more risk because it leaves gaps in documentation.
General contractors are not a substitute for licensed home inspectors.
If Pre-Listing Inspections Aren’t Perfect, What’s the Least Risky Approach?
We all look for ways around tough situations. But sometimes, the only way out is through. Avoiding issues doesn’t make them go away—it just means they show up later, when they’re harder to control.
So, how do agents avoid liability surprises, buyer walkaways, and bad inspection reports that wreck deals? Many find that the safest play is to take control of the process early.
1. Encourage Sellers to Get a Pre-Listing Inspection
It eliminates last-minute surprises that could tank a deal.
It allows sellers to fix, disclose, or negotiate from a position of strength.
It reduces the chances of price drops, long days on market, or buyers walking away over inspection findings.
2. Help Sellers Understand Their Disclosure Obligations
Some sellers think “No Representation” protects them. It doesn’t.
If they opt out of a pre-listing inspection, some agents have them sign a document acknowledging their choice.
If they do an inspection, they can attach the report (or a summary) to their disclosure statement and reference it in the RPOADS.
3. Find the Right Balance of Disclosure
Some agents share the full report with buyers for transparency.
Others provide a summary version that highlights key takeaways.
Either way, hiding known issues is not an option.
The Bottom Line
Pre-listing inspections aren’t always easy—but they put sellers in control instead of leaving them at the mercy of the buyer’s inspection.
If you’re looking for the lowest-risk, most controlled approach, a pre-listing inspection is often the best play. At the very least, getting sellers to sign off that they declined one reduces your liability.
That’s how I see it, but I know not everyone handles this the same way. What’s your approach? Have you found a better way? Let’s keep the conversation going.
