According to established protocol, one should first make an offer and sign a contract, and only then have the home inspected. By obtaining a commitment from the buyer, the seller gains the upper hand, forcing the buyer (after an inspection) to either honor the agreement or come back to the table. In our case, the seller is allowing the inspection before an offer or contract; (if he would have refused, we would have walked away).

Not only does the encouraged order of things - (contract then inspection) - obviously benefit the seller, to underline this advantage and remind the buyers of their place, the seller also has the right to veto a home inspection outside of a contract. We are lifelong renters who are looking seriously at a house that was built in 1836. Not knowing protocol, In my ignorance I scheduled the home inspection first, thinking that would help me in determining further interest and possible offer. It seemed logical. I was chastised. I stood my ground. I understand that someone could swoop in with an offer in this interim, but to me, (especially in this Caveat Emptor state), knowledge is more important than a few hundred dollars. And what about Caveat Emptor? We encourage the buyer to beware, but we establish protocols and we make rules and we enforce laws that put the buyer at a disadvantage. It is the way of property and power and wealth.