At the time, I was very happy with the inspection. The inspector was very reasonable and down to earth. I was attempting to purchase a house that was in poor condition for my first gut rehab project. The inspector showed up early, worked the place and gave me a few very good pieces of information that I ended up using. However, I found out just before purchasing that the city inspector had determined this property to have several code violations, many of which were minor. A couple were not. The inspector had indicated that the back deck was old, but sturdy. But, by the city, the back deck of the property was considered "dilapidated", which required me to tear it down and build a new one, which was not one of the costs I was hoping to incur at this junction. When I had the city inspector through, he noted several of the signs that should have been very obvious to anyone that knows this information. For example, someone had sawed a big section of the supporting beam, which was very unsafe. Also, there is a slight vault, which indicates that the deck is sinking and that the footings were incorrectly placed. I feel that the inspector should have known this. Lastly, there were a couple of heating units, which since they had no pilots lit, he was unwilling to check. This seems reasonable. However, I had the gas company come out and there were a couple of flex pipes being used to the house space heaters that I was told must be hard pipe. I think he probably should have noticed this as well. I admit, I had a tougher house than most, however, this was not a cheap inspection service, so I expected a little more. When I contacted the offices, I heard the same thing from everyone I talked to, which was "We don't check against codes, we only check safety", however, the topics I ran into were safety issues and not so much codes.