Would you waive inspection on an older Montreal duplex at C$1,019,000?

[hana.slate]

We’ve lost two offers on older Montreal duplexes to buyers with fewer conditions. We’re now considering a five-bedroom property at C$1,019,000. It looks reasonably maintained, but its age and the mention of possible service charges make waiving inspection feel reckless.

Our agent suggested shortening the inspection window. Would a pre-offer inspection or a contingency limited to major structural findings be a sensible compromise? I’d especially value examples of how buyers have handled this around Montreal rather than general market headlines.

 

[iris_shore]

I wouldn’t limit protection to structural defects. Expensive trouble can also come from plumbing, electrical systems, moisture or the roof. If the seller permits access, a pre-offer inspection is the cleaner compromise. Otherwise, keep a full inspection condition but shorten the deadline and arrange an inspector before submitting. I’d also ask an insurer whether anything about the building’s age could affect coverage.

 

[MinaGale]

Is the offer for the entire duplex, or for a unit with some form of shared ownership? The service charges need explaining before you decide anything. Find out exactly what they cover, who controls spending and which repairs are shared. A decent-looking interior tells you very little about those future obligations.

 

[MinaGale]

Also, don’t assume both lost offers came down solely to inspection. Price, financing conditions, deposit and closing date may all have mattered. Ask your agent what is actually known about those winning bids. Shortening the window only helps if an inspector is already available, so line one up now rather than after acceptance.

 

[aisha_asks]

There is a downside to repeated pre-offer inspections: you may pay for several and still buy nothing. Even so, at C$1,019,000 that cost may be easier to absorb than an unknown major repair. I disagree with using a “structural only” clause unless its meaning is made very clear locally. A short inspection condition with a straightforward right to withdraw seems less likely to create an argument over whether a finding qualifies.

 

[AdaFord]

Work backward from the cash you would have left after closing, not just from what the lender will allow. Set aside moving costs, the first mortgage payment, an insurance excess and a real emergency fund. Then add a separate amount for immediate repairs identified by the inspection. Furniture can wait; unsafe wiring, active leaks or failed heating cannot. If buying leaves no room for that second pot, fewer conditions are not the main problem.

 

[ari_drew]

A practical sequence would be: clarify the service charges and ownership setup, get insurance questions answered, reserve an inspector, and decide your maximum repair exposure before writing the offer. Then compare a pre-offer inspection with a very short full inspection condition. Have the exact wording checked by the Montreal professionals handling the transaction, because a narrowly drafted contingency may protect less than you expect. If the seller refuses access and demands no inspection, walking away remains a valid competitive decision.