Chicagoland Home Inspectors

Tim Heise was an excellent inspector. He caught a few issues in our new construction condo. First, his thoroughness caught a panel that couldn’t be opened. Second, he had a tool to test furnaces that detected an issue that wouldn’t have been caught otherwise.<br><br>We would definitely hire Tim and Chicagoland Home Inspectors again.

• Price assessment: Great price
• Services: New construction inspections

Great experience working with John. He was very knowledgeable and took his time walking us through the entire property. His inspection report provided a lot of detail. Will definitely use again on the future.

Vince provided excellent service during his inspection. He was on time, polite, detailed oriented, and answered all my questions. I also appreciate the follow up call with Charlie to go over the report in detail. I highly recommend. Thank you Vince & Charlie!

• Services: Multi-unit inspections

This was our second time working with Frank (Dattalo) as we've been hunting for our first single family home—the high level takeaway is that he's fantastic and you'd be in great hands working with him.<br><br>For our first inspection, we booked him by chance after seeing the great reviews. Despite that deal falling apart, we had such a great experience with Frank, so when we were under contract again on a different property, we knew we wanted to work with him again. He's patient, thorough, and really great at verbalizing what he's seeing as he's working … if it's as expected, and if not, what he'd like to see.<br><br>My wife and I had a lot of questions for Frank as we went along, and the inspection felt like a long conversation with someone we felt had our best interests in mind. We were on site ~4.5 hrs, and I felt very confident we knew what we were getting into.<br><br>He hope to stay in this property a long time, but if we found ourselves needing another inspection, Frank would be at the top of our list.

• Price assessment: Reasonable price
• Services: Sewer line scope

We hired Alex from Chicago Home Inspector for a full inspection of our Chicago condo, and the work was clearly above the usual walk-through standard. He arrived on time, set expectations for the visit, and worked through the unit methodically rather than rushing room to room. Common areas, the mechanical systems, the electrical panel, plumbing fixtures, windows, exterior envelope items visible from the unit, and the typical condo constraints around shared structure were all covered in a way that was easy to follow.<br>The most valuable finding was a leakage in the HVAC system. It was not obvious on a casual walkthrough, and we would have missed it without a careful inspection. Alex located it, showed us the evidence, and explained what it meant for the unit, including likely causes, why it mattered, and what kind of follow-up to request from the seller or a contractor. That single item justified the inspection on its own and gave us a concrete point for negotiation rather than a vague concern.<br>What stood out more broadly was how he explained what he was seeing while he worked. He distinguished between defects that needed attention, items that were normal wear for the age of the building, and observations that were informational rather than urgent. He was patient with questions, did not overstate problems to create drama, and did not dismiss items worth documenting. Safety notes and maintenance recommendations were practical.<br>The written report matched the verbal walkthrough. Photos of the HVAC leak and the other findings were clear, comments were specific to the unit rather than generic boilerplate, and the summary made it straightforward to prioritize follow-up with the seller, the association, or a contractor. Communication before and after the appointment was prompt and professional.<br>If you are buying a condo in Chicago and want an inspector who is thorough, clear, and willing to explain the reasoning behind the findings, Alex is a strong choice. We would use him again.

We were disappointed with CHI.<br><br>First, the good: our inspector was great on site, conducted a seemingly thorough inspection, and answered all my questions patiently and professionally. He also identified a requested chimney scan as unnecessary given a metal chimney, and refunded the amount, which we sincerely appreciated.<br><br>Now to what disappointed us. When we received the inspection report, we were surprised to find seemingly material issues described that did not reflect my understanding of the findings conveyed to me verbally during the inspection. Having raised these issues with our inspector (who, to his credit, was very responsive), I understand that these discrepancies arose from his use of generic, template descriptions while drafting the report that did not necessarily reflect the actual findings of the property.<br><br>For instance, a description of one issue noted having “observed significant water intrusion” despite the inspector having reportedly not actually observed any water intrusion in the inspected unit. Again, to his credit, after we raised these issues, our inspector revised the report, including by correcting the above referenced issue. Unfortunately, however, these revisions delayed negotiations with Sellers and required that we request an extension to a deadline.<br><br>In any event, the use of template descriptions in an inspection report felt problematic for a few reasons.<br><br>First, in order to effectively negotiate resolution of findings with Sellers, we needed timely and accurate information in the report as to the issues with the property. Because I did not conduct the inspection and therefore could not distinguish between actual issues and inapplicable template descriptions, it was difficult for me to discern the true condition of the property based on the initial report we received, and to structure our requests from Sellers accordingly.<br><br>Second, I anticipate that one day we may sell the property that is the subject of the report, and we will need to make accurate representations and disclosures about the history of the property at that time. In preparing those representations and disclosures, I suspect that we may wish to refer back to this report. But the use of template descriptions not actually reflective of the state of the property, at least in the initial report, would likely undermine our ability to identify required disclosures and possibly lead to disclosure of issues that were described but not actually found.<br><br>Third, if I recall correctly, CHI’s own terms states something to the effect that the written report represents CHI’s final say on findings—not to be conflicted with verbal assertions over the course of the inspection. Given the importance that the agreement places on the written report, I was surprised by CHI’s use of template descriptions that inaccurately described findings.<br><br>Separately, with respect to the follow-up call that CHI offers, no representative from CHI was available for this call during the week following our Sunday inspection. Although there were some open times the following week, given the timing of our closing, we were unable to benefit from this call prior to the conclusion of inspection review. At the recommendation of an employee, we reached out to Charlie directly to see if he might be able to accommodate us before the end of our inspection period, but we did not receive a response by the time of posting this review (about three days after emailing him). To be fair, we understand Charlie may have been traveling for a conference at this time, but it was nevertheless disappointing.<br><br>The stellar reviews suggest our experience was not necessarily reflective of CHI’s ordinary level of service. And we did find our inspector knowledgeable and responsive. Still, due to the issues described above, we cannot recommend. If you do proceed with CHI, confirm in advance that your inspector will carefully curate any template or generic descriptions of identified issues to ensure your report accurately reflects the state of the property inspected.

I couldn’t have asked for a better home inspection. Mike Schejbal was incredible at explaining everything in detail, extremely thorough, and very knowledgeable. Being a first time home buyer, I am incredibly grateful for this! He put my mind at ease in my decision to buy an older home. Thank you!!

HIGHLY RECOMMEND!<br><br>Our inspectors, Tim and Alex ,were great—on time, super thorough, and didn't mind at all when we tagged along asking a ton of questions. It was raining, so they even used a drone to check out the roof. We got a 124-page report the next day that was super detailed with clear pictures and arrows pointing right at whatever needed attention.<br><br>The best part, though, was the video debrief with Charlie, the owner. He spent almost two hours walking us through everything, giving us his honest opinion on what was actually a big deal versus what was just code, plus realistic cost estimates and contractor recommendations. They went above and beyond. Seriously the best inspection experience I've had.

Tim was great - thorough, professional, and took the time to explain everything to me as he was going through. I also found the post inspection debrief call very helpful!

We decided to go with Chicagoland inspectors for our first time home based on the glowing reviews. We're so glad we did, and the work definitely lives up to the reviews. Glen-Carl was friendly, communicative, and incredibly thorough. He clearly explained everything about the inspection and answered all our questions. The use of high tech tools like the thermal camera made us feel much more comfortable with the results. We are so glad we used this company and would not hesitate to use them again!

• Price assessment: Great price
• Services: Sewer line scope