Plaintiff appeals from an order of the Civil Court, Bronx County (Francis M. Alessandro, J.), entered December 14, 2004, which granted a motion by defendant Douglas for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

PER CURIAM

Order (Francis M. Alessandro, J.), entered December 14, 2004, affirmed, without costs.

Summary judgment dismissal was properly granted in defendant's favor, in the absence of any triable issue as to whether defendant acted negligently or breached its contractual obligations in performing a pre-purchase home inspection. The inspection report by its terms was limited to a "visual examination of the readily accessible portions of the building and its equipment" at the time of inspection and disclaimed any guarantee as to the premises' "fitness or habitability" (see Kogan v Fenster, 191 Misc 2d 525 [2002]), while additionally advising the plaintiff to re-examine the property prior to closing. Plaintiff's opposition papers contained no competent proof that any defective conditions that may have existed at the time of closing — six months after the inspection — readily could have been discovered by the visual inspection contracted for by the parties (see 470 Owners Corp. v Richard L. Heimer, P.E., P.C., 258 AD2d 558 [1999]; Bonsignore v Imperial Extermination Co., 249 AD2d 351 [1998]).
This constitutes the decision and order of the court.
I concur I concur
Decision Date: May 4, 2006