[smileysteve]

While the inspector recommended by your agent might be fine, there is an implied incentive/bias for the inspector to help close the sale;

The recommending agent is a marketing arm for the inspector; if the wrong deal falls apart because of the inspection, the inspector knows the agent isn't going to get their commission, whether or not that means they'll recommend them with as much fervor the next time can be largely dependent on how badly the agent needed the money that time.

But, by hiring without an agent referral; the inspector has no incentive to approve a house that shouldn't be approved; you're not going to be the new marketing arm. Indeed, absent a relationship with an agent, the inspector has an interest in inspecting as many properties for you as possible, and therefore finding as many deal breakers as possible.

[paradygm]

The flaw here is in thinking just because you find an inspector on your own that makes a difference in incentives. Who do you think the inspector has the most incentive to impress? The buyer whom they most likely will never see again or the agent who can potentially provide more and more clients?

[smileysteve]

This is my point in the last paragraph; you should ideally never let them meet.