Tennessee Home Inspection Report; please review

[Brian E. Kelly]

Originally Posted by dandersen

Is what you see in Blue in my report.

I MUST fill in the blanks (which will state why, if any of these could not be inspected).

Yes David I read where you added your state's SOP in blue throughout your report. It pretty much says what you SHALL inspect, not what you DID inspect.

[David A. Andersen]

Yes, the narratives will be in black for recommendations - red for significant issues below, along with pictures etc.

I only have done one report with this an it has not closed escrow so I will not post it.

You'll just have to use your imagination!

[Stephen W. Stanczyk]

"A representative number of interior doors were operated".

Sorry but that just doesn't make for good customer service. In order to perform even a bare minimal inspection, you would have to enter a room. You have to pass through or at least operate each and every interior door. Why wouldn't you test every one of them and state that? And if it was blocked open by personal effects, locked shut or didn't operate properly, that too would be specifically stated.

All interior doors and hardware were operated and functioned satisfactorily at time of inspection.

OR if there are defects on one or more doors:

All interior doors and hardware were operated and functioned satisfactorily at time of inspection except those noted specifically below.

Doors are unique, unlike windows or electrical receptacles where you may only test a representative sample. But doors that you have to walk through in order to perform your inspection?

If you are going to build a template, you might as well add any options / language that you have used before. The initial build takes longer but once it is done and your own wording is incorporated, you only add new items that you run into.

JMHO. Best to you.

[Wayne B. Wilson]

I don't know about you all but i check all windows and doors and outlets in every room, Just for my peace of mind.

[David A. Andersen]

Sorry but that just doesn't make for good customer service.

\\This is about report writing, not inspecting.

You want to change the state law...

I want to get away from all this made up crap floating around in this industry.
You change the wording to the law here and where will this take you later.

This is exactly my point about all of this!
It doesn't matter what you like or dislike. The law is the law.

Yes, I check every door. The law says you can exceed the rules. But, what if I get sued for a door? (slight chance) but it could be something else... I am required only to report what the law requires. If I happen to check every door, I'd say it covers the representative number required. There are a lot of doors with those damn over the door hangers that damage the door, and prevent closing them without removing all the clothes. If I don't move personal property (which is also not required) and the door fails, I get sued... I'm not liable because I am not required to inspect all doors. Those hangers are responsible for most door damage. So there are two reasons not to have to inspect the door.

By the way, do you remove every child protection plug in wall outlets to test every receptacle? #1 you only have to test a representative number of outlets, #2 you don't have to move personal property, #3 most of this child proofing is just inspector proofing! It may take 8hrs to inspect some of these houses. #4 do you move furniture to get at the child proof outlets?

Again, some of this disclaimer stuff is starting to show through, Home Inspectors are making up Standards of Practice as they go along. You can inspect more than what is required but when your report starts to look like 99 pages of "disclaimers" on things you are not required to inspect in the first place, I think it is a bigger disservice to your client and to the industry.

How many of you that have been sued were sued because your service was compared to what other HI's elected to exceed in the SOP? The law suit becomes an interpretation of what is commonly done, rather than what is required by the standing SOP. This report format spells out what the law states. I can report anything I want to below these letters of blue. But the Standards are clear. And when you do go one step further for your client, it is more obvious that you did.

Been sued for an HVAC problem?
There is only about 1% of HVAC that you are responsible for in TN under the SOP.
This goes on in court because of implied interpretations of observations within our industry. Take a look at a dozen or so HI web sites and see what is said about HVAC. There are some, but not many HVAC guys doing HI. If you got in trouble over HVAC, it is likely you were trying to keep up with Joe Home Inspector or were assumed to be required to fully inspect this equipment.

[Stephen W. Stanczyk]

Originally Posted by dandersen

\\This is about report writing, not inspecting.

You want to change the state law...

I want to get away from all this made up crap floating around in this industry.
You change the wording to the law here and where will this take you later.

This is exactly my point about all of this!
It doesn't matter what you like or dislike. The law is the law.

Yes, I check every door. The law says you can exceed the rules. But, what if I get sued for a door? (slight chance) but it could be something else... I am required only to report what the law requires. If I happen to check every door, I'd say it covers the representative number required. There are a lot of doors with those damn over the door hangers that damage the door, and prevent closing them without removing all the clothes. If I don't move personal property (which is also not required) and the door fails, I get sued... I'm not liable because I am not required to inspect all doors. Those hangers are responsible for most door damage. So there are two reasons not to have to inspect the door.

By the way, do you remove every child protection plug in wall outlets to test every receptacle? #1 you only have to test a representative number of outlets, #2 you don't have to move personal property, #3 most of this child proofing is just inspector proofing! It may take 8hrs to inspect some of these houses. #4 do you move furniture to get at the child proof outlets?

Again, some of this disclaimer stuff is starting to show through, Home Inspectors are making up Standards of Practice as they go along. You can inspect more than what is required but when your report starts to look like 99 pages of "disclaimers" on things you are not required to inspect in the first place, I think it is a bigger disservice to your client and to the industry.

How many of you that have been sued were sued because your service was compared to what other HI's elected to exceed in the SOP? The law suit becomes an interpretation of what is commonly done, rather than what is required by the standing SOP. This report format spells out what the law states. I can report anything I want to below these letters of blue. But the Standards are clear. And when you do go one step further for your client, it is more obvious that you did.

Been sued for an HVAC problem?
There is only about 1% of HVAC that you are responsible for in TN under the SOP.
This goes on in court because of implied interpretations of observations within our industry. Take a look at a dozen or so HI web sites and see what is said about HVAC. There are some, but not many HVAC guys doing HI. If you got in trouble over HVAC, it is likely you were trying to keep up with Joe Home Inspector or were assumed to be required to fully inspect this equipment.

Exactly. It is all about report writing. So if you inspect all the doors, why aren't you informing your client of that fact? If you aren't testing a door for a reason (door hangars or whatever), are you relying on the "representative number" language to protect you? Or are you going to inform your client you didn't test the door because ABC... What if there is damage? Do you ignore it relying on the representative number language or do you report it?

Do I remove the child protective plates from each receptacle? If I can reach the receptacle without moving furniture, I will remove at least 1 of the 2 caps to test. Do I remove appliance cords from receptacles to test? If it does not affect timers or electronics.....Yep you bet. Does it take more time. Yep. Oh well.

Do I want to change the law? Nope, not at all. The representative number is the bare minimum the state requires. Just like building codes are the bare minimum....... not necessarily best practice but the bare minimum. When my client pays the bill, it sure isn't the $179 bare minimum special. They pay more, and their report will show that.

I still don't understand why, if you inspect all the doors, it isn't reported to state exactly that fact. Say you inspect them all but only put down you inspected a representative sample and you get sued over a door (I agree slight chance). Now you come back to the client's lawyer and say, I inspected all the doors. My first question as a lawyer would be, "then why didn't you report that in the first place? What else didn't you report?" Why the language games?

[David A. Andersen]

I still don't understand why, if you inspect all the doors, it isn't reported to state exactly that fact.

What is inspected is spelled out under the law.

If there is nothing wrong, there is nothing to report except what the law requires.

If there is something wrong it is reported.

Why do you feel that you need to list everything you did?
This means if you inspect a few outlets, you must tell which ones you did and the ones you did not do?

It says you will inspect ALL exterior entry doors. The reports says "all doors were inspected", if not, why. If there is damage, you add that in. If there is nothing wrong, there is no reason to add anything. You did and reported what was required.

Adding things are OK is not the reason for the Inspection Report.
The reason is to "Report" the items in the state law and things that are significantly deficient and/or a safty issue.

If it is not in the report, it is assumed under the law that there was nothing wrong.
The report is to deal with things that were found deficient, not to list what you did all day. The law says what you will do and report, each and every inspection. There is no reason to add to this.

The reason to report that "A representative number of interior doors were operated"
is because that is what you are required to do and report.

Nothing says you can't add pages and pages of fluff. If that makes you feel good, great! I'd rather spend the time at the house with the client than spending that time writing things in the report that is not required. The more stuff in the report that is not relevant, the greater the likelihood that they won't read it all and later make a complaint. I have received several complaints over the years where they just didn't read the report. All I had to do was print out the page of the report and send it to them to read again!

Again, do as you wish. I'm just presenting another option for consideration.

I guess I don't have to ask what you think of check box reports!

[Stephen W. Stanczyk]

Originally Posted by dandersen

What is inspected is spelled out under the law. No, the law spells out the bare minimum of what is to be inspected and reported. Unless you only inspect to the minimum standards.

If there is nothing wrong, there is nothing to report except what the law requires. Ever heard of customer service? Don't you think the client has paid for the information you may be leaving out of your report? As a purchaser of a service, I want to know what was done to earn the fee I am paying. That's why I shop seriously prior to buying anything.

If there is something wrong it is reported.

Why do you feel that you need to list everything you did?
This means if you inspect a few outlets, you must tell which ones you did and the ones you did not do? If I test all the doors or window or outlets, I tell them all the doors or windows or outlets were tested. You use the same software I do. You check a box and your prepared commentary is inserted. It takes the same amount of time to check one box as it does to check the other. If I cannot test an item, as part of the service the client paid for, I inform them.

It says you will inspect ALL exterior entry doors. The reports says "all doors were inspected", if not, why. If there is damage, you add that in. If there is nothing wrong, there is no reason to add anything. You did and reported what was required. And an "A" student, "B" student and "C" student all pass. Personally, if these students were doctors, I would want the "A" student performing the surgery. As a parent, do I want John Wooden to coach my kid or do I want Bobby Joe "put the ball in the circle" from the local high school to coach him? I don't want the minimum, I want all the information. I did pay for it.

Adding things are OK is not the reason for the Inspection Report.
The reason is to "Report" the items in the state law and things that are significantly deficient and/or a safty issue. Opinions differ as do services.

If it is not in the report, it is assumed under the law that there was nothing wrong. Does it specifically state that in the law? I doubt it. Assume? No way.
The report is to deal with things that were found deficient, not to list what you did all day. The law says what you will do and report, each and every inspection. There is no reason to add to this.

The reason to report that "A representative number of interior doors were operated"
is because that is what you are required to do and report. "C" Student work.

Nothing says you can't add pages and pages of fluff. If that makes you feel good, great! I'd rather spend the time at the house with the client than spending that time writing things in the report that is not required. The more stuff in the report that is not relevant, the greater the likelihood that they won't read it all and later make a complaint. I have received several complaints over the years where they just didn't read the report. All I had to do was print out the page of the report and send it to them to read again!

Again, do as you wish. I'm just presenting another option for consideration.

I guess I don't have to ask what you think of check box reports!

So with your software, your choice is to highlight the commentary you want and put it in one of the two selection panes . How does it take any longer to put it in one pane and not the other?

Sure, it takes a little time to originally write the comments and put them in the template, but once it is done and saved, it is always available. Why the bare minimum? Would you accept that for your own purchases or services you are paying good money for?

[David A. Andersen]

Let's just let this lie. You are missing the entire point.

When completed, this report is about twice as big.
What your looking at in this sample is the bare bones template, which buy itself fulfills the state requirement. The point is not to make it shorter, but to make sure you covered everything and not miss a single thing.

My second point is that this is the wording of the law, not stuff that has been made up by HI's along the way.

HI's spend huge amounts of time trying to figure the age of HVAC equipment, which is not a requirement in this state (and most others). We can debate this one too, but there is nothing significant about the age. You may say that I'm cutting corners...
The fact is that I do more of an HVAC evaluation than anyone else is capable of. I do not report that it is ok. I report only that which is wrong.

If this template can help you do a better and faster job, great. If you can't swallow it, like I can't swallow the disclaimer reports I follow up on, than don't worry about it.

[Brian E. Kelly]

I think you are heading in the right direction David and it should help you reduce your report writing time.

[David A. Andersen]

It's a work in progress.

I have no intention to skimp on the inspection, just the reporting we have already "drilled to death on site".

Hell, since I made this template, I have done nothing but inspections on near perfect homes! I can't even try it out!

[bkelly1]

I have seen some of David's past reports and after doing so I began working on mine to shrink it down. His knowledge of reporting and "how to" is very indepth, and I can tell you that EVERYTHING is inspected and nothing is skimped. I for one look forward to seeing ( and maybe stealing) the finished product.

PS Dave if you want to write a full report, come across the river to some of the crap holes I have landed here. I just keep diggin further on "the most hated list" I had another H.I call the other day and he said a Realtor told him he would never call me again, because I call out everything. When the market slows, the ethics go.

[David A. Andersen]

Thanks, Ben.
I will swap reports with you again soon. No stealing required!
As I said, I'd need to let things go to escrow (even with client permission it can come back and bite you in the butt).

When the market slows, the ethics go.

So true! Can hardly blame them with the way things are, but...

My Agent yesterday told me a lot of agents hit the road for greener pastures. But not the "crappy ones"! I guess not making money now is the same as not making any money before!!!

[Peter Severtson]

Unfortunately, an inspector is forced to cover himself. Naturally, the best defense is a thorough inspection, but California lawyers, for example, don't care what the SOP says! They file anyway [and the inspector's E&O funds the suit]. Then the E&O company throws the inspector under the bus, writes a check, bills the inspector for the "deductible" and raises the inspector's rates, when it's a totally frivolous case. It shouldn't make it past "motion to dismiss" but does.

It's really corrupt. It used to be that way with workman's comp insurance until a law was passed protecting...guess who? Insurance companies. It's not about what's right, but about who's got the power or money - same thing.

I know an inspector who got hit with a suit because the seller filed to disclose a death in the house sold. Another got sued over defects in a pool that wasn't built at the time of the inspection. Go figure!

So ya got to cover yourself. It's unfortunate, but it's a corrupt game where insurance makes the inspector a target.

[Robert W. Jude]

looks good! I think you need a first page that explains what you are doing with each section- kind of like the long thread you posted here so we knew your intentions.