Do any inspectors on this platform use the multiple summary feature on Home Inspector Pro? It’s also known as the “Advanced Colors and Summaries” feature when selected from the desktop drop down menu.
It allows the user to break the summary comments into different categories with different-colored text and titles.
Here’s a JPEG snapshot from the training video to show what the design has the potential to look like:
Summary comments could be any category that the user wants, but the ones mentioned in their training video includes the following:
Safety Concerns
Defects
Maintenance
Minor Defects
Personally, I think that four different categories is excessive and has the potential to confuse clients.
However, I’m considering breaking my summary comments into two different categories. Safety concerns would be red text, and defects would be blue text.
Would it even be possible to put all of the summary comments into just two categories? Would two categories be overly simplistic? What categories would you use?
Do you think that breaking the summary into multiple categories introduces excessive liability to the inspector?
Does this feature create a lot of extra work when producing reports?
Do you think that breaking the summary into multiple categories is too confusing for other people who are reading the report?
Would this feature help the client rate the importance of items that are mentioned in the summary?
Here’s the training video that shows how to implement the design feature in the report:
What moved me away from HIP was the inability to use the Summary as a means to effectively communicate what is important and what is less so. I ditched HIP after negative feedback from clients.
I have a thorough summary page. I have two categories of importance that I focus my client to: Major (Repair items that require immediate attention or that are not working at the time of the inspection.) and Safety (Conditions and items that are unsafe and in need of attention.)
The rest of my categories run from Moderate > Maintenance > Future Project > Energy Efficiency. This allows me to perform a thorough and detailed inspection without overwhelming my clients. I categorize and list every finding on a summary page.
Is liability the main reason you don’t want to offer a more thorough summary? Is your current summary working with your buyers and realtors? For me, being able to categorize and list every finding in the summary is important. Thus, my preference.
If you want four categories, you might consider Major, Safety, Moderate, Minor/Maintenance
Liability is one reason why some inspectors don’t like to categorize findings. Do what’s best for you and your clients.
One step in finalizing my report is to review categories. All my findings are already categorized, but I’ll change a few of them for the report.
That’s the feedback I received that ultimately moved me away from HIP and to software with a better system of categorizing findings in the summary.
Major and Safety are my two important categories, prioritized in that order. Major has the potential deal breakers, although not all major items are deal breakers. Edit: IMO, an active leak at a sewer vent boot (Major) is more important than a missing GFCI breaker in the kitchen (Safety).
We use HIP but do not use Multiple colors or ratings. It is not our job to rate a deficiency! By putting a tag of Minor, Major, Monitor, or whatever, you are essentially softening the severity of that issue. Yes, real estate agents love this method of reporting, but it is also the most confusing to your client! I have worked on many home inspector litigation cases over the years as an expert for defendants and plaintiffs on cases where the inspector used a “rating” system. In all of them, the “plaintiff or client” said they did not understand the severity of the problem.
I highly recommend not using ratings or colors to indicate the severity of an issue. Items are either OK, broken, defective, rotting, installed improperly, or not performing as intended/designed!
Here lies the problem! The agents want to prioritize the defects! Everything we report on should be addressed.
What I tell my clients (the agents are not my clients) is that they need to pick and choose what they feel is the most important. An example I give them is: “A roof is more important than a dripping faucet, but a dripping faucet will also not get better. So, they both should be corrected. A rotting window frame will allow water into that wall area, so it is important.” This tends to help them understand that all of the items we note need to be taken care of.
That’s exactly how I do it. My software allows me to choose or categorize each defect automatically or with the click of a button.
But as @bcawhern1 stated, it’s important to make clear to your client what exactly constitutes a major defect, minor defect or a safety defect, in the opinion of the inspector. I also have category’s for “requires further evaluation” and “make inquiry with current owner,” which simplifies the summary and makes it easy for clients to understand.
In Indiana. licensees shall “be objective in their reporting and not knowingly understate or overstate the significance of reported conditions.” Rating a defect is subjective. For this reason, I do not rate defects.
Which category does adding downspout extensions to a home go in? It can seem like a pretty trivial item.
A couple of years ago, the lawn mowing service that I use did not put the extensions back after they got done. I was gone and came back to some pretty significant water in the basement after a pretty heavy rain.
Ok that helps me understand the risk of ratings. I’m not editorializing in reports for clients that are unable to think for themselves. What if my summary contained the categories of Safety Concerns and Defects? Would that require too much subjective interpretation about the severity of the problems?
Why not just report this way: “The door frame is rotting at the base. Repair or replace as needed; if this is not corrected, water could enter the interior of the home.”
If you feel it is a safety concern, tell your client that…. “The GFCI does not trip. This is a safety concern. It will most likely need to be replaced. Contact a qualified electrician to make the needed repairs.”
This is just a simple example of how we report on items in my company.
I do have several summaries, but for defects, not so much. I have a summary on:
Where emergency shit offs are for gas water and power.
I have a summary I use for if there is unclear info and the seller needs to be asked something, more to remind the buyer and agent to ask if we discussed it
I use a summary when doing new and 12 months so that anything the builder should be on the hook can easily be pulled out from the report.
I have a summary I will use when an agent needs to do more diligence with a specialist and get further evaluation. For WA, this allows them to extend the contingency period. It also can be pulled from the report easily and shared with a seller if asked for, and it will just be that specific item/deficiency only.
So, I guess over time I have made different catagories that will get summaries, just to make the info clear to someone or standout, but for defects I do not. Feedback I get from agents and others is appreciative, but I know there are a lot of ways to “skin that cat”
What comes to mind is a situation where the location of the main water shutoff to the home is missing or unlabeled. Does a different summary for clarifying information from the seller have a different color text, or different level of importance, or priority, than the other summary?
My summary only includes the items in my report that have been identified as “repair and replace’. I don’t make any distinction between severity of problems - I just have this one category for action items. However, I do use a narrative format for my write ups. I essentially write 1) what I saw, 2) why that could be a problem, and 3) what to do about it. In most situations the what-to-do-about-it is “contact a qualified contractor for further evaluation and/or repair”. Sometimes if I want to go out on a limb for the benefit of my client (my conscious decision) I will give further advice.
Your neighbor, Wisconsin, requires a summary page. Inspector there cannot use the word defect unless it’s meant to describe a material defect. Deficiencies should be categorized as 1) defects, 2) components needing repair, 3) components needing further evaluation, 4) items to monitor, and 5) maintenance items.
It seems unusual to put in a summary, but perhaps it’s to help the reader see it early so they can get to asking the seller about it ASAP. I’m not saying that it’ll be in my summary, but I’m trying to understand his reasoning for putting it in his summary.
