Under the section, Check the Site’s Drainage, the section concludes with
“When poor site
conditions exist, they can often be overcome technically, provided there are no land-use
restrictions involved. However, the added cost of design and non-conventional
foundation construction (such as an elevated foundation and/or special drainage
features) should be considered a significant part of the expense of building a house. It is
usually very costly to correct site drainage problems and foundation moisture issues
after the fact. Therefore, the inspector must be very careful regarding
the recommendations s/he makes about a site with poor drainage.”
I get that the actuality of correction can be difficult and expensive. This statement could lead one to believe the inspectors recommendations should be based on the difficulty level of repair, not the guidance of best practices/code (yes, we’re not code inspectors…). Is not the job of an inspector to observe and report? Not, observe and temper your report of difficulty of correction/repair.
Thoughts that can help make this make sense?