There were signs of paint and drywall cracking on the
ceiling. The area was tested with a moisture meter at the time
of the inspection and showed high moisture. This should be
monitored for further damage or possibly water intrusion.
How can that be a canned comment. They state that the area tested wet, and then go on so say that it needs to be monitored for further damage and moisture intrusion. Someone is not reading what they write, or they have no idea of what they are doing.
I doubt the ENTIRE response was canned. But, I’ll bet the original canned response was: There were signs of paint and drywall cracking on the ceiling. The area was tested with a moisture meter at the time of the inspection and TESTED DRY. This should be monitored for further damage or possibly water intrusion.
The “showed high moisture”, was likely the inspectors ridiculas contribution.