SoPRFI Texas Complaints

Here is a sneak preview of the complaints that have come in from January to March 2010. The reports are inconsistent and vary in length from 6 pages to 76 pages. I suspect most inspectors do not comply with the SoP. I suspect they want to but do not know how. That is the reason for

I redacted identifying info although anyone can go to TREC and get the stuff. The purpose is not to harm an inspector but to learn from their mistakes. Please no radical negative posts on the complaints. They are there for learning.

John, The 76-page report has a reference to the inspector in it. Contact me for the page number

I know it’s wrong and I should feel ashamed, but I’m getting a kick out of some of the hand written comments in the first report.

I would love to see what TREC’s response to the complainant looks like… Will they respond in general or point by point? Will they tell the complainant that he needs to report his electrician to the TDLR for being incompetent?

Gotta watch all that boilerplate and make sure it applies to the house being inspected (e.g., gas appliance related comments being applied to non-fuel burning appliance). Also, I never liked the use of terms like “must be repaired”. We report defects, but don’t dictate repairs (this may be a holdover from the prior version of the TREC form which required the inspector to report repairs needed rather than deficiencies).

With the last comment in the body report, the seller appears to be complaining about the limitation of scope excluding pressure testing of gas lines, where he quips “lots of things appear to be”. Does he really want the inspector to expand the scope of his inspection even further?

I agree. Regarding the 76 page report, I read the complaint and was thinking, “wow, sounds like the inspector was a goof.”

Then I read the report and the hand written comments. I may not produce a report with that much verbiage, but it seems the complainant is mistaken in several areas. And the electrician he hired is incorrect about neutrals.

I see on the log home report, the inspector didn’t check any box regarding “fireplace” and has a note to refer to “outside the scope”. I read the “scope” but saw nothing about fireplaces.


I updated redacting. If you look at the 76 page report it is:

1 - TREC standards at each section
2 - TREC limitations at each section
3 - supporting code
4 - supporting pictures
5 - lots of helpful hints on things outside the scope of inspection.

All well done but a big bite for most consumers. I really do not see material problems with the inspectors report. By gosh how does one create such a report with typical prices. Do you think TAR would like to see every report taken to this level?

I also enjoyed the hand written comments. Appears to be sour grapes. The seller should have had his home inspected and if he did then call his inspector, not shoot the messenger he did not hire.

I’ve never believed there is too much information you can provide as a buyer will just skip over and read what they want anyway. As for pricing it doesn’t cost to add information. All you do is create a master format file and add/subtract from it. A buyers expectation is very high and they want information. Just ask your next client what they expect from the inspection and report. I don’t think anyone will tell them they’ll be getting less information than you know because you are worried about what some other trade organization thinks.

The basis of any inspection IMO is - put yourself in the shoes of the buyer, would you want to know this information?

Just because the report is made out to be a long report is not an issue except to ones that might write short reports (in their opinion). It’s only about 44 pages and the rest is added information. I see a lot H.I. web sites full of fluff, puff and apparent misrepresentation.

I liked the adding of the TREC limitations as it helps lower the expectation of what an inspector is doing. One can always exceed the minimum standards but if one doesn’t understand the SoP how do they know if they are even meeting the minimum? Also, one certainly can’t argue with a line item if it is backed up by a reference. (The SoP is code based anyway) I started adding the TREC sections as much as possible this year. That’s my signal to others I am required to disclose and didn’t pull the items out of thin air.

The question should be what did the buyer think of the inspection? If the buyer is happy then it was a great inspection.

Report writing and inspections did change with SB 914.