When Two Property Professionals Disagree About a Finding

14 January 2022

Different conclusions about a property concern may reflect different access, methods or information. Compare those differences before assuming that one professional is careless or that the most reassuring answer is correct.

A practical approach

Ask each person to explain the observation, the work performed and the basis of the conclusion. Provide the same relevant records where appropriate. Identify whether one assessment examined a concealed area or used a specialist method that the other did not. For significant unresolved concerns, seek a suitably qualified independent assessment rather than collecting informal opinions until one matches your preference.

Close the loop on an unresolved finding

An unresolved item should have a next action, a responsible person and a clear record of what information is missing. Otherwise it can disappear between the inspector, contractor, seller and buyer. A short follow-up log is often enough: original observation, question asked, response received and any remaining limitation.

Do not change the original report to make it match later work. Keep subsequent documents beside it so the sequence remains understandable. If a professional reaches a different conclusion, ask for the evidence and scope behind that conclusion. Differences can reflect new access or information rather than an error. The important point is to preserve a traceable explanation of how the concern was investigated and what was actually resolved.

Know when an engineering question is separate

A general inspector may identify conditions that call for structural evaluation without being able to establish the cause, capacity or repair design. Movement, altered supports and unusual loading questions can require an appropriately qualified engineer or other relevant specialist. The need for referral is useful information, not a failure of the inspection.

Give the specialist the report, photographs and available history of alterations or previous repairs. Ask what needs to be examined before any design or reassurance is offered. Avoid removing supports, opening structural assemblies or testing a questionable area by loading it. A contractor's repair estimate is not automatically an engineering assessment. Keep the roles clear so the proposed work follows an appropriate diagnosis rather than a cosmetic interpretation of the visible symptoms.

Ask questions that produce usable answers

Replace broad questions such as "Is the house good?" with questions about evidence and limits. Ask what was observed, how the condition was checked and whether the cause is established or only suspected. Then ask what additional information would change the recommendation. This creates a clearer path than asking the inspector to predict the exact remaining life of every component.

Write down questions while reading the report and group them by system. A contractor can then answer repair questions without having to reconstruct the whole inspection. Distinguish an explanation of a finding from a request for a new service. If an area was inaccessible, a follow-up visit may be necessary; an email description of the hidden space cannot replace an examination of it.

An example to work through

A general inspector may flag visible movement while an engineer later evaluates the structure with additional access and records. The later explanation should show how the new information addresses the original concern.

What to check

Compare the questions each person answered.
Identify new access or evidence.
Keep written conclusions and limitations.