Thread: Anyone Still Use Paper Inspection Forms?

Just wondering if anyone still uses the Paper forms. After spending 3 hours putting a report together, there a days that some of these paper forms look pretty good! I doubt I could every bring myself to use them, but a guy can dream

Similar Threads:

• Who here uses Robo forms?
• inspection forms
• FHA Inspection Forms
• fha inspections forms
• odd fireplace forms

Hello Donald - nothing wrong in my opinion with a good paper report system. I am involved with a company that sells both paper-based and 3D computer based in Canada.

Our general "business" market indicates that we still have a large portion of our clients still favoring paper-based. Personally I have used both and found the paper-based typically does not take that much more time, and it is not dependent on other support systems such as recharging and down time when the computer or system crashes, let alone the cost invested.

In our case, the paper-based system provides a template for our computer based system. If you look at ongoing cost of investing in software and hardware and potential ongoing maintenance, it simply boils to personal choice.

Thanks Claude, that's nice to know. I was looking over some of my reports from years past and it dawned on me one day. If I took most of the explanations out as to why something is wrong, then I'd have a pretty simple report in most instances. But then again, some people need that added info...not to mention pictures!

Originally Posted by Donald Lawson

Thanks Claude, that's nice to know. I was looking over some of my reports from years past and it dawned on me one day. If I took most of the explanations out as to why something is wrong, then I'd have a pretty simple report in most instances. But then again, some people need that added info...not to mention pictures!

Looking back my very first reports (1986-87) simply acted as a "punch list" of defects or potential concerns. A few of them just 1 and a half to 2 pages at best. My background is architecture and building design, hence the punch list approach was what I commonly used as my report reference form based on my phase inspection job site reviews.

After joining ASHI I changed my reports to mirror SOP compliance. So first and foremost any decent report "must" adhere to an industry "established" standard.

Being involved in testing and report review over the past 10 years, I often see reports that fail to be SOP compliant, or ones with computer based reports containing lots of photos and graphic images that in my opinion that can also fail to report the full detail of how the photo or image impacts the client.

I happen to use the reporting system to which Claude referred.

Personally, I like this reporting system as it is in depth and extremely self explanatory. My clients are always impressed when the report is prepared (with DVD) and I sit down with them to explain my findings and my recommendations.

Bryce Jeffrey - CMI

If your clients want paper, sure give them paper. My clients want to scroll through the report on their cellphones. Not just kids anymore, greybeards are scrolling away on cellphones, something of a novelty 2 or 3 years ago. If you try to go back in time you will fade away or be trampled by competitors with gadgets.

I would not waste any effort on paper reports, because the pictures are so important now. People won't read reams of text, no time for that, they will skip over the text and look at your pictures.

Describe the problem, half a sentence, and give the consequences, finish first sentence. Second sentence, give them an action, done. If you can't type, develop a library, cut and paste.

Picture with circle arrow and maybe a label. Give the defects a personal touch, that's the pic and the 2 or 3 sentences. Then throw in the descriptions of other stuff and more pics, roof, attic. Report done in about 80 minutes, cover page on there and pdf published. If it takes 3 hours for an average house, you need better software.

Well John I've used about every piece of software that's on the market. Doesn't matter who's software it is, still takes me a lot of time. For example, home a few days ago was 2000sf older home in great shape. Still took over 100 photo's and ended up with about 42 discrepancies. By the time I assembled this report, I had 3 hours into it.

Part of what takes time (besides editing photos) is the actual wording. I use very little boiler plate because none of it is specific enough for every home. And by the time I get done editing it to make it specific, heck, it's sometimes faster just to write it from scratch.

I'm seeing more and more people who just want to know the discrepancies. Most of the people asking for simpler reports are investors and those who've owned several homes over the years. They already know the dangers of lead, FPE panels, asbestos tiles, knob & tube wiring, etc, etc. They want to get down to business and not have to read through a dissertation on the home.

Right now most still want the computer generated report with photos, but I'm seeing a good amount of people who are believing "less is more".

NOTE: I did order NACHI's paper report, but it doesn't look like it will work for me. I wanted to order the Matrix Advantage Report from Kaplan/ITA but the $13 report was going to cost me $13 in shipping! So for now, I'll do the "Basic" reports on my computer.

The thing about "boil plate" narrative in your library, is you can change them a little for each home. I have hundreds of narratives in my library that are fairly long (more than a sentence or two). I can just add a small comment to it to customize it for the specific home. Its a lot less time than writing several sentences, or a paragraph each time you find that defect.
In fact, when I would find a defect more than a couple times, I would add a new boiler plate narrative to my library.
It saves a lot of time.