TOPIC: Lastest NOVAhi Template

Bumping this thread as they are such great examples.

I've been examing the various reports/templates, and also appreciating the discussion.  There seem to be valid concerns from each direction.  I think alot of photos are key, but not so many in the reports that one could be tripped up later.  Showing various elevations, and rooms/closets especially if there are things in the way is good.  On the other hand, as Dominic pointed out, the same photo could show a problem missed.  There was a photo in one of Serge's reports of a garage access door.  This door had a huge step on either side, that could easily be a trip hazard, the photo(s) were provided to show in one example of a drainage/foundation moisture problem, but right there was that trip hazard.  I thought, he may have some exposure if someone trips and gets injured, and then looks back at the report.  So, we should really inspect our inspection photos.  2nd, There was a discussion on the fireplace, and it had some disclaimers about not being able to inspect the flue. It did not recommend having a certified fireplace expert examine, if new home owners wish to use, or something a bit more specific about the potential hazards with the fireplace.  It seems to me that this might be a huge risk if there is ever a creosole or CO hazard latter.  In this case, there is good reason to be CYA oriented, it would seem to me.  In the end, excercising caution with (nearly)everything reported is key, especially if we are trying to generate reports quickly & get on to the next inspection.

Like you said Bruce, there's pro's and con's to both sides. I think the most important thing is to zoom in on the problem you're going to be discussing and like you said, just review your photos.

Like you said Bruce, there's pro's and con's to both sides. I think the most important thing is to zoom in on the problem you're going to be discussing and like you said, just review your photos.

Yes, here's another example.I believe its from the same sample report as the one with the trip hazard I mentioned above.  There is a photo showing the underneath of where a deck meets the wall.  The inspector rightly caught and photo'd the stain & algae running down the siding at the edge of the deck underside, suggesting the deck needed repair in this area to mitigate the stain.  Yes.  But, what was missed was the stain pattern contoured directly to a light fixture where it magically terminated.  Its possible (probable) that the run-down was entering both the electrical housing and penetrating to structure at this point.  So, this photo could prove a double-edge sword, by missing those other aspects, particularly if later someone decided to change a bulb and instead provided a direct ground path...or if mold/rot developed in the house.  Often when we are inspecting we zero in on an issue, and may miss the broader awareness that could be caught upon later review.

Here's the take-away, I thnk photos (many) are really good, but if we're being quick to get reports out, trying to beat some speed record, we are more likely to miss issues that provide liability evidence later...especially if we are relying soley on our camera, or a small screen tablet/netbook in the field.  Personally, my tendency will be to re-inspect any photo I submit to record, probably that evening, and before the report is delivered.  All 3 of the issue I flagged, are from the same report btw (& they weren't the only issues observed in the photos posted)...a report that (otherwise) is quite professional and one I appreciate seeing and intend to follow, as I get further along with HIP.  I also appreciated Steven Teretsky raising the liability issue on how we use photos.

I am a new user of HIP software and I want to thank serge for creating a similar design to the AHIT reporting system. AHIT is very poor when it comes to software but the report style has kept me going for over ten years. To all old AHIT users try Serge's template. Thanks again.

I did not know that!
Glad it works out for you!