Your Builder Has Supplied a Dilapidation Report: What Should You Check?
A report arrives from the builder next door. It contains photographs of your home and a request to confirm it. Before replying, you want to know whether it records the right areas, whether anything important is missing and what your response might mean.
Start by checking the address, inspection date, scope and the actual observations. You do not need to identify the cause of every crack to notice that a room was missed or a photograph has been labelled incorrectly. If you want an independent condition record or help discussing a suitable inspection, send ClearScope the report and your concern.
First establish why the report was prepared
Ask who commissioned the report, which works it relates to and what it is intended to record. A builder arranging the appointment is not, by itself, evidence that the observations are unreliable. Equally, the builder’s involvement does not mean you should accept an inaccurate record without asking questions.
Check whether it is an ordinary before-works record or part of a formal protection-work process. The BPC’s adjoining-property information explains that protection work has its own requirements. Ask the relevant building surveyor how this particular document fits the process.
Keep any notice, cover email and acknowledgment request with the report. The accompanying wording can matter just as much as the photographs when deciding what professional advice you need before responding.
Check the identity and timing carefully
Confirm the property address, unit number and inspection date. Look for any mismatch between the cover, body and photograph labels. If the work is next to a unit development, make sure your dwelling and any shared areas have not been confused.
Was the inspection before demolition, after demolition but before excavation, or later? A report only records what could be observed at its stated time. If work had already started, ask for the chronology to be accurately described rather than assuming the report proves the earlier condition.
Compare the timing with your own records. A dated email about access, an original photograph or a repair invoice can help clarify a discrepancy. Keep those originals. Our guide to arranging a baseline explains why the relevant works date needs to be specific.
Match the stated scope to the areas visited
Read the inclusions and exclusions before counting photographs. Does the report say internal and external, exterior only, selected rooms or nominated boundary areas? Were those areas actually accessible? A report can be correctly limited, but its limits should be clear.
Check rooms closest to the works, external elevations, paving, fences and outbuildings against the agreed scope. Do not assume a roof space, concealed footing or underground drain was examined because the report says “property inspection”. Ask for clarification where wording implies more than was possible.
If a report excludes an area you believe should be recorded, identify the area and the reason. A specific request is easier to resolve than saying the report is incomplete without explaining what is missing. The dilapidation service page provides context for discussing a separate scope.
Look for observations you can locate again
An effective condition record connects photographs and descriptions to identifiable places. You should be able to understand whether an image shows the kitchen ceiling, a side elevation or a particular section of paving. A very close photograph without context can be difficult to revisit.
Check that descriptions match the images and do not attribute a condition to the wrong surface. If a crack you pointed out is absent, say where it is and whether it was accessible at the appointment. Do not enlarge or compress a photograph and then assume its appearance provides a reliable measurement.
Ask whether a correction or supplementary inspection is appropriate. Editing a PDF yourself can create competing versions and obscure the original evidence. Request a clearly issued amendment through the report provider instead.
Existing defects should be recorded honestly
It may feel disadvantageous to acknowledge a crack that predates the works. A baseline is intended to document existing condition, including imperfections. Omitting an existing crack does not make a later comparison stronger.
The opposite matters too: a report should not describe damage as present at inspection if you believe it was not there. Raise the discrepancy calmly and attach the information you have. Separate what you personally observed from what someone told you.
Avoid turning the correction request into an unsupported causation argument. “The hallway image is labelled bedroom” or “the rear wall was not accessible” is a factual point. Whether nearby work caused movement is a different question, potentially requiring records and specialist assessment beyond a visual condition report.
Read limitations rather than treating them as small print
Furniture, vegetation, stored items, locked areas and unsafe access can restrict observations. A report should not imply that a concealed surface was fully checked. If it notes a restriction, consider whether another appointment with better access is needed for your purpose.
Ask about vague phrases such as “all areas satisfactory” where detailed coverage is unclear. Does that mean no visible damage in accessible areas, or something broader? A condition record is not an engineering assurance that your house can withstand proposed excavation.
For a defect that is already concerning you independently of neighbouring works, discuss a scoped inspection through Services. It may be a different assignment from recording a baseline. Explain the question you want answered so the service is not chosen solely from the document’s title.
Take care with signatures and acknowledgment wording
Do not sign something you have not read or do not understand. Ask what the acknowledgment covers: receipt, access, agreement about recorded condition or another matter. If wording appears to release rights or accept responsibility, seek advice about that wording before responding.
Where formal protection-work documents are involved, do not let a request for report clarification cause you to miss a notice deadline. Ask the relevant building surveyor or your adviser how to deal with the notice and the condition record in parallel.
ClearScope can discuss condition observations and an inspection scope. It cannot decide the legal effect of your signature. Consumer Affairs Victoria’s building guidance is a useful starting point for finding the appropriate advice pathway.
Send one organised correction request
Use a short list with the page or photograph number, location, concern and requested clarification. For example: “Page 8, rear bedroom: the image appears to show the front bedroom. Please confirm the room label.” That example illustrates wording, not a finding from an actual ClearScope inspection.
Group access issues separately from factual errors. If a room was locked, say whether access can now be arranged. If a condition changed after the appointment, disclose that date rather than asking for the new condition to be presented as original.
Keep the response and any amended report together. Ask which version is final and how other recipients will receive the correction. A clear version history makes a later comparison easier for everyone involved.
Decide whether a separate inspection would answer your concern
An independent appointment may help where important areas were not recorded, the scope does not suit your concern or you want a separately commissioned record. It will still have its own timing and access limits. A new inspection cannot recreate surfaces that have since been repaired or concealed.
Send the supplied report before booking, explain which areas need attention and disclose whether works have begun. ClearScope can discuss what an additional record could usefully achieve. Avoid paying for a second document simply because it is called independent if it does not answer the missing question.
You can view report examples to understand reporting style and compare quote scopes before deciding. Confirm the actual inclusions and fee for your property.
Keep a usable record during the works
Retain the original report, correspondence, access notes and any relevant works dates. If you later notice a change, record the location and when it was first noticed. Keep original photographs with enough context to identify the surface.
Our follow-up comparison guide explains how an earlier record may be used. A difference is evidence to consider, not automatic proof of cause or responsibility. Changes in access, finishes and lighting can also affect what is visible.
If something appears unsafe, prioritise safety and appropriate urgent assistance. Do not enter the neighbouring worksite or investigate an unstable structure to improve your photographs. A report-review appointment is not an emergency response.
Keep receipt and agreement distinguishable
If you are uncertain what is being requested, ask the sender to explain it in writing. Retain that explanation with your response. A practical clarification about a photograph and advice about signing a document may need different people.
Ask about the gap that matters to you
You do not have to decide whether the entire report is “good” or “bad” before seeking help. Start with the specific uncertainty: omitted areas, unclear labels, timing, inaccessible surfaces or the meaning of an acknowledgment.
Contact ClearScope about a dilapidation inspection with the address, supplied report, works dates and your main concern. We can discuss an appropriate visual condition-record scope and the questions that need the surveyor, engineer or legal adviser instead.