Why standard property inspections fail buyers

Why standard property inspections fail buyers

Most property surveys are little more than a box-ticking exercise; the inspector (engenheiro civil) walks through the house, taps a few walls, takes a photo of a moisture mark if it’s visible, writes a short report stating that “everything looks generally fine,” and moves on to the next job without digging any deeper.

But here’s the issue: what they don’t see or rather, what they choose not to look for is exactly where the real problems hide; structural moisture, deep-set mold, hidden leaks behind finishes, ventilation failures, and construction shortcuts that lead to long-term damage aren’t even part of their checklist, because doing so would require time, proper equipment, and real engineering expertise none of which are built into the quick survey model that sells for 400 euros and delivers just enough to shift liability away from the surveyor.

The truth is brutal: I’m constantly called in after these “professional inspections,” only to find the property has serious issues that weren’t even mentioned; problems that will cost tens of thousands to fix, and that could have been avoided had someone actually done their job with depth and responsibility.

Why is no one held accountable? Because the standard reports are designed to protect the surveyor, not the buyer; because there's no legal demand for depth or real diagnostics; because the system rewards speed, not accuracy.

So, if you’re investing in a property where you plan to live, raise your family, or protect your health and assets don’t expect that a standard inspection will keep you safe; it won’t. It’ll keep the inspector safe. That’s all.