Two-Stage Property Inspection Review And Audit Trail

In Blog, Solving Inspection Problems by John AntillLeave a Comment

Learn how Brightchecker’s two-stage review preserves the original inspection data, allows the reviewer to make changes, and maintains a robust audit trail.

A survey has been completed.

Now someone needs to check it.

That person might be the original inspector.

It might be another member of the team.

It might be someone carrying out a formal quality check.

The question is:

What happens when the reviewer needs to change something?

The problem with simply editing the original

In a basic system, the reviewer changes the answer.

The original answer disappears.

Now you have a new version, but you don’t necessarily have a clear record of what was originally submitted.

For some inspections, that is a serious problem.

You may need to know what the inspector actually recorded on the day.

The original remains untouched

BrightChecker’s enhanced review process separates the original submission from the reviewed version.

There is always an original view.

That is what was recorded when the inspection was submitted.

The review view starts out exactly the same.

But when the reviewer changes something, the system records that it has been altered.

You can therefore distinguish between the original submission and the reviewed information.

You can revert individual changes

The reviewer doesn’t have to commit permanently to every change.

If they change an answer and later decide they preferred the original, they can revert that question.

That makes the review process much less risky.

You can experiment.

You can change your mind.

You can return to the original.

Photographs are treated differently too

Photographs present another problem.

Suppose an inspector took a photograph and later realised that it belonged somewhere else in the survey.

Deleting it and uploading it again could lose important metadata.

So instead, BrightChecker allows media to be reused.

The original photograph remains available, including its associated information such as GPS and timestamp.

You can suppress it from one part of the survey without destroying it.

And if you change your mind, you can reactivate it.

Reordering photographs

Reviewers can also reorder photographs by dragging them into the required sequence.

That can make a significant difference to the final report.

The reviewer is looking at thumbnails, but can click into a larger lightbox view when they need to examine a photograph or video in more detail.

A library of standard comments

There is also a comment library.

You can store commonly used paragraphs or snippets and associate them with keywords.

For example, a reviewer working on an issue involving asbestos can search the comment library for “asbestos” and bring up the relevant prepared paragraphs.

They can then insert the appropriate wording into the review.

That can help improve consistency without forcing every reviewer to repeatedly type the same material.

Reports remain separate versions

Once the review is complete, the reviewer can approve it and generate the report.

The resulting report is effectively a timestamped instance.

If the reviewer later reopens the process, makes further changes and generates another report, the original report isn’t silently rewritten.

You have another report instance.

That distinction matters where reports form part of an audit trail.

Review can be quick or deliberate

Not every inspection needs the same level of review.

A straightforward pool inspection might contain ten simple observations.

The reviewer might be completely confident and approve it immediately.

A more complex professional survey can be different.

We have spoken to RICS surveyors who deliberately don’t issue reports immediately. They may sit with the information for a day or two and think it through because the consequences of getting something wrong can be significant.

The enhanced review process supports both approaches.

The software doesn’t dictate how much thought your business should put into a report.

It gives you the tools to make that decision.

 

Explore BrightChecker

See what BrightChecker can do

Brightchecker is flexible by design

Start your free month

About the Author

John Antill

John Antill is a co-founder and the chief designer, builder and tester of BrightChecker, bringing together hands-on inspection experience, 10 years of professional auditing and more than 20 years of business, process and technology experience. John has carried out property condition inspections and reports for buyers and rental properties, giving him first-hand experience of the practical realities of inspecting properties, recording findings and producing reports. Earlier in his career, John spent 10 years working as a financial auditor, where structured checklists, evidence, stock inspections and asset inspections were a regular part of his work. That experience gave him first-hand understanding of the importance of structured checks, consistent recording, evidence and following findings through to their conclusion. John has also spent more than 20 years working in business analysis, process improvement, technology transformation and systems change. His experience includes understanding how organisations work, mapping processes, defining requirements, designing better ways of working and turning those requirements into practical technology solutions. As the chief designer, builder and tester of BrightChecker, John has brought those experiences directly into the product. He has designed and tested the workflows, survey structures, evidence capture, reporting, business rules, issues, work orders and connected processes that make up BrightChecker. Alongside his professional career, John has a long-standing interest in property, DIY and home improvement, including the property market, interior design, gardening, pest control and the practical problems encountered by property owners and professionals. His writing focuses on property inspections, inspection software, survey and checklist design, evidence capture, inspection reporting, property maintenance, issues, work orders and the practical workflows that connect what is found during an inspection with what happens next.

Leave a Comment