The inspection took an hour. The write-up takes the evening.

Dictate your findings on site. The agent assembles your own Word template from your photos and your approved defect wording, and you open a draft instead of a blank page. You review and sign off — nothing sends without a person.

Building inspection practices write each report by hand into their own Word template after the inspection — photos numbered and dragged in, wording picked from a defect library, 20 to 30 minutes a report at the desk. This replaces the blank page with a filled draft: dictate your findings on site, and the agent assembles your template from your photos and your approved defect wording. The inspector still reviews and signs off. Nothing sends without a person. The value is turnaround — a report out the same day is a report that wins the next referral. Fixed-fee setup from AUD 3,500.

What this is

How a job flows

On site. Inspect as you do now. Photograph as you do now. Say each finding out loud as you go, instead of holding it in your head until you reach the desk.

Handoff. Photos and the recording go to one job folder. You already download and file photos — this is the same step with an agreed destination.

Assembly. The agent transcribes, matches findings to photos, drafts from your defect library and builds your Word template around them.

Review. You get an editable draft, not a finished report. You correct, add the client detail, approve. Nothing reaches a customer without that.

Built around your template, not instead of it

Your Word template — not a new one. Header table, legend, photo grids, inspector's opinion column, costing section, invoice block and terms. The output is your file, in your layout, with your branding. You do not migrate to my software, because there isn't any.

Your defect library as the wording source. The clauses you already use for common defects become the drafting corpus. The agent selects from wording you have already approved. It does not invent structural, asbestos, termite or costing language — that is your professional judgment and your registration on the line, not a model's.

Photos, numbered and placed. Photos land in the grid in report order with their numbers intact. Reports run short and long; the document is assembled to the number of findings you actually have, not padded to a fixed page count.

A draft that fails loudly, not quietly. Anything the agent cannot source from your library or your dictation is flagged in the draft with the words you actually said, not filled with a plausible guess. A blank you can see beats a sentence you have to catch.

What is already built

Deterministic assembly of a real inspection template — header, legend, photo grids, opinion column, costing block, invoice skeleton and terms

Variable-length reports: 21 to 59 photos, 4 to 6 pages, built to the findings rather than a fixed layout

Photo numbering, grid placement and page cloning that hold as the report grows

A defect library read as a style corpus — 150+ categories, 240+ clauses — so drafting reuses approved wording

What is not proved yet

Transcription accuracy against real on-site dictation in wind, traffic and roof cavities — untested until inspectors record real jobs

Which photo survives when six near-duplicates were taken, and what order the findings belong in — capture order is not report order

Per-inspector voice: three inspectors write three dialects, and a draft tuned to one reads wrong for the others

Whether the drafted wording is wording you would actually sign — that is measured on your jobs, before you pay, not promised on a web page