Social Media Is Distorting What Buyers Expect From Home Inspections

Written by:

Alejandra Rodriguez

Date:

27 Jul 2026

Share

Share via Facebook

Share via Linkedin

Share via X

Copy to clipboard

Home inspections exist to identify safety hazards, structural concerns, and mechanical failures that a buyer can’t detect without training. Across many markets, that purpose is being redefined, not by regulation or shifting housing conditions, but by short-form video content, often produced by inspectors themselves.

The pattern shows up clearly in the Twin Cities, where Reuben Saltzman, Owner & CEO of Structure Tech Home Inspections, says the biggest change he’s observing isn’t in housing conditions or market activity. It’s in what buyers now believe an inspection is supposed to cover. Inspectors posting vertical video reels of cosmetic flaws on new construction are training buyers to expect documentation of every scratch and ding, work that falls outside what a professional inspection is designed to do.

“I think the public’s perception of what we do is being skewed by these, and people are starting to expect us to report on cosmetic defects, which is not what we do,” Saltzman says.

The Cosmetic Expectation Problem

The trend is showing up most clearly on new construction inspections, where buyers increasingly arrive expecting their inspector to document every scratch, ding, and imperfect paint line. Saltzman describes a recent complaint his company received: a client was dissatisfied because the inspection report didn’t note that several cabinet knobs were scratched.

“Anybody can see cosmetic defects,” he says. “I can take a 10-year-old kid and say, show me parts of the wall that don’t look right, and they can find scratches and dings. That’s not what you’re paying a home inspector to do. We’re there to tell people the stuff they don’t know about. The stuff that takes a trained eye, an educated person to figure out.”

Reporting criteria across the industry generally rest on three questions: does a finding affect the safety of the home, the durability of the home, or will it cost the client money? If a condition meets one of those thresholds, it belongs in the report. Cosmetic items generally don’t qualify.

For buyers scheduling new construction inspections, this distinction matters directly. An inspector focused on cosmetic flaws may spend time cataloging surface-level blemishes while missing electrical, structural, or moisture problems that carry real financial consequences.

A Steady Market With Misconceptions

Beyond the cosmetic-expectations issue, Saltzman says the Twin Cities inspection market has been stable. Pending sales – which he considers the best indicator of market direction – have been nearly identical for the past three years.

Two misconceptions continue to surface among buyers, sellers, and agents, and Saltzman’s experience reflects a broader pattern in the profession. The first is that a home inspection results in a pass or fail. It doesn’t. “This is just information about a house,” Saltzman says. “It’s never meant to tell someone whether they should or shouldn’t buy a home.” The second is that sellers are obligated to act on inspection findings. “A seller never needs to do anything based on the results of the inspection. Everything is negotiable.”

When deals do fall apart after inspection, it’s typically because multiple serious issues surface at once: major electrical defects, leaking roofs, structural problems, significant plumbing failures, or water intrusion. Wet basements and potential mold in attics, Saltzman notes, “tend to really freak people out.”

For buyers, the practical takeaway is that an inspection report with 50 findings doesn’t mean the house failed. It means the buyer and their agent now have information to decide which items, if any, to negotiate on, and which to accept as the normal condition of a home.

The Report-Writing Gap

The quality gap between inspection companies often shows up not in what inspectors find, but in how they communicate it. Saltzman identifies report writing as the most challenging and most underestimated part of the job, a view echoed broadly across the profession.

Software allows inspectors to generate polished-looking reports by checking boxes and inserting pre-written comments. Saltzman says the result can be “worse than useless,” “actually misleading if a home inspector doesn’t know how to write comments themselves and they don’t know how to actually identify defects.” A report filled with canned language and stock photos may look professional while failing to describe the specific conditions in the home being inspected.

For buyers, one useful signal is whether a report contains specific, written descriptions of conditions found in that particular house, or whether it relies primarily on generic pre-loaded comments that could apply to any property.

Reporting More Isn’t Reporting Better

Saltzman draws a direct line between the social media trend and a broader risk: inspectors who document too much can overwhelm clients to the point of paralysis.

“When home inspectors talk about something too much, it has the potential to overwhelm people, and they can shut down,” he says. “At some point you’re shooting yourself in the foot by talking too much. You need to give people as much information as they need, but not more.”

The risk runs in both directions. An inspector who under-reports leaves the buyer exposed to problems they didn’t know about. An inspector who over-reports – cataloging every cosmetic flaw alongside genuine safety and durability concerns – makes it harder for the buyer to distinguish between what demands immediate attention and what doesn’t. The result is the same: a buyer less equipped to make a clear decision about the home.

In a market where pending sales have held steady for three years, and housing conditions haven’t materially changed, the variable that is changing is buyer expectations. Inspectors producing viral content about cosmetic flaws are generating engagement at the cost of clarity about what the profession actually does, and buyers are increasingly arriving at inspections with assumptions shaped more by social media than by the scope of what they’re paying for.

About the Expert: Reuben Saltzman is Owner and CEO of Structure Tech Home Inspections, serving the Twin Cities market in Minnesota.

This article is based on information provided by the expert source cited above. It is intended for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal, financial, or real estate advice. Readers should conduct their own research and consult qualified professionals before making any real estate or financial decisions.