That could, of course, be true depending on the quality of the information being provided. A home inspector who does not understand something, can create problems that should have been avoided. I would argue however, that sometimes providing detailed information can actually make things go better.
The photo below is at garage exterior wall. That piece of wood hanging on it is pretty grisly. It has burrowing marks and tunnels that are as big around as your little finger. That is not something the buyer wants in a house. The inspector knows, or should know, that these tunnels are from Teredo, a salt-water mollusk that damaged this wood when it was in the water. They are long departed at this point and this is, for lack of a better term, "yard art."
Let's look at reporting options. In the first one, the inspector says nothing, just ignores that wood. What is likely to happen? Later, the buyer notices this wood and worries that the inspector missed something and that the home is being devoured by a voracious and mysterious creature. In our state, the WSDA knows of a situation where the buyer then doused similar wood with a toxic chemical to kill the beasts.
In the second scenario, the inspector casually mentions that the piece of wood at the garage has been tunneled in by Teredo, a salt-water mollusk. The mollusk is no longer present, cannot live on the land, and such wood is popular in coastal communities as trim, yard art or decorations.
In the long run, it is my view that the second scenario, that provides detailed information, does a better job of taking care of the buyer, for the inspector and the realtor, than the first option. It is all about the clarity of the information!
Steven L. Smith
Bellingham WA Home Inspections