When to Recommend a Structural Engineer

Recommending a structural engineer evaluation represents one of the most delicate decisions in building inspection practice. This approach protects both your client and your professional liability, while recognizing the inherent limitations of a standard visual inspection. Knowing when to make this recommendation requires a clear understanding of your role, rigorous assessment capability, and transparent communication with your clients.

This guide helps you navigate these complex situations by clarifying respective roles, identifying escalation criteria, and equipping you to effectively communicate your recommendations.

Inspector Role vs Structural Engineer Role

The building inspector performs a visual, non-invasive inspection designed to identify apparent defects and signs of potential problems. Your role is to observe, document, and report visible anomalies, without performing structural calculations or definitive diagnoses on root causes.

The structural engineer, on the other hand, has the qualifications to analyze structural problems in depth, perform load calculations, use specialized measuring instruments, open building sections if necessary, and prescribe repair or reinforcement solutions compliant with building codes.

Clearly Defining Your Scope of Competence

Your inspection is generally limited to elements accessible and visible at the time of visit. You are not required to move furniture, probe walls, or perform destructive testing. This limitation should be clearly stated in your report and explained to the client from the outset of the mandate.

Recognizing your inspection limitations is not an admission of weakness, but a demonstration of professionalism. It establishes realistic expectations and protects your liability in case of hidden problems discovered later.

Typical Situations Where Recommendation Is Relevant

Certain field observations almost systematically trigger a structural engineer evaluation recommendation. Knowledge of these situations allows you to react consistently and professionally.

Cracks and Structural Movements

Significant structural cracks warrant thorough evaluation: horizontal cracks in foundation walls, stair-step cracks in load-bearing masonry, cracks exceeding 6mm width, or any crack pattern suggesting active building movement.

Movement signs also include floor sagging exceeding 2-3cm, walls out of plumb, deflected or cracked load-bearing beams, and posts or columns showing signs of distress (crushing, cracking, deformation).

Non-Compliant Structural Modifications

Any apparent structural modification without appropriate documentation warrants recommendation: partially or completely removed load-bearing walls, cut or notched beams, added floors or significant loads without visible reinforcement, or openings made in load-bearing elements.

These situations are particularly concerning as they can compromise structural integrity without immediate visual signs of failure. The engineer can verify code compliance and determine if corrective measures are necessary.

Escalation Criteria Based on Findings

Assessing finding severity guides your decision to recommend specialized investigation. Develop a systematic approach to prioritize your observations.

Severity Assessment Grid

Major findings require immediate recommendation: any visibly damaged or failing load-bearing element, signs of active and progressive movement, risks to occupant safety, or situations where structural integrity could be compromised.

Moderate findings may justify recommendation depending on context: intermediate cracks (3-6mm), slight but measurable sagging, signs of inadequate previous repairs, or accumulation of multiple minor anomalies in the same area.

Minor findings generally don't justify immediate recommendation, but should be documented for future monitoring: shrinkage microcracks, slight level variations normal in old buildings, or cosmetic defects without structural impact.

How to Formulate the Recommendation in the Report

Your recommendation wording must be clear, precise, and professional. Avoid unnecessary jargon while remaining technically accurate.

Essential Elements of a Good Recommendation

Your recommendation should include:

• Factual description of observed finding (location, dimensions, problem nature)
• Required specialist type (structural engineer, with professional order mention if applicable)
• Urgency level (immediate, short-term, monitoring recommended)
• Recommendation reason (exceeds visual inspection scope, requires specialized calculations/tests)
• Reminder of your inspection limitations

Example of professional wording: 'A horizontal crack 8mm wide, extending 3.5m, was observed in the north foundation wall. This situation exceeds the scope of our visual inspection and requires evaluation by a structural engineer registered with the professional engineers order, to determine movement cause, assess impact on load-bearing capacity, and prescribe appropriate corrective measures. This evaluation should be performed as soon as possible.'

For situations involving significant legal or safety risks, also consult our guides on presenting deficiencies in your inspection reports.

Managing Client Expectations

Communication with your client around this recommendation requires tact and transparency. Some clients may perceive the recommendation as a failure on your part or as an unexpected additional expense.

Explaining Recommendation Value

Present the recommendation as client protection, not as a limitation of your services. Explain that the engineer brings complementary expertise allowing for definitive diagnosis, precise solutions, and peace of mind before transaction conclusion.

Use simple analogies: 'My role is similar to a general practitioner who detects a problem requiring specialist expertise. I'm directing you to the appropriate resource to get the answers you deserve.'

Anticipating Common Questions

Prepare answers to frequent questions: how much will the engineer evaluation cost (generally a few hundred to several thousand dollars depending on complexity), how long will it take (varies by availability and problem scope), and what happens if the engineer confirms a major problem (negotiations with seller, price adjustment, possible offer withdrawal per contract terms).

Remind the client that the structural warning signs identified during your visual inspection warrant this thorough investigation to protect their investment and safety.

In conclusion, recommending a structural engineer at the right time demonstrates your professionalism and commitment to protecting your clients. This approach clearly delineates your scope of competence, protects you legally, and ensures complex problems receive attention from a qualified expert. Clear and transparent communication transforms this recommendation into added value for your client.