How should an inspector handle a raised sidewalk edge on the walking path?

A raised edge on a walking surface is a trip hazard, and trips are among the most common causes of injury around a house. The inspector's job is to report it on the terms that matter to the occupant: where it is on the route people actually take, and that it presents a tripping risk. Two temptations pull away from that. One is precision — measuring against a municipal standard implies the inspector is enforcing a public works specification, which is neither their role nor useful to the client, and standards vary by jurisdiction anyway. The other is diagnosis — naming tree roots as the cause states something the inspection cannot verify without excavation, and the cause does not change the recommendation. Report the hazard, note its location on the path of travel, recommend correction.

The finding is a trip hazard located on the route people actually walk, and reporting it in those terms tells the client what matters. Correction is recommended regardless of the exact height or the underlying cause.

Home inspection standards address walkways and site features. Trip hazards are reported as safety items, described by location and condition, with correction recommended; the inspector does not enforce municipal standards or determine subsurface causes.

On the Path People Walk. Not the code height, not the root underneath — where it is and that someone will catch a toe on it.

Note whether the location is on the primary route to the entry, and whether it is lit at night. Both raise the practical risk and belong in the description.

• •Measuring against municipal standards rather than reporting the hazard
• •Setting an informal threshold below which trip hazards go unreported
• •Stating a subsurface cause the inspection cannot verify