Foundation Repair Inspection Request Form: Fields That Qualify the Project Without Diagnosing the Structure

Overview

A weak foundation-repair form asks:

Then the office receives:

My wall is cracked. How much?

A bad form goes too far in the other direction and asks the homeowner to choose:

The customer usually cannot answer those questions safely.

The best inspection request form sits in the middle.

It captures enough context to decide the next professional step without pretending the website can diagnose the structure.

• name;
• phone;
• message.
• soil failure;
• helical vs push pier;
• required capacity;
• pier count;
• structural diagnosis.

Field 1: Name

Recommended label: Name

Start with the person.

Do not begin with technical questions.

Field 2: Phone

A foundation enquiry often benefits from a clarification call.

Collect a phone number if the business actually uses it.

If the company texts, use the consent language required by the real messaging workflow.

Field 3: Email

Useful for:

• appointment confirmation;
• estimate follow-up;
• report requests;
• written next steps.

Field 4: Property address

Recommended label: Property address

This helps the company determine:

The address is intake.

It is not an engineering input by itself.

• service-area fit;
• property identity;
• travel;
• local scheduling;
• the next review step.

Field 5: Your role

Useful choices can include:

This can matter because the company's inspection process may differ for:

Do not assume the same free-estimate policy applies to every role.

• homeowner;
• property manager;
• buyer;
• seller;
• real-estate professional;
• commercial owner/manager;
• other.
• owner-occupied repairs;
• real-estate transactions;
• commercial properties.

Field 6: What are you seeing?

Use plain-language options.

Possible choices:

Allow multiple selections if the real form supports it.

Do not label these as diagnoses.

• wall/foundation crack;
• sticking door/window;
• uneven or sloping floor;
• bowed or leaning wall;
• gap around an opening or finish;
• visible settlement;
• crawl-space support concern;
• prior contractor recommended foundation work;
• other;
• not sure.

Field 7: Where is the concern?

Possible choices:

This helps route the conversation.

It does not determine the repair.

• basement;
• crawl space;
• slab area;
• exterior foundation;
• garage;
• addition/porch;
• interior wall/floor area;
• other;
• not sure.

Field 8: When did you first notice it?

Useful options:

If the business wants more detail, add an optional note.

Do not ask the visitor to measure movement over time unless the company has a real reason and clear instructions.

• recently;
• within a few months;
• more than a year ago;
• not sure.

Field 9: Has the issue changed?

Possible choices:

Keep this as customer-reported context.

Do not turn:

seems worse

into:

active structural movement confirmed

• appears unchanged;
• seems to be getting worse;
• changes seasonally;
• not sure.

Field 10: Has anyone evaluated it before?

Useful choices:

This can help the office understand what documents may exist.

It does not mean the business should adopt someone else's conclusion without review.

• no;
• another foundation contractor;
• structural engineer;
• home inspector;
• builder;
• other;
• not sure.

Field 11: Do you have a prior report or proposal?

Ask:

Do you already have a report, proposal or drawing related to this concern?

Options:

If yes, use the business's verified document-transfer process.

Do not require sensitive documents through an unverified upload path.

• yes;
• no;
• not sure.

Field 12: Is this related to a property transaction?

Possible choices:

This can be operationally important.

The business may use:

Publish only the policies the contractor has approved.

• no;
• buying;
• selling;
• refinancing/insurance;
• other;
• not sure.
• different fees;
• different report types;
• different professional roles;
• different turnaround rules.

Field 13: Preferred timing

Useful choices:

A requested date is not a guaranteed inspection date.

• as soon as practical;
• within a few weeks;
• tied to a property transaction;
• planning for later;
• flexible.

Field 14: Is water or moisture the main concern?

This question can protect the foundation/waterproofing boundary.

Options:

If the business has a separate waterproofing workflow, route the lead appropriately.

Do not diagnose the source of moisture from the answer.

• yes, water/moisture is the main problem;
• no, the main concern appears structural;
• both/unclear;
• not sure.

Field 15: Any recent construction or major site change?

Optional choices:

This is context only.

Do not imply causation.

• addition/remodel;
• grading/landscaping;
• plumbing/utility work;
• nearby excavation;
• no known change;
• other;
• not sure.

Field 16: Photos

If the business has a verified photo-upload workflow, ask for a small, useful set.

Possible prompts:

The purpose is qualification.

Photos do not prove:

• soil failure;
• pier depth;
• structural capacity;
• hidden conditions;
• cause of movement.

1. wide view of the area;
2. closer view of the visible concern;
3. surrounding wall/floor area;
4. exterior view where relevant;
5. measurement reference only if the contractor explicitly requests one.

Field 17: Short description

Use one free-text field.

Recommended prompt: Tell us what you are seeing and anything that may help us prepare for the visit.

This catches the situations no checkbox predicts.

Fields to avoid asking the homeowner to determine

Do not ask for technical conclusions such as:

If the business already has a professional report containing these facts, collect the report through the appropriate workflow rather than asking the homeowner to re-enter it from memory.

• foundation failure type;
• required pier type;
• number of piers;
• load;
• required capacity;
• soil bearing capacity;
• torque;
• engineering design;
• code classification.

Should the form ask crack width?

Only if the contractor has a clear, approved reason.

Most homeowners will measure inconsistently.

If a visible measurement helps the business, give a simple instruction and treat it as customer-reported.

Do not use the number as an automatic structural diagnosis.

Should the form ask whether the floor is level?

Ask what the customer notices, not for a technical elevation survey.

Useful:

“Do any floors feel uneven or sloped?”

Less useful:

“Enter elevation differential in inches across the structure.”

The latter belongs to the inspection workflow.

Should the customer choose helical or push piers?

Usually no.

If the visitor is specifically requesting an estimate on a system already recommended by an engineer or another contractor, allow them to mention it.

The contractor still reviews the project.

Should the form provide an instant estimate?

A foundation repair estimate can depend on:

A generic instant estimate can create false certainty.

A strong inspection request is more credible.

• inspection;
• measurements;
• structural system;
• pier count;
• anticipated depth;
• access;
• engineering;
• permits;
• restoration.

Inspection request vs booking

Two models can work.

Inspection request vs repair order

The inspection request is:

Please evaluate this property concern.

The repair order is:

Perform this approved structural scope.

Do not collapse them.

There may be several professional steps between them.

Use one confirmation message

Avoid:

Your foundation repair is scheduled.

unless a repair job actually exists.

Safer copy:

Thanks. We received your foundation inspection request. Our team will review the property and concern details and contact you about the next step.

If the company has a verified response-time standard, add it.

Do not invent one.

Connect the request to an ordinary client record

OneStudio can preserve the public relationship around:

The specialist workflow should own:

• enquiry;
• contact details;
• inspection booking;
• reminders;
• interaction history.
• inspection findings;
• elevations;
• structural measurements;
• engineering criteria;
• pier takeoff;
• estimate;
• field installation.

A compact foundation inspection request

A practical first-stage form can include:

That is enough to make the next professional decision.

1. name;
2. phone;
3. email;
4. property address;
5. your role;
6. what you are seeing;
7. where it is visible;
8. when you first noticed it;
9. whether it appears to be changing;
10. prior evaluation yes/no;
11. property transaction yes/no;
12. water/moisture main concern yes/no/unclear;
13. preferred timing;
14. optional photos;
15. short description.

Collect the concern, then let the professional workflow take over

The best foundation form does not make the homeowner play engineer.

It captures:

where, what they see, when they noticed it, why the request matters and what prior information exists.

Then it stops.

That is enough to turn a worried visitor into a much better inspection brief.

Explore OneStudio features, compare current plans, or review the turnkey website service.

Questions businesses ask