Guide
A useful sewer camera inspection report identifies the property and date, states where the camera entered the line and how far it travelled, describes each observed condition with its distance along the line, notes any section that could not be assessed and why, and includes the footage itself.
The inspection produces evidence. The report is what makes that evidence usable later: when comparing quotes, revisiting a decision, or showing someone else what was found.
The property, the date, and which line was inspected. Obvious, and routinely omitted.
Where the camera entered, and how far along the line it reached. The extent matters: a report covering thirty feet of a longer line is not a report on the whole line.
Each condition should be tied to a distance along the line. “Root intrusion at a joint” is an observation; “root intrusion at a joint approximately 42 feet from the cleanout” is actionable: it can be located, quoted against, and re-checked.
Sections obscured by standing water or buildup, points where the camera could not pass, and any part of the line not reached. This is the section most often missing and among the most important: it tells you the limits of what the inspection established.
Ask how the footage is delivered and how long you can access it. It is evidence about your property.
It should not assert conditions the camera cannot establish: pipe wall thickness from outside, soil conditions, or the remaining life of a line. It also should not present a repair recommendation as a finding; what was observed and what someone concludes from it are different things, and worth being able to separate.
It can, but the observations and the recommendation should be distinguishable. Being able to separate what was seen from what someone proposes doing about it is what makes a second opinion possible.
