DP5

DecisionPoint
http://proethica.org/ontology/cases#DecisionPoint

DP5

Should Engineer A have obtained the client couple's express prior consent before transmitting the inspection report to the real estate firm, and would such consent — or a publicly disclosed standard practice disclosed at engagement — have rendered the disclosure ethically permissible?

Engineer A did not obtain the client couple's prior consent before transmitting the inspection report to the real estate firm. The question is whether prior client consent — whether obtained case-by-case or embedded in a publicly disclosed standard service practice — represents the only ethically sound path to third-party distribution of a commissioned inspection report, and whether Engineer A's failure to seek such consent was itself an independent ethical defect separate from the disclosure itself.

Before transmitting any copy of the inspection report to the real estate firm or any other third party, seek and obtain the express prior authorization of the client couple, proceeding with distribution only if affirmative consent is granted.

Include a clear disclosure in the service agreement at the time of engagement that Engineer A's standard practice is to provide a carbon copy of all inspection reports to the relevant real estate firm, allowing clients to make an informed decision about whether to retain him on those terms before any report is prepared.

Treat the carbon-copy practice as a standard professional courtesy that clients implicitly accept when retaining an inspector operating in the real estate market, without seeking express consent or disclosing the practice in advance, on the basis that industry custom provides sufficient notice.

Engineer A