How detailed should Building and Pest be.

...& fix the defects while they're there.

 

What you've described above sounds like what one should receive from such a service

I'm attempting to achieve a refund from the bloke via email correspondence.

On acceptance of the inspection one includes credit card details with the form, so was charged effectively when the report was done.

 

Sounds like you have a case to get a refund or take it further with Consumer Affairs if you are not happy with the product produced based on the product you were promised. You certainly could dispute the payment with your credit card company if you wanted to take it that far.

 

I wish they would haha.

 

It sounds completely inadequate - but a different view is to find out if the inspector has done a proper job on the MAJOR issues that will impact the liveability of the property and the potential for major expensive repairs in the foreseeable future:

• Pest inspection (did he use hammer on every part of the house? did he use additional tech to back this up)
• Moisture inspection (bathrooms, kitchens, laundry and areas where roof may be suspect)
• Ceiling void inspection (did they get into the ceiling (if applicable)?
• Roof inspection (did they get up on the roof or use drone tech to inspect the roof for leaks, damage)?
• Underfloor access (if applicable)?
• Review of drainage, external paint condition etc.
• Testing of electrical systems.

My view is 1 hour is insufficient - I would expect 90 minutes for a small house and more likely 2 hours for a thorough inspection with the proper testing.

Minor defects are to an extent forgivable. Missing the big issues is negligent. Did they deal with this properly?