2026.04.03 It’s been a few days since Spectora rolled out their misguided attempt to milk even more profits from their “captive” home inspector client base. The backlash against their new “Fixle” product (seriously, you couldn’t have come up with a better name than that?) has been pretty strong. Spectora has even gone into radio silence mode on their FaceBook Spectora users group. (And yes, I’m old. I still use FB.)
I’ve been trying my best to make noise about this issue, and finally had a breakthrough today. They have agreed to not add Fixle to my account!
For those that don’t know, Spectora home inspection software has rolled out a new feature, where they are able to spam MY HOME INSPECTION CLIENTS right inside the client’s inspection report portal. They’re trying to get MY CLIENTS to click through to their “preferred vendors.”
This is a clear ethics violation in most states (and inspection organizations), as they are offering additional services to the home inspection client without their approval. In my state, that’s a clear violation of our Code of Ethics, Title 46, Part XL. Chapter 5. §501.B.1,6, & 11.
I am posting the entirety of my online chat conversation with them below, in the hopes that someone else will be able to do the same thing that I did, and keep this ridiculous money grab at bay for a while. Please reach out to me if I can be of assistance. I have also posted a few rants on this same subject on the FB Spectora users group. Spectora also has a webpage where they take requests for new ideas and features. Be sure to go there are give a thumbs up to everyone’s comments about Fixle. You can even post a comment there yourself. If you do, I’ll be sure to vote it up!
What follow below is the conversation that I had on the Spectora chat bubble:
This first part is something that I got from someone else on the FB group:
(Someone else’s content, reposted by me to the Spectora chat bubble:)
I want to be very direct regarding the Fixl integration.
I do not want third party repair or service marketing included anywhere within my inspection reports or client experience, and I am extremely frustrated that there is currently no option to disable this feature.
I understand that this may be positioned as a customer opt in service, but that does not make this acceptable. My concern is not just whether a client chooses to use it, but that it is being introduced into my report environment at all. My reports are a direct reflection of my brand, my professional judgment, and the trust I establish with my clients. Introducing outside services into that space creates confusion, raises concerns about conflicts of interest, and undermines the independence that my clients expect from me.
This is not a feature I requested, and it is not something I am willing to have associated with my business in any capacity.
I am requesting that Spectora provide a clear and complete ability to disable all Fixl related content and functionality within inspection reports and any client facing materials.
If that level of control cannot be provided, I will have to seriously evaluate whether Spectora continues to align with my business moving forward.
I would appreciate a direct and clear response on whether this will be addressed.
Hi Joseph
We hear you loud and clear, and I want to give you the direct response you requested.
I want to be clear on what your client’s will see and how this will impact your reports.Fixle does not appear inside your inspection report. Your report is unchanged. What your clients see is a single offer card on their client portal dashboard and a Special Offers tab. That’s it. Nothing triggers, no one is contacted, and no information goes anywhere unless your client actively requests something themselves.
The partners included are vetted before they can participate and held to published standards around consent, communication, and legal compliance. You can see exactly who they are at spectora.com/advertisers-we-work-with.
I understand that may not fully resolve your concern about the association, and that’s a fair position to hold. Would it help to walk through the client view yourself so you can see exactly what they experience? If so, log into your Spectora account, open a completed inspection, and click “Client View” in the upper right corner of the report.
We are here to help and answer any questions.
My response:
I don’t care how it gets spun on your end, this is a no go. No matter how you try to soft sell this, any contractor used will be so inextricably linked with my company (“after all, I found them on your website, Mr. Inspector…”) that I will bear some level of responsibility and it will have some effect on my reputation. MY CLIENTS are not your customers. PERIOD. I am beyond disappointed in this move. Giving inspectors (your paying clients) an option to toggle this on/off is the only option here. I plan on addressing this issue with my state board, as what you are doing is now putting my license in jeopardy, as unapproved marketing to home inspection clients is illegal in my state. I’m a long time user, and have been singing Spectora’s praises to every inspector that I teach. Probably won’t be doing that much anymore…
Hi Joseph!
You’ve raised a specific claim about state regulations and your license, and that’s not something we’d dismiss or argue against without understanding it properly.
Here’s where we are: Fixle is part of the standard Spectora experience, and that’s not something individual inspectors can toggle off on their end. I want to be honest with you about that rather than leave it unclear.
What I do want to do is make sure the right people here are looking at what you’ve raised.
If there’s a legitimate compliance question specific to your state, that matters to us, and we’d want to understand it. Can you share more about the specific regulation or guidance you’re referencing? That will help us get the right people involved and give you a better answer.
My reply:
You are, in fact, forcing me to release MY CLIENTS’ information without their explicit consent, which is in direct violation of most all state or organization Code of Ethics. I’ve notified my state board. MY LICENSE is the one on the line here. You are going to cause me to violate my state’s Code of Ethics. Specifically, Title 46, Part XL. Chapter 5. §501.B.11. “The LHI shall not disclose inspection results or a client’s personal information without approval of the client or the client’s designated representative…”
I hereby place Spectora on formal notice that your actions are placing me at risk of violating the requirements of my licensing board. As a licensed professional, I am obligated to comply with all applicable laws and regulations governing my work. Your current actions and/or requirements are creating a situation in which I may be placed in non-compliance through no fault of my own. I request that you take immediate corrective action to eliminate this risk and ensure that your processes and requirements do not interfere with my ability to remain in full compliance with my licensing obligations. Please be advised that I will hold Spectora responsible for any adverse actions taken against me by my licensing board as a result of this situation, including, but not limited to, any fees, fines, lost income, and non-economic or general damages.
I would appreciate your prompt attention to this matter and a written response outlining how this issue will be resolved.
Joseph, thank you for laying this out in detail. We have the specific regulation you cited and are getting the right people involved to review it properly.
My reply:
I must say that the most disappointing thing in all of this whole mess is the fact that corporate was not able to figure out how to spin this into a net positive. You could have easily rolled this out as a way for inspectors to make money if they wanted to, included it as part of the basic Spectora experience, and offered to bump up to your Advanced product the inspectors that didn’t want to participate. Win all the way around. Seriously, there’s no one smarter than me making these decisions? Sheesh. Maybe I should be running that part of your company…
This next part is something that I got from someone else on the FB group:
(Someone else’s content, reposted by me to the Spectora chat bubble:)
I want to be very direct regarding the Fixl integration.
I do not want third party repair or service marketing included anywhere within my inspection reports or client experience, and I am extremely frustrated that there is currently no option to disable this feature.
I understand that this may be positioned as a customer opt in service, but that does not make this acceptable. My concern is not just whether a client chooses to use it, but that it is being introduced into my report environment at all. My reports are a direct reflection of my brand, my professional judgment, and the trust I establish with my clients. Introducing outside services into that space creates confusion, raises concerns about conflicts of interest, and undermines the independence that my clients expect from me.
This is not a feature I requested, and it is not something I am willing to have associated with my business in any capacity.
I am requesting that Spectora provide a clear and complete ability to disable all Fixl related content and functionality within inspection reports and any client facing materials.
If that level of control cannot be provided, I will have to seriously evaluate whether Spectora continues to align with my business moving forward.
I would appreciate a direct and clear response on whether this will be addressed.
Hi Joseph
We hear you loud and clear, and I want to give you the direct response you requested.
I want to be clear on what your client’s will see and how this will impact your reports. Fixle does not appear inside your inspection report. Your report is unchanged. What your clients see is a single offer card on their client portal dashboard and a Special Offers tab. That’s it. Nothing triggers, no one is contacted, and no information goes anywhere unless your client actively requests something themselves.
The partners included are vetted before they can participate and held to published standards around consent, communication, and legal compliance. You can see exactly who they are at spectora.com/advertisers-we-work-with.
I understand that may not fully resolve your concern about the association, and that’s a fair position to hold. Would it help to walk through the client view yourself so you can see exactly what they experience? If so, log into your Spectora account, open a completed inspection, and click “Client View” in the upper right corner of the report.
We are here to help and answer any questions.
My reply:
I don’t care how it gets spun on your end, this is a no go. No matter how you try to soft sell this, any contractor used will be so inextricably linked with my company (“after all, I found them on your website, Mr. Inspector…”) that I will bear some level of responsibility and it will have some effect on my reputation. MY CLIENTS are not your customers. PERIOD. I am beyond disappointed in this move. Giving inspectors (your paying clients) an option to toggle this on/off is the only option here. I plan on addressing this issue with my state board, as what you are doing is now putting my license in jeopardy, as unapproved marketing to home inspection clients is illegal in my state. I’m a long time user, and have been singing Spectora’s praises to every inspector that I teach. Probably won’t be doing that much anymore…
Hi Joseph!
You’ve raised a specific claim about state regulations and your license, and that’s not something we’d dismiss or argue against without understanding it properly.
Here’s where we are: Fixle is part of the standard Spectora experience, and that’s not something individual inspectors can toggle off on their end. I want to be honest with you about that rather than leave it unclear.
What I do want to do is make sure the right people here are looking at what you’ve raised.
If there’s a legitimate compliance question specific to your state, that matters to us, and we’d want to understand it. Can you share more about the specific regulation or guidance you’re referencing? That will help us get the right people involved and give you a better answer.
My reply:
You are, in fact, forcing me to release MY CLIENTS’ information without their explicit consent, which is in direct violation of any Code of Ethics, state or organization. I’ve notified my state board. MY LICENSE is the one on the line here. You are going to cause me to violate my state’s Code of Ethics. Specifically, Title 46, Part XL. Chapter 5. §501.B.11. “The LHI shall not disclose inspection results or a client’s personal information without approval of the client or the client’s designated representative.”
I hereby place Spectora on formal notice that your actions are placing me at risk of violating the requirements of my licensing board. As a licensed professional, I am obligated to comply with all applicable laws and regulations governing my work. Your current actions and/or requirements are creating a situation in which I may be placed in non-compliance through no fault of my own. I request that you take immediate corrective action to eliminate this risk and ensure that your processes and requirements do not interfere with my ability to remain in full compliance with my licensing obligations. Please be advised that I will hold Spectora responsible for any adverse actions taken against me by my licensing board as a result of this situation, including, but not limited to, any fees, fines, lost income, and non-economic or general damages.
I would appreciate your prompt attention to this matter and a written response outlining how this issue will be resolved.
Joseph, thank you for laying this out in detail. We have the specific regulation you cited and are getting the right people involved to review it properly.
Me again:
I must say that the most disappointing thing in all of this whole mess is the fact that corporate was not able to figure out how to spin this into a net positive. You could have easily rolled this out as a way for inspectors to make money if they wanted to, included it as part of the basic Spectora experience, and offered to bump up to your Advanced product the inspectors that didn’t want to participate. Win all the way around. Seriously, there’s no one smarter than me making these decisions? Sheesh. Maybe I should be running that part of your company…
Hey Joseph,
We take this concern seriously. Here’s how Fixle works in practice: you aren’t recommending, referring, or suggesting anything. The buyer finds Fixle Protection Products on their own inside the client portal. There’s no inspector involvement in that interaction at all.
If the client does not explicitly consent to getting an offer, and provide their contact information, nothing is shared with any third party. We only provide that info when the client enters it and directs Fixle to send it. No inspection results are ever shared, only contact info that the client enters.
I’ve attached a video that shows how this experience works. Does this give you the confidence you are looking for that you are not violating any code of ethics?
My reply:
Absolutely not. You are using the personal information of MY CLIENT to contact them without their explicit consent. No matter how you spin it, it’s still a violation. I’ve already been in contact with the attorney that represents my state board, and he believes that you’re also in violation of LA Title 46, Part XL. Chapter 5. §501.B.1 & 6 as well. There is no way you can spin this so that it looks like MY CLIENTS have approved you to even request to attempt to market to them. If I am not the one asking for their permission to share their info so that you can market to them, it is a clear Code of Ethics violation. I stand by my previous message. It really wouldn’t have been too difficult to roll this out as a win for everyone involved. Clearly, someone in management has no clue how the world of the inspection industry works…
Me again:
“If the client does not explicitly consent to getting an offer… nothing is shared with any third party.” I don’t think you understand that YOU’RE the third party here. There was never any client consent for YOU attempting to sell services. This is a business move based solely on greed. You’re betting that the money made from referring contractors will make up for the revenue lost to defections. Sorry, that thinking doesn’t align with my business model.
At this point, I found something intriguing on the FB group chat. A few people were (apparently) successful in getting this squashed. So, I copied and pasted this into the chat bubble and about 18 hours later, I got the reply I was looking for…
(Someone else’s content, reposted by me to the Spectora chat bubble:)
I would appreciate the same courtesy that you are selectively providing other inspectors as shown in the attached photo.
Hi Joseph, what you’re seeing is communication with a customer who had unique business needs that we worked to address. Those decisions were based on individual circumstances and aren’t something that’s broadly available.
That said, I do understand the legitimate concerns you have around this, and looking at that through the same lens. We’re working through reviewing every request. I will follow-up with you as soon as I have an update. I’m going to do my best to make sure you have something before we go into the weekend.
A little while later:
Hi Joseph,
Thanks for taking the time to share your concerns. We really appreciate it and value your partnership with Spectora.
We’ve gone ahead and honored your request based on your unique situation, and Fixle Protection Products will not be included on your account.
I want to share a bit of context on where we’re headed. This is about helping you deliver more value to your clients while keeping you at the center of the relationship. Our goal is to provide products that make it easier for you to strengthen your role with agents and homeowners while driving more business back to you.
As we continue to improve and add value, we hope you’ll be open to revisiting this and trying new features in the future. Please reach out if you have additional questions, otherwise we’ll close this as an active thread for now.
My reply:
Thanks for letting me know about your decision. However, I shouldn’t have had to jump through hoops to get this done. What you’re attempting to shove down inspectors’ throats is not only wrong, it’s illegal according to most (if not all) Codes of Ethics. Again, I stand by my statement that Spectora could have played their cards differently and come out even better that expected. I’m quite disheartened that there was no one in upper management that was able to see this. The quote on your Fixle sales page (“We talked to hundreds of agents and buyers”) provides the best perspective on this problem. Maybe you should’ve considered to talking to hundreds of inspectors instead…
***End of chat***
As I said, feel free to copy any of this information that may be helpful.
They’ve promised to not add this feature to my account. It remains to be seen whether or not they’ll make good on their promise. It wouldn’t surprise me in the least if they simply slipped it in without telling us, knowing that the majority of inspectors are not going to be proactive enough to verify that they’ve done what they promised.
We will not be able to see if they’ve added this integration to our accounts UNLESS we log in as our clients to see what they’re seeing when they log in.
Thanks, Spectora, for giving me even more work to do…
Signed, an inspector who is actively looking for a new software product.
Would you like to get an email every Friday where we share the newest things we’ve discovered about home inspections? CLICK HERE to sign up.
Want to be an Influencer in Your Field? Share This Post!
Thanks, Joe
