The law sets requirements for the content of an inspection report and for the way it is drawn up, not for the tool that writes it. Below you will find the legal framework, how our report answers it, and which part always stays with you.
The legal framework
For residential leases in Flanders, article 9 of the Flemish Residential Lease Decree applies, which is mandatory law. For leases outside its scope, articles 1730 and 1731 of the old Civil Code apply. Brussels and Wallonia have their own rules, with substantively the same requirements.
Wording such as "received in good condition" is treated as equivalent to having no inspection report at all. A document drawn up unilaterally likewise carries no evidential weight when the adversarial element was missing, not even when a bailiff produced it. At move-out, either party can demand a detailed, adversarial report, at the latest when the keys are handed back.
Without a valid inspection report, the presumption of article 1731 applies: the tenant is deemed to have received the property in the condition it is in at the end of the lease. The burden of proof then reverses entirely, to the landlord’s disadvantage.
In Belgium there is no professional monopoly on drawing up an inspection report. The parties may write it themselves. An expert, surveyor, architect or estate agent is called in for neutrality and quality, not because the law demands it. The legal weight therefore lies in the content and in how the document came about, not in a title.
Our report
Too little detail, no description of condition, subjective or speculative language, findings that cannot be traced back to evidence: those are the points where inspection reports fail in practice. That is exactly what the report is built around.
The report works through the property systematically: per floor, per room and per individual element. For each element we record the material, the finish, the type and the condition, including when the element is in good condition. It is precisely those elements without remarks that you need at move-out in order to compare. A room is never closed off with a single blanket qualification.
The description stays with what is observable: a scratch, an impact mark, a crack, a damp stain. The report does not speculate about cause, use or liability, proposes no repairs and uses no commercial or subjective language. Anything that cannot be established visually with certainty is described neutrally and flagged separately in yellow, instead of being written away as "presumably".
Every finding refers to one or more numbered photos, and every photo supplied is processed into the report. An opposing party, a lawyer or a judge can trace each sentence back to the image it rests on. The photos are stored with the file and can be exported as an annex.
At move-out the current condition is described autonomously, as if no move-in report existed. The comparison sits in separate fields: per element unchanged, changed or new, and for damage new, already present or worsened. That keeps the move-out report a full inspection report in its own right, and makes the comparison a verifiable layer rather than something that blurs the findings.
Meter readings and keys cause a striking share of disputes, and are forgotten just as often. They therefore get separate, rigorous treatment in the report.
Reading, meter number, EAN, OBIS code and the state of the seal are recorded separately, and systematically flagged as yours to check and verify.
Number, type, labels, badges and remotes are recorded separately, so at move-out it is in black and white what has to come back.
The final report carries all the data that makes an inspection report legally usable, so you can have it signed, attach it to the lease and have it registered along with it.
Your part
We would rather be explicit than reassuring here, because these are exactly the points on which inspection reports fail in court. Part of the validity lies in the process, not in the document.
No system, ours included, can generate the adversarial character. It arises because both parties are present or were demonstrably invited, can raise their remarks, and date and sign the document. We deliver the detailed, objective content; you organise the adversarial part.
Stating who made them: case law attaches express weight to this. Provide a clear section for it in your final template. The report processes the findings of the inspection, not the positions of the parties.
No technical inspection, no destructive investigation, no hidden defects and no compliance certificates such as EPC, electrical or asbestos. A non-working installation only enters the report when you report it yourself.
They are an aid in negotiation, not a legal assessment of tenant damage. The correction for age and normal wear, which may never be charged to the tenant, remains a human judgement.
A wrong digit has major consequences. That is why meter readings are always flagged for checking, and the report explicitly asks for it.
Draw up the report while the property is unoccupied or within the first month, then attach it to the lease and have both registered within two months. If significant changes occur during the lease, either party can request a supplementary report; an additional inspection is supported.
ImmoHabits is a drafting instrument that structures and writes out your findings. It does not replace your professional judgement. Your review before signing is an essential part of the method, legally and, with the European AI framework in mind, in terms of human control over the end result.
Is an inspection report made with AI legally valid?
Yes. The law sets no requirement about the tool, only about the result: detailed, adversarial, dated and signed by both parties. A report written by AI and then reviewed and signed by the parties meets that just as well as a handwritten document or an expert’s report.
Does ImmoHabits make my report adversarial?
No, and no system can. The adversarial character arises because both parties are present or were demonstrably invited, can raise their remarks, and date and sign the document. We deliver the detailed, objective content; you organise the adversarial part.
Do I need to be an accredited expert to draw up an inspection report?
No. In Belgium there is no professional monopoly: the parties may write it themselves. An expert is called in for neutrality and quality, not because the law demands it. The legal weight lies in the content and in how the document came about, not in a title.
What happens if there is no valid inspection report?
The presumption of article 1731 applies: the tenant is deemed to have received the property in the condition it is in at the end of the lease. The burden of proof reverses entirely, to the landlord’s disadvantage. A report that is too vague, such as "received in good condition", is treated the same way.
Can the report be signed electronically?
Yes. The eIDAS Regulation provides that an electronic signature may not be refused as evidence solely because it is electronic. A qualified electronic signature, for instance via eID or itsme, has the same legal standing as a handwritten signature.
Does this also apply in Brussels and Wallonia?
Yes. Each region has its own lease legislation, but the substantive requirements are the same: detailed, adversarial, drawn up in good time, dated, signed and registered together with the lease.
Can I still edit the report before it is signed?
Yes, and that is the intention. You review the report, adjust where needed and add what was discussed on site. That review before signing is an essential part of the method: you remain the author of the document.
This page provides general information about the legal framework and is not legal advice. For a specific case, consult your own counsel.