Inspection methodology
The Automotev Evidence Standard
A field inspection is only useful when the remote decision-maker can understand exactly what was requested, what was observed, what evidence supports the finding and what could not be verified.
Assignment scope confirmed before dispatch
Evidence collected against each requested item
Technical QA before report release
1. Identify the vehicle and the assignment
Every file begins with the basics that anchor the evidence to the correct vehicle and request: vehicle identification, mileage, repair facility, inspection date and the specific components or conditions the client asked Automotev to verify.
2. Address every requested item
The inspection follows the client’s assignment scope. Each requested component or condition is addressed individually so the report makes it clear what was reviewed, what evidence was available and whether anything could not be accessed during the visit.
3. Document demonstrations and diagnostics
When the repair facility performs an authorized demonstration or diagnostic procedure, Automotev documents what was demonstrated and the observable result. Where available, diagnostic evidence can include fault codes, status, freeze-frame information and relevant live data rather than codes alone.
4. Capture physical evidence that can be reviewed remotely
- Vehicle and component context photographs
- Wide, location and close-up views where appropriate
- Video when motion, noise or a demonstration is important
- Observable fluid leaks, damage, wear or component condition
- Supporting screenshots or diagnostic displays when available
- Clear notes when evidence is inaccessible or inconclusive
5. Finish each requested item with a clear verification status
- Verified — accessible evidence supports the reported condition
- Partially verified — part of the reported condition is supported
- Not verified — the condition was not confirmed with accessible evidence
- Additional dealer diagnosis required — available evidence is inconclusive
6. Quality review before release
Before the standard report is issued, the file is reviewed for basic completeness: vehicle identification, requested scope, supporting evidence and whether the written finding matches what is documented. The objective is a file the claims reviewer can follow without reconstructing the inspection from scattered notes.
Use the standard on a real Québec assignment
Send one paid assignment and evaluate the evidence quality, report completeness and workflow against your own claims process.