The U.S. housing market is now grappling with a historic imbalance: according to Redfin, there are hundreds of thousands more people trying to sell their homes than there are buyers. This growing glut of inventory—Redfin estimates roughly 519,000 to 529,000 more sellers than buyers—represents the largest gap on record since Redfin began tracking in 2013. While this might sound like a buyer’s market, the deeper consequences for valuation ripple far beyond simple negotiation power. For the mortgage field services industry—where Field Service Technicians (FST) mow lawns, clean up foreclosures, and secure properties, and Inspectors assess condition and occupancy—this shift could presage a painful reckoning.
To understand why, it’s critical to distinguish between Field Service Technicians, who carry out the physical labor of preserving and maintaining properties, and Inspectors, who evaluate and report on a property’s condition, occupancy, and risk. In a market flush with sellers and starving for buyers, both roles face cascading pressures. But it’s the FST labor force—frequently on the front lines of distressed or under-maintained homes—that may feel the economic squeeze first, especially when valuations plummet.
The root of the issue lies in the imbalance itself. With roughly 1.9 million active sellers versus 1.5 million buyers, Redfin data shows a 33.7% surplus of sellers. This isn’t just a statistical fluke: new listings are rising, active inventory is reaching highs not seen in years, and yet demand is flagging. Redfin economists project home prices could decline by around 1% by the end of the year as a result. For homeowners who bought during the post-COVID spike—and for lenders who financed those transactions—that outlook is deeply troubling.
Here’s where field services intersect with this macro risk: many of the homes on the market today were acquired in 2021–2022, when mortgage rates were relatively low by today’s standards. Those borrowers now carry higher-interest loans, and increasingly, their homes could be “underwater”—worth less than their outstanding mortgage. That means if they default, the loss severity for lenders may rise dramatically. When defaults happen, the need for property preservation goes up: securing vacant properties, cleaning, mowing, and inspecting becomes more common. But paradoxically, when valuations decline, field service vendors may find less work—or lower pay per job—as servicers and asset managers tighten their belts.
For Inspectors, too, the shifting market is fraught. As more homeowners scramble to offload properties, some will delay maintenance or disclose deterioration to avoid further valuation markdowns. That could lead to more inspections flagged for deferred maintenance, code violations, or risk conditions—but fewer resources to address them. Meanwhile, servicers may decide that aggressive preservation is not cost-effective for homes they anticipate losing value on, especially when liquidation costs exceed expected recoveries. Inspectors might be asked to do more for less, or their findings may be ignored in favor of cheaper short-term fixes.
But the labor-first perspective demands we also consider the impact on the workforce. Field Service Technicians often operate on thin margins, paid per call or per job, with limited bargaining power. If business slows because fewer homes are being maintained or preserved—especially in previously overleveraged segments—then technicians lose not just hours but livelihoods. For many in this line of work, the job isn’t a side gig: it’s a core income source. A downturn triggered by valuation declines could ripple into unemployment, reduced job availability, or pressure to accept lower rates from servicers desperate to cut costs.
Moreover, the ethical dimension cannot be ignored. Servicers and asset managers face a conflict: on one hand, they must preserve assets to maximize recovery; on the other, the sheer volume of excess inventory and projected price declines may lead to cost-cutting. That tension could incentivize under-maintenance of properties, compromising neighborhood stability and tenant safety. Field Service Technicians may find themselves on the ground witnessing neglect—not because they refuse to act, but because the economics no longer support robust preservation. Inspectors, tasked with reporting risks, may produce reports that go unheeded.
There’s also a systemic risk to servicers and lenders: if too many loans become underwater and defaults rise, the shadow inventory could grow. This isn’t merely a servicing problem; it’s a valuation crisis. When large swaths of property portfolios are revalued downward, the collateral backing mortgage-backed securities weakens. That, in turn, can affect whole servicer business models, potentially reducing budgets for property preservation and inspection. The FST and inspection labor economies are not peripheral—they are embedded in the financial plumbing of mortgage risk mitigation.
What makes this situation particularly precarious is timing. Redfin’s report notes that summer 2025 was the strongest buyer’s market on record, yet many sellers still overprice, hoping to recoup their pandemic-era gains. That hope may be misplaced. As mortgage rates remain elevated compared to pandemic lows, and as buyers retreat, sellers may soon be forced into price cuts or concessions. If property values drop faster than expected, undervalued homes could flood the market, triggering more defaults—or voluntary walk-aways—especially among borrowers who bought near the top.
From a labor-first standpoint, advocating for FSTs and Inspectors means pressing servicers, investors, and policymakers to plan for this downside. That could involve negotiating fairer rates for preservation work, ensuring timely inspections even on at-risk or underwater loans, and structuring servicing contracts to support sustainable labor, rather than reactive cost-cutting. If field service firms are forced to cut staffing or wages in response to declining work, the risk is not just to individual workers—but to the overall quality and integrity of the preservation ecosystem, which protects both neighborhoods and financial assets.
Finally, this is a moment for accountability. Lenders and servicers must acknowledge that their risk models did not fully account for a mass listing surge—or for the social consequences of a saturated market. They must work proactively with service providers, not punitively. Regulators, too, should scrutinize whether mortgage servicers are satisfying their duties to preserve, inspect, and secure properties, even as valuations fall. Otherwise, the burden of a market correction will fall disproportionately on the labor force performing essential maintenance work, and on neighborhoods already vulnerable to neglect.
In sum, the record-setting gap between sellers and buyers reported by Redfin is more than a statistical oddity—it is a potential inflection point for the mortgage field services industry. As valuations face downward pressure and post-COVID high-rate loans risk going underwater, Field Service Technicians and Inspectors stand at the front lines of both risk and response. Their jobs, their incomes, and the very integrity of property preservation depend on how investors, servicers, and policymakers react. In a market that may be tilting fast, ensuring that labor is not sacrificed in the name of cutting costs is not just an ethical imperative, but a practical necessity for long-term stability.
