I would imagine the Realtor would have a hairy in either case. I wounder if it was a bank owned/foreclosure if they would be forgiving and just let it go, some how I doubt it.
If a home inspector is smart (not all are, for some actually prefer licensing laws) he would simply take the sample and have the lab send the report directly to the client. The client would then be backing out of the deal based upon a lab report … not a home inspection report.
If the seller wanted to challenge the finding, he would have to hire a mold assessor to specifically test for mold and use his report.
Is a certified mold inspector the same as a certified mold assessor?
Exactly. Having read what is available. It is my position that they are not the same.
No more than the attic portion of a home inspection, is equal to a structural assessment of the building by a structural engineer.
A home inspector can take samples of substances limited to their part in the Home Inspection process. In the course of activities that licensed HI perform, Mold is determined to be present in significant levels, (greater than 10’). They have to punt to the Mold Assessor. As well they should.
It is the Mold Assessor who will then evaluate the whole structure and it’s systems to ASSESS the Mold issue. At this point, it is clearly outside the home inspectors area. Just like a serious crack in the foundation, etc…
I believe there is enough language in the legislation to support my position. But, we will have to wait see.
They can walk over the color of the drapries during the inspection period. LOL.
But that’s why HI’s are not assessors. An assessor will come in and evaluate the whole structure and it’s systems exclusively toward Mold and Mold related factors. The Mold Assessor is the expert that will determine if the is Mold issue is significant cause for alarm, if remediation is needed, etc…
All the Home inspector is hired to do is perform some tests, deliver them to a lab, and deliver the findings. It is then up to the parties involved to hire the licensed porfessional to evaluate and make repairs. :mrgreen:
At least that is my interuptation of the legislation…
Someone should really tell the DBPR to correct their website, it will surely confuse many consumers that are not “informed” as HI’s. 
Needs a License
· Taking samples for purposes of testing for the presence of mold.
I am totally confused on these commnents.
- We take the test and have the lab send the results to the buyer? Really, thats a valid “loop hole”? So the buyer with absolutely no knowledge of mold is suppose to review this and get an answer?..Wait let me guess, the lab decides if there is a mold problem or not? No wonder there is a need for mold assessors. The lab performs a reading of the result given by the “Inspector/Assessor” to determine the final analysis.
But we can start there, lets just take it one step at at time. How many calibrate their equipment before each day or each sample? Has your device that determines the calibration been calibrated? Are you taking the samples in the correct areas? How do you take them if there is more than one AC system? Where do you take them at the interior? What do the weather conditions have to be? How many sanitize/clean their equipment before EACH sample, yes that include the long plastic tube for those who use that type. Do you record the temperature and humidity at EACH area where the samples are taken, has that device been calibrated or checked? Once completed do you quickly place your sample into a plastic sealed bag to prevent any possible cross contamination. Do you fill out your chain of custody properly so the lab can make adjsutments if needed? How do you know what portion of the sample your lab reviews? Do you ever do a blind test? Do you even know what a blind test is? - Thats just the sample TAKING and pre-set up.
Now that you sent it away, you let the lab determine if an unsual mold condition exists? How can someone 1000 miles away determine the condition of the house? I have done many mold tests where there was visual mold and the air quality was great and vice versa. What do you do then? Let the lab decide?
For those who take the samples and then just send the results without any explanation, you’re the reason why we now have a mold assessors license. I get about 5 calls a week asking about a lab report and what it means. I tell them what I can see in the report but without visiting the house I cannot make a professional determination.
So many here are saying test and then if it comes back high call a licensed mold assessor? You feel that is the best way to serve your client? Let me make my money and then pass the buck of responsibility to the next guy? My question is, on the reports that come out non elevated, if your not a mold assessor and do not follow the proper steps and procedures how do you really know its not elevated?
So the other aspect is when someone performs an (unknowingly because of ignorance) home inspection and are not licensed then “off with their heads” and turn them into the DBPR! But when Home Inspector unknowing performs a poor mold test, and the license activity is presently in question then thats OK?
You have one reputation, I suggest you protect it with all you have…
Good stuff Russ, thanks
Russell, I can’t disagree with what you say! I share your fustration. I am sick of Mold being missused just to generate extra fees. With no concern for the established industry standards or the consequences of unethical behavior.
You completely identified the need to seperate those that specialize in Mold related services and the need for the Professional Mold Assessor. From the way I read the Legislation, this was the Laws intent.
But your total arguement could be replaced with: Why should I hire a HI that’s not a GC. How is someone that doesn’t know framing going to inspect my attic structure? How can anyone but a Licensed Electrician, inspect my electrical panel? Why should I hire a HI to inspect my roof. If there is a problem, the HI is just going to tell me to find a licensed Roofer, GC, or Electrician!
“So many here are saying test and then if it comes back high call a licensed mold assessor?” EXACTLY. I would argue that observe and report is what HI’s are supposed to do.
Unfortunately, the DBPR has not responded to my offer take over this problem for them…I guess will have to wait and see what they decide.
Meanwhile, we are just p i s s i n g in the wind. 
In the past, I’ve made two strong arguments for why a licensed home inspector can legally inspect for mold.
The first is the 10 square foot thing.
The second is the exempt from having to comply thing.
I now make a third:
If the intent of the law was to prevent licensed home inspectors from inspecting for mold without an assessor’s license, why isn’t “mold inspector” listed above?
Exactly Nick. The language of the law clearly ssuggests that the Lawmakers went to an exstensive effort to avoid removing Home Inspectors from the Mold Inspection business. At least to the 10’ limit.
We shall see how it plays out. You guys keep talking about this 10 square foot rule. I don’t think the mold law was put into place because of what we find, I think it was put into place because of what is missed and negligence. So you feel you should charge a fair fee and not be liable for anything? Who can they go after if your house is filled with mold and it was missed? Your not required to have the insurance for mold liabilty. Want proof? I bet 10% of the people performing “Mold tests” have no idea what humidity bloom is, what it looks like and what the causes are and I see it about 1 time per day.
I think the "intent’ of the law was to try and protect the client for obtaining perceived services and to TRY and protect them for ignorance on such a severe possible problem. But some think the intent it to take samples, not know how to read them, let a lab 1000 miles away determine if there is a problem and then have no liability. I guess we just see the “intent” differently.
I got just three things to say:
-
Nobody knows nothing until the DPBR releases a statement.
(Depending on what that statement is, it may not be long lasting due to the language of the legislation). -
I recommend that everyone take a look at the Law, not the summary by the DBPR. If anything, the language of the law will prevent enforcement of everything Except, the use of the title, Mold Assessor.
-
According to Mr. Wall, All the worst offenders are among the grandfathered Mold Assessors.
What’s interesting here is how many licensed mold assessors are arguing to allow unlicensed guys to test? Interesting to argue on a public forum that you are unlicensed so the consumer should hire you over the licensed guy.
Home inspectors may observe mold like substances and reccommend further evaluation. That’s all I need or want. I have to wonder if those kids now graduating with the degrees allowing them to pursue a career in the lucritive mold assessment field will be able to appreciate the complex nature of building sciences that experienced home inspectors have a firm handle on.
It is really easy to eliminate the mold. The understanding of why it was allowed to propogate within the structure is a more complex issue. This is the only question that needs to be answered and I am not certain that the new qualifications required for the mold assessment liscense include the necessary training.
I have a contractor friend in N.J. that has to constantly force enginneers to go back to the drawing board due problems related to a misunderstanding of how all the systems work together.