Mold Finding's

Once suspected/apparent mold growth has been established, and the customer has been informed and given an opportunity to have mold testing performed, but declines and the “Waiver of Mold Testing and Release” have been signed, should there also be a notation in the Home Inspection Report itself of the apparent mold growth find, or is the Waiver form sufficient, and should report findings at that point, only concentrate on the staining/moisture intrusion that was found? I realize there is probably no perfect answer here, but is there a standard as far as this question goes?

Thanks Guy’s!

I’d still put it in there. It is still a finding regardless of a waiver signed. The report needs to stand on its own, especially in court. You dont want to cloud things by having to reference another document.

Exactly and AFTER I find mold I don’t even offer testing. I just document the microbial growth and suggest testing and mitigation of not just the growth but discovery of the cause

I agree, I inspected a home last week, there was “bio-growth” present on rafters in the basement. I called it out, likely cause poor/improper ventilation of the adjacent bathroom vent.

In any case, the buyer asked if I recommended a mold sample or air quality test. I first thought yes, but then re-considered. I told her she could test the air quality, but even if the test comes back with a lower spore count, I still recommend remediation of whatever the growth is, because it will get worse.

Please feel free to use:

American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) states in its Bioaerosols: Assessment and Control (1999 version) that indoor growth of fungus is inappropriate and should be removed.