Caoimhín has pretty good credentials as an Industrial Hygienist, Raymond. Just out of curiosity, what in your background qualifies you to disagree with him on this subject?
Please allow me to recap:
Perform an inspection and observe what looks like mold growth, although we can’t say it is unless it’s tested. But experts say it doesn’t need to be tested because mold is everywhere. We see small visible signs of what probably is mold, but don’t know how far it’s spread (could be huge?). We recommend contacting an expert, knowing there is none because there are no standards (ASTM, ASHRAE, etc. can’t agree to what they are experts on, because they are afraid to get sued). Meanwhile, the clock is ticking on the sale of the home.
Should the extent of reporting on mold during a home inspection consist of only providing known information and suggestions from bodies like EPA & CDC?
It may explicitly stated that mold is not part of the home inspection, but curiosity got to me. Put yourself in the place of the potential home buyer; how would you determine what tests are needed, who would perform them, and how would you get the straight skinny on this issue to decide whether you’d buy the home?
Thanks
Just to make it clear, I do not necessarily disagree with his findings as an expert on this matter, they have usually a high probability to be founded and documented very well, and his postings and publications contain very helpful and educational information for interested parties.
I am criticizing the misleading way of data display to support the conclusion in the above case example, which I found to be without substance and that is based on 10+ years of DOE experience.
To me this is the crux of the question, Thomas. It boils down to the clint thinking “I have to decide whether to spend money on mold sampling or not. Should I believe the companies who make money sampling mold and tell me I should, or the organizations that don’t make money from mold sampling and tell me that it’s a waste of money?”
Obviously there are homes with moisture problems in which mold grows like crazy and the problem needs to be taken care of. Remediation is not the question. Sampling is the question, and it all comes down to the nature of the danger from mold exposure.
The way I understand it is… The nature of the danger from mold is High concentrations of mold spores in indoor air which may have adverse effects on the health of the very young or old, those with lung disease, damaged immune systems or allergies.
Not…
Toxic compounds from mold fungi will infect you and make you ill.
Since mold sampling is a contoversial issue, when trying to understand whether or not mold samping is a waste of time and money, I tend to listen more to those organizations that have nothing to gain from mold samping and are mostly concerned with human health (like the EPA and the CDC) than those that make their living in businesses connected to mold sampling and will go out of business if people stop performing mold sampling.
Thanks Kenton,
So you are suggesting for home inspectors to stay away from the mold issue entirely? If so, then I agree, we should not even give any advice on whether mold should be sampled or not, simply refer the clients to EPA and CDC. Personally, if I were a client, I feel the information there is of no help in determining the specific problems in the home I was about to purchase. The information there is general and gives no specifics (I know, I know, there are no specifics!).
However, what I understand is that only specific types of mold can produce those nasty mycotoxins (correct?). Or perhaps some folks may be allergic to other specific types of molds. Wouldn’t sampling identify those types and give the client additional information to aid their decision? And even though it is a “snapshot in time” of the home we are inspecting, isn’t the entire inspection a “snapshot in time”?
The point I was trying to make is the buyer is deciding whether to buy this home or not. We report on what we see at the time. If comments about mold are included, they should be made with correct basis in fact.
Mold cannot be present without water (correct?). Leakage, condensation, etc. are defects and must be repaired. On a typical leak we comment that it should be repaired and hopefully damages caused by the leak. Wouldn’t it stand to follow that those damages may include large mold growth? I, for one, would like to know how the experts would go about getting that information if they were purchasing the home and had only a few days to make their decision. Would they accept the “least desireable” method to screen any problems, ask to hold up the transaction for months to have tyvek clad scientists and instruments in the house, or are they just happy they haven’t gotten sick?
Hmmmm…(I don’t know)…
I think that we need to emphasize, especially amongst ourselves, that home inspectors are “generalists”. We examine a home and report what we find to our clients…including the presence of organic substances that may be consistant with mold. Just as we do with electrical or plumbing issues, we recommend further evaluation and repair (if necessary) by an industry expert.
Whether it be mold in the attic or an issue in the service panel, it is not our job (nor is it in our best interest or the interest of our client) to prescribe or recommend solutions.
We have vendors that would disagree with this and I’m also certain that any inspector who has invested in this auxilliary service would also disagree…but the analysis of mold is not a part of the SOP. It is distinct and seperate from a home inspection. It is a separate service and should be addressed as such for it to make any sense in discussions such as this, IMO.
James, I think everybody agrees that it is a separate service and it is up to each individual inspection company to decide which auxiliary services around a home inspection they offer. Whatever deviates from the SOP should be charged for, for their own protection. If environmental services like radon, mold, termite or extra services like low-e checks of glazing.
Going back to mold and if you find any, as a service provider you need to make the call if it makes sense to do further testing and as you can see above there are risks you take, but I do not think they are greater or lesser than with any other services you provide as long as you continuously educate yourself.
If I would find a small patch of mold-like substance on a bathroom wall or below the kitchen sink, careful cleaning can take care of the problem before it grows into a bigger one and thats what I recommend, the same way I recommend them to clean gutters out if they are full of leafs.
I am new to the HI industry and just recently joined NACHI. I am curious if there is a proper way to present the client with the option to test mold and not misrepresent the test. What is the professional opinion on this?
These forums are great! I am trying to get organized to start inspecting and NACHI has been a big help.
How come I don’t show up as member when I post?
Darren,
I would like to warn you, there are many self-appointed experts on this message board.
Take this mold issue. It’s not really a a part of home inspections, because we are generalists, yet it merits discussion from time to time. Why is that? And why does NACHI “partner” with Pro-Lab and indorse their training, products, etc.? When I contacted Nick Gromicko, he seemed to brush off the matter because he never took a mold course and referred me to this message board for answers. So far, not much luck from the experts. Seems like when the questions require thought, we become generalists.
I do believe mold testing is separate from standard home inspection requirements. However it is nonetheless an inspection service that can be provided by qualified(???) persons. Just like probing, we don’t do it unless we see signs that may indicate a problem (home inspection is a visual record). I would hope mold testing falls under similar criteria and is not being provided to rip people off. As far as the type of scientific testing and what the results are used for, I’m still confused but am researching it away from this message board.
Kevin
Great comments!
Can’t help but think you were cheering at the Ryder Cup in Kildare the other week!
Slainte
Michael
The reason everyone else spells it “MOLD” instead of Mould is because that is the way Websters Dictionary spells it. Maybe they are wrong. Maybe someone should sue them 
Webster’s New World Dictionary
Mould chiefly British spelling of Mold
I America we spell Mold as Mold
.
If you go back to where this started I asked why the scientist spelled it MOULD and that most other people from the USA spell it mold.
I wondered if in the scientific part of the world they use the English way of spelling .
Incidental in our part off America ( Canada) we spell it Mould and most in our country have switched to meteric but I still use Lbs and Inches</IMG>.
I have noticed you use lbs and Inches where as in the Scientific part of the USA they use the metric measurements and wondered if it was this way in the Scientific in spelling too.
This can become confusing trying to use both.( It is for me )
Roy Cooke
Shucks, Roy…we do that with a lot of words—like, f’rinstance, labour. In the US and A we spell it L-A-B-O-R. You should hear how we pronounce French names around here. It’s a whole differnt world…
I love our money because it easy to tell one bill from another .
I love your money because it is accepted in every country in the world .
And I really love all my American Friends because we can have these silly discusions and forget all our aches and pains for a while .
Roy Cooke
</IMG></IMG>
Thomas, I don’t claim to be an expert.
The experts are people like Mr. Connell and the scientists at the CDC and the EPA. What I hear the experts saying is “If you have a little, clean it up. If you have a lot, get rid of it, sampling is a waste of time and money”.
My understanding:
Mycotoxins are produced by fungi for use against each other in their competition for food. Their effect on humans is negligable.
That said, I finally forked out the $150.00 for a full-face respirator today but not because of mold spores. NACHI has an Inspecting for Wildlife course that lists all the diseases you can get from animals and/or what animals leave behind http://icwdm.org/handbook/damage/dam_man.pdf .
This little cough I’ve had, can’t seem to kick it you know… starting to develop all the symptoms of every disease. 8-
The “scientist” in question is Irish Roy.
Smart move.
Getting all of your info on any subject strictly from this message board is like getting all of your news from CNN. 
Most of what is printed on our message board on this topic comes from (a) vendors who supply training in this area or (b) inspectors who sell services in this area - both of whom have extensive experience and knowledge but who also have something at stake in the issue.
Please bring back to the discussion (and the message board) what it is that you learn from outside sources to help increase our database of knowledge on this board. (Even if it invites hostile responses from our resident “experts”, it adds quality to the debate).
You are a good man if you can read their Irish and even better if you can understand it .
Their are two Irish countries and one uses a different language then is written or spoken in Canada or the USA.
I am sure I can not even pronounce mr. Coaimhin P. Connell name
Roy Cooke