What are you specifically referring to in the document?
Unless I’m missing something, this appears to just cover the circumstances in which a landlord may enter a tenants residence in regards fixing mold issues, and a landlords obligations in fixing mold issues.
I don’t see anything that really pertains to home inspections.
Here is the pertinent sentence in the law that affects inspectors:
So mold is substandard condition.
One would think that was common sense. But given how many common sense safety concepts weren’t code until the last 20-30 years, I guess someone had to be explicit about it.
Many have argued that mold (with maybe a few types as exceptions) is everywhere and not a defect.
That argument is now settled by law, at least in California.
Wether you test for mold or not… in California mold is now a “substandard condition” and thus should be reported if noticed by home inspectors.
This is an interesting point.
I’ve seen some home inspectors list “visual mold inspection” as an extra charge. Not lab testing, but actually charging extra for a visual inspection. And I think to myself, really? If you see visual mold on a regular home inspection, you’re not going to tell the client unless they pay extra? That seems crazy to me.
If I see visual evidence of mold, of course I am going to say something!
And now with this new law, that’s what all home inspectors must do.
Being that it’s California, I’m surprised they don’t expect us to note the invisible mold also.
Frank I think the IR training is finally coming into value…
Perhaps the thermal anomalies of the invisible “stuff” is in a level three III training course. Why don’t you get back to me when you know something more…
I can detect strings or pull ups but invisible mold… I’m not going there under any circumstances.