The damn inspector told me NOT to do it!
Now my beautiful children are sick & my new AC guy says he should have recommended it.
Nick, it’s a discussion with the clients.
I outlined what I tell them above.
It’s their call.
1st of all I see no proof of that statement and I personally beg to disagree.
Now the original thread title is “** Reduce liability by offering mold testing and taking a photo”**
If you clearly state in your agreement that you do not test for mold whatsoever and the clients agree to that you are safe according to mark Cohen even… But if you do infect test for it and miss it you are Increasing your liability as well as your chances of losing a law suit. That’s a no brainer.
The taking a photo is funny as most molds grow behind walls or other surfaces long before they pop through and become visible. Also mold grows unseen in many other places such as inside the Air Distribution system, again what photo ?
The bottom line is that Mold testing is a separate skill from a basic home inspection and should be treated as such. It takes a ton of education to be Competent in mold testing and is really an separate profession and skill them most home inspectors have.
I could go on, but that fact is that simply saying you test for mold on a general Home inspection will reduce your liability is ridicules to say the least. An inspector is much better off disclaiming mold altogether to reduce liability unless well trained and competent in that skill.
Jim
That’s how long it takes for a beer to get cold when it is submerged in ice. :lol:
That pretty much sums it up Jim.
No, nor did they win. In the U.S., the vast majority of lawsuits never see a courtroom.
He claimed it even killed his dog!
Ed McMahon: 'Death Mold Killed My Dog' - ABC News
Mick’s ex-wife’s 20 million dollar mold lawsuit**
**
New York City inspectors found mold in Jagger’s apartment in October 2003. They classified the mold as “immediately hazardous,” and gave the owner five days to have the problem certified as corrected.
Originally Posted by jkeilson https://nachi.cachefly.net/forum/images/2006/buttons/viewpost.gif
- If you clearly **state in your agreement that you do not test for mold whatsoever and the clients agree to that **you are safe according to mark Cohen even… But if you do in fact test for it and miss it you are Increasing your liability as well as your chances of losing a law suit. That’s a no brainer.
The bottom line is that Mold testing is a separate skill from a basic home inspection and should be treated as such. It takes a ton of education to be Competent in mold testing and is really an separate profession and skill then most home inspectors have.*
The above is worth reading again as this thread its extremely misleading and has an obvious agenda behind it that could harm any inspector who lacks the necessary skills to perform a thorough and Competent mold test.
Jim
There were recently 11 lawsuits regarding spring water and none of the Inspectors offered divining rod services…
I believe Fred McMahon (eds illegitimate half brother) won the last suit.
If Prolab sold diving rods and Home Advisor marketed them I can just guess as to how I should be pushing this “Service” to limit my liability.
Maybe we wait for the next lawsuit over mold (shouldn’t be long) and see if the home inspector offered mold.
And why do they not reach the courtroom? Usually because they settle, not because they are dismissed. A settlement is not a win
I was involved in a major local mold lawsuit in 2005 here locally. I was to blame as I did not alert to the home buyer that mold was present. Even though my reports and agreement stated that I did not do any “environmental” testing, I got pulled in. The buyer moved here from Idaho, and after move-in, his family was getting sick often. Doctor said that the new home had mold. Buyer started suing everyone. After thousands of dollars spent on mold testing, eveasive in-wall testing by various companies, all mold results where higher on the outside of the home than the inside. One company testing person decided to look at the linens. Guess what. The buyer had the curtains and bed pillows in storage for months before he moved the truck trailer to Kansas to unload, all covered with mold.
If you do not do mold testing, state it on your reports and agreements. If you do mold testing, better create a good seperate mold agreement. My attorney advised me to explain the word “environmental” in my agreement, or change the word and list the mold, radon, air, etc. seperately.
So did the lawsuit cost you anything, money wise?
It always does, whether or not you win or lose. Attorneys do not care how any complaint ends up, because all of them get paid, both sides, for any reason. As Nick stated, over 90% of lawsuits and complaints get settled out of court. Figure $5K a day if you go to court. It is always cheaper to settle than to go to court, whether or not you are guilty. Make sure, if you have E&O insurance, that insurance covers mold, termite, attorney fees, mediation fees, discovery responses, etc. Some low cost E&O will not cover some of these fees.
Yesterday I had a client who was interested in mold testing.
I gave him the run down as I stated in an earlier post.
No mold was visible and no musty smell.
But he wanted to go ahead with air sampling for 280.00 ( 2 samples ).
And thats fine of course, I don’t really care about the money.
So we’ll most likely get back the reports with the typical molds present in typical concentrations and I guess they’ll feel like they covered their bases.
Yep.
That’s for sure.
Correct.
9 cases in 20 odd years I am shaking in my boots.
I have a better chance of doing a Move in Certified Inspection.
More evidence to support my contention came out yesterday:
Yesterday, InspectorPro Insurance put out an email to its policy holders stating that most mold claims filed against home inspectors were filed against home inspectors who didn’t offer mold inspection services.