Are IR Camera Sales Dead

[David A. Andersen]

Just some thoughts to ponder in your new endeavor.

[Chuck Evans]

Originally Posted by dredding

er, other ways to find that there is in fact a moisture leak near the chimney perhaps?

• Take a look for cracks around the chimney crown
• Examine the flashing where the chimney meets the roof (assuming you can walk the roof)
• Look for wood rot/signs of moisture around the chimney from inside the attic
• Look for efflorescence in the firebox and chimney
• If you get a hit on any of the above, check with your moisture meter because the IR guys are encouraged to do the same AFTER viewing with their imager to KNOW FOR SURE.

Not flaming here, just pointing out that a quality inspection can be done (and is) without the use of IR.

All the above is true and I have the pictures to prove it. If you have inferred that I use, or advocate use, of infrared in-lieu of sound visual inspection methods you are sorely mistaken. Unfortunately, none of that applied to the usinspector that I went behind, so a crappy visual inspection is still a crappy inspection.

This was a diagnostic inspection. I was there to identify moisture penetration, which I did within two minutes. I could not have done that, nor could I have done the same level of inspection at the other four chimneys and the rest of the house without the use of IR. The rest of my time was spent identifying the potential sources, potential causes, extent of visible damage, etc. I spent significantly more time and published a larger report just for the water penetration issue alone than the usinspector spent on the entire 7,000sf house.

I will say that you can and will miss things on a quality visual only inspection that you will find with a proper IR inspection. Just as a doctor can detect medical issues from a blood test that he cannot find in a routine exam. You will still be charged for the blood test though.

Originally Posted by dredding

Last year I lost a grand total of (2) inspections because I didn't have IR.

You can't possibly know how many calls that you didn't get. I will tell you that over 90% of my contacts inquire about IR and 80+% of my bookings include it. I can pretty much guarantee that you are losing far more than that, but that's OK by me.

[Brandon Clark]

Originally Posted by canderson5

Seems to me if you as the inspector chose to pull out the camera then yes you are responsible to inform them. (even as I write that I'm debating it in my mind).

If it were a safety issue then it's a no brainer, I would be obligated to inform them. If they didn't ask for the IR and you break it out anyway, that seems to put some burden in your lap.


As far as just missing it in a standard home inspection, it's not really something that was missed. It's way outside a visual inspection and the contract and SOP would set that in stone. I can't see into walls so it's not part of the inspection.


It's clear that IR services HAVE to be separately contracted and well spelled out or your butt could really be in a sling whether they are part of your home inspection or not.

It seems you are being really smart about this with keeping an open mind and thinking of all the possibilities. Most of us just go to war for a few days when we disagree. Kinda keeps the place interesting and fun

Your absolutely right though, every tool and every extra thing we do has the potential to put us at risk. I believe in the end it just has to be a personal decision of do you think you offer something that provides "more benefit" or "more risk".

I think alot of it has to do with knowing your place as well. I think I provide WAY more benefit to a home buyer with thermal imaging but I would provide WAY more risk to someone needing IR on an enormous commercial building. The good part is that once you market that you offer IR services than you actually have a shot at folks calling you for these enormous commercial type jobs and then all you gotta do is contact a couple of NACBI guys or Level III's to take the reigns.

You can really miss out on alot of opportunities by not getting into thermal imaging. Eliminating most of the risk has more to do with a person staying within their training boundaries than actually buying the equipment.

I'd rather be obligated to tell the home buyer more about the home because of what I find using IR vs. taking a larger chance of missing something and having to prove I wasn't at fault for missing it.

[Darin Redding]

you have no knowledge of calls which were never made because potential clients saw that you did not have IR and took you off their list before even picking up the phone.

Good point and certainly there are those cases no doubt. To clarify, I was referring to those that call and inquire about IR.

But let's be honest, how many people actually peruse your website? I get people hitting my site and they see a page or two and pick up the phone. They ask "how much is an inspection" and "can I see a sample report" and both are only one link away from any page on my site. So the reality is that they don't look around.

So are there people that hit my site, look to see if I offer IR then leave? Probably. But consider this statistic. I run into an investment group from time to time that does flips on 250 homes a year in San Diego. I asked the sellers rep the other day while on an inspection how many HI's do inspections on his houses using IR. He said around 6 per year.

If I get sued for going above and beyond minimum standards with the sole intentions of trying to benefit my clients than so be it. That's a risk I'm willing to take.

It is happening right here in my neck of the woods, unfortunately. This tale comes from a RE agent I've done a few inspections with that I ran into this week on an inspection. An HI offered an "upgrade" of $50 to a buyer to add thermal imaging, missed a broken pressurized hot water line under slab, and is being sued by the current homeowners. Will he escape with his business in tact? Hope so. But it will be damaging for sure. BTW, there was no "visible" damage to the floor coverings. I would rather defend the fact that I missed it because I perform a limited, non-destructive visual inspection.

So today's inspection revealed slightly high moisture levels in the corners of two adjacent bedroom ceilings (14-16% moisture, surrounding areas averaged 7-10%). Ceilings were drywall covered in acoustic. No visible signs of moisture at the ceilings. Up in the attic there was only ruffled insulation and rodent droppings in the area of the leak. I figured rodents, like termites, like a source of moisture nearby. Faint water stains on one rafter nearby but the compo roof was maybe 15 years old. The house had two additions with gable roofs side by side, running in the same orientation. This created a valley where the two met and a cricket had been installed in this area. Torch down roof covering covered the cricket. My SOP in these cases? Scan the ceilings with my Surveymaster. I would have loved to see the IR scan of this one. It would have cut the time required to find the source of the leak but I still ain't sold.

[Joseph Hagarty, CMI]

Originally Posted by dredding

It is happening right here in my neck of the woods, unfortunately. This tale comes from a RE agent I've done a few inspections with that I ran into this week on an inspection. An HI offered an "upgrade" of $50 to a buyer to add thermal imaging, missed a broken pressurized hot water line under slab, and is being sued by the current homeowners. Will he escape with his business in tact? Hope so. But it will be damaging for sure. BTW, there was no "visible" damage to the floor coverings. I would rather defend the fact that I missed it because I perform a limited, non-destructive visual inspection.

IR is a Tool.
If you do not know what you are looking at in the first place, IR will only hurt and increase the liability of your business.

The fact that a Client was offered and deferred, will assist the inspector in preparing a defense to a Claim which is not likely to ever be filed or persued....

[Brandon Clark]

Originally Posted by dredding

Good point and certainly there are those cases no doubt. To clarify, I was referring to those that call and inquire about IR.

But let's be honest, how many people actually peruse your website? I get people hitting my site and they see a page or two and pick up the phone. They ask "how much is an inspection" and "can I see a sample report" and both are only one link away from any page on my site. So the reality is that they don't look around.

So are there people that hit my site, look to see if I offer IR then leave? Probably. But consider this statistic. I run into an investment group from time to time that does flips on 250 homes a year in San Diego. I asked the sellers rep the other day while on an inspection how many HI's do inspections on his houses using IR. He said around 6 per year.



It is happening right here in my neck of the woods, unfortunately. This tale comes from a RE agent I've done a few inspections with that I ran into this week on an inspection. An HI offered an "upgrade" of $50 to a buyer to add thermal imaging, missed a broken pressurized hot water line under slab, and is being sued by the current homeowners. Will he escape with his business in tact? Hope so. But it will be damaging for sure. BTW, there was no "visible" damage to the floor coverings. I would rather defend the fact that I missed it because I perform a limited, non-destructive visual inspection.

So today's inspection revealed slightly high moisture levels in the corners of two adjacent bedroom ceilings (14-16% moisture, surrounding areas averaged 7-10%). Ceilings were drywall covered in acoustic. No visible signs of moisture at the ceilings. Up in the attic there was only ruffled insulation and rodent droppings in the area of the leak. I figured rodents, like termites, like a source of moisture nearby. Faint water stains on one rafter nearby but the compo roof was maybe 15 years old. The house had two additions with gable roofs side by side, running in the same orientation. This created a valley where the two met and a cricket had been installed in this area. Torch down roof covering covered the cricket. My SOP in these cases? Scan the ceilings with my Surveymaster. I would have loved to see the IR scan of this one. It would have cut the time required to find the source of the leak but I still ain't sold.

So in a sense, charging an additional fee for IR vs. just including it with the home inspection put him at more risk. If he charged them extra for IR services that could have potentially detected the slab leak than they could claim they paid extra for a tool that should/could have detected it.

If he wouldn't of charged extra for the IR services than he could have claimed he's still only responsible for the general SOP but simply uses IR as a personal tool to help him ensure he's at-least meeting his visual SOP inspection standards.

HI's are always at risk of being sued if they do use IR, if they don't use IR, if they charge extra for IR, if they don't charge extra for IR, etc... It doesn't appear there's anyway of escaping all the risks of being sued in this business.

Do you actually crawl through every attic and crawl-space and put your moisture meter on every old moisture stain you see? That seems like it would take forever and be extremely difficult in many attics and crawl-spaces. An IR camera can definitely confirm if something is a stain or if it's wet and that saved time alone can often make up for the extra time spent scanning the rest of the home.

[Chuck Evans]

Originally Posted by bclark3

So in a sense, charging an additional fee for IR vs. just including it with the home inspection put him at more risk. If he charged them extra for IR services that could have potentially detected the slab leak than they could claim they paid extra for a tool that should/could have detected it.

If he wouldn't of charged extra for the IR services than he could have claimed he's still only responsible for the general SOP but simply uses IR as a personal tool to help him ensure he's at-least meeting his visual SOP inspection standards.

HI's are always at risk of being sued if they do use IR, if they don't use IR, if they charge extra for IR, if they don't charge extra for IR, etc... It doesn't appear there's anyway of escaping all the risks of being sued in this business.

Do you actually crawl through every attic and crawl-space and put your moisture meter on every old moisture stain you see? That seems like it would take forever and be extremely difficult in many attics and crawl-spaces. An IR camera can definitely confirm if something is a stain or if it's wet and that saved time alone can often make up for the extra time spent scanning the rest of the home.

Fee or no fee. If you do not define the service that you are providing with your thermal imager and under what conditions it is effective, you will be at risk. Especially if you over-hype capabilities in your marketing. Like claiming to detect mold with your imager.

[Cameron C. Anderson]

Mold?

Who is touting that?

[James H. Bushart]

Originally Posted by canderson5

Mold?

Who is touting that?

Scroll down.

[Cameron C. Anderson]

Okay, somebody needs to explain that to me. Is that actually possible or the camera just picking up moisture? I know just from gardening that heat is produced when composting takes place, but those moldy areas in the photos are all cooler.

[Charley L. Bottger]

Originally Posted by canderson5

Okay, somebody needs to explain that to me. Is that actually possible or the camera just picking up moisture? I know just from gardening that heat is produced when composting takes place, but those moldy areas in the photos are all cooler.

The first thing you need to understand about IR cameras is they display surface temps only nothing else they are not magic and one interrupts the information to be what it is

[Brandon Clark]

Originally Posted by jbushart

Scroll down.

You want ever find where I claim that Thermal Imaging can take the place of mold testing.

So you think that me saying "Infrared can help detect Moisture AND Mold concerns" and showing a couple of examples of it on my website is the same as me claiming that Infrared is used for mold testing????

Moisture and mold "DETECTION" is an entirely different subject than mold "TESTING". If I was advertising that thermal imaging was used for mold "testing" than why in the hell would I offer "mold testing" using a mold pump and taking air samples?

I can't believe you would try and call me out on such non-sense! Does thermal imaging not help detect MOISTURE AND MOLD concerns? Do you not HAVE to have a moisture concern to have a mold concern???

Do you not think thermal imaging can easily find hidden moisture concerns causing the mold concerns?

Do you want me to show you plenty more examples where I've discovered hidden moisture and mold concerns? Most people have the common sense to realize that thermal imaging can help detect hidden moisture and mold concerns but that an IR camera isn't going to provide the number of spores and the type of spores like mold testing would do.

How would you prefer I re-word the examples on my website to suit folks like yourself who don't seem to understand the common sense point I'm trying to make?

If I changed it around to "Infrared can detect hidden moisture which can be causing hidden mold" than would that be more suitable for you? Don't you think that saying Infrared can help detect hidden moisture and mold concerns is about the same thing?

It seems like your just looking for reasons to try an point fingers at folks.

[Chuck Evans]

Brandon,

I wasn't picking on you when I mentioned folks claiming to detect mold in the previous post. I didn't realize that you were one of the people making such claims, but this is over the top.

http://55205e2.activerain.com/post/2...me-inspections

Mold Testing is Often Avoided by Utah Infrared Home Inspections
Mold Testing Can Often and Easily be Avoided by Utah Infrared Home Inspections

Many Utah home owners and home buyers are saving the un-necessary costs of mold testing by simply having an Infrared Home Inspection. At Utah Infrared, we have all the top of the line Mold Testing Equipment and are mold testing certified by the International Association of certified Indoor Air Consultants, however, we often find ourselves being able to avoid the need for mold testing.

This kind of stuff harms the industry and does damage to our collective reputation.

Infrared imagers don't detect mold any more than they see through walls.

[Brandon Clark]

Originally Posted by cevans

Brandon,

I wasn't picking on you when I mentioned folks claiming to detect mold in the previous post. I didn't realize that you were one of the people making such claims, but this is over the top.

http://55205e2.activerain.com/post/2...me-inspections



This kind of stuff harms the industry and does damage to our collective reputation.

Infrared imagers don't detect mold any more than they see through walls.

Well maybe it is over the top in some folks opinion but I've never once detected moisture/mold with my thermal imaging camera and not explained to the client what the benefits of further mold "testing" would provide for them. I still explain to them either way such as "I have found hidden moisture/mold throughout your home via thermal imaging. You can pay me another $220 for a mold "test" but It's gonna confirm what I am SHOWING you. I'll be glad to charge you another $220 dollars but either way your home needs to be cleaned of mold because you have a moisture/mold concern" Does that not sometimes save someone the cost of upfront mold testing?

Everything I claim is absolutely true. Often times I can feel confident in telling a client that I don't feel as if they need mold "testing" after a through home inspection and a thermal imaging scan.

Just last week I had a fella request a home inspection and mold test on a brand spanking new home. The home was a model home for the other 5 upscale homes they built to sale. The place was literally flawless! I couldn't even find a gutter extension that was missing. I called the guy and said "I'd be glad to charge you another $220 for the mold testing that you requested but after doing the thermal scans of this home, I honestly feel like you'd be wasting your money". The guy sent me a lengthy email thanking me for my honesty and detailed report and 2 days later his brother-in-law called and booked a $439 pre-listing inspection from me.

You can't sit here and judge the way someone runs their business by going off a blog or two that isn't worded absolutely perfectly.

I am not doing any harm to this industry in any shape form or fashion. I work daily to try and educate and maintain the highest level of standards that I can in this industry. It's not people like me that's killing this industry, it's the camera manufactures selling $1100 cameras and folks not spending an extra dime on education and then claiming they can see through walls and detect mold. That's not what I'm doing in the slightest..

And on another note, on that blog you pointed out, everything that has one of those little funky symbols before it came straight from the United Infrared Power Point that I received during a $2500 MoistureFindIR class taught by Scott Wood. All I did was add "Utah Infrared" into it.

Are we not all on the same team here?

[David A. Andersen]

In my personal opinion all this talk about liability is a bunch of unsubstantiated BS.

[If he wouldn't of charged extra for the IR services than he could have claimed he's still only responsible for the general SOP but simply uses IR as a personal tool to help him ensure he's at-least meeting his visual SOP inspection standards. ]

It doesn't matter how you charge it, you cannot use thermal imaging and fallback later claiming that you only do a general SOP inspection. You cannot be an expert (on any ancillary service) and turn around and claim to be a "generalist" as many here seem to think they can do.

As Chuck pointed out:

[ Fee or no fee. If you do not define the service that you are providing with your thermal imager and under what conditions it is effective, you will be at risk.]

There are limitations to every ancillary service we provide and these limitations must be used to ensure you meet your client's "expectations".

[Chuck:Especially if you over-hype capabilities in your marketing.]

Over hype exceeds your clients expectations in every case!

[HI's are always at risk of being sued if they do use IR, if they don't use IR, if they charge extra for IR, if they don't charge extra for IR, etc... It doesn't appear there's anyway of escaping all the risks of being sued in this business. Utah Infrared is not your "normal home inspector". ]

We are not always just over-hyping ourselves but we also over-hype what we are capable of achieving;

[—Thermal Imaging used during a home inspection identifies any hidden moisture therefore exposing any hidden mold often eliminating a need for a costly mold test.]

Thermal imaging is not a moisture meter and does not identify moisture. It measures energy. We are the ones that identify the moisture.

Also claiming that thermal imaging eliminates the need for costly mold testing is against our general standards as we never rely on the thermal camera as a standalone test. Substituting thermal imaging for mold testing is a big "no go" because it can't identify or correct it's readings to identify Mold!

So as you can see this statement also cannot be used:

[If I changed it around to "Infrared can detect hidden moisture which can be causing hidden mold" than would that be more suitable for you?]

Again, this device is not a moisture meter:

[—Thermal Imaging is your non-destructive solution to indentifying where the water is and what exactly has moisture in it.]

This is not an exact capability of a thermal camera.

[I am not doing any harm to this industry in any shape form or fashion.]

Well in actuality you probably are (as are hundreds of other thermographers out there that are copying one another and trying to beat each other out of jobs). When we lead the client astray with mis-beliefs of what thermal imaging is capable of (whether intentional or not).

Also business practices such as this, concerning pricing structure:

[Most often a full thermal scan of a home can be conducted and all moisture concerns documented in an easy to read report for under $150 dollars.]

You cannot guarantee all moisture concerns can be documented and to do "a full thermal scan of a home" for $150 (this statement does not cover all of the issues that will be addressed in the thermal scan so the client can only assume that you will find "everything" which is the basis of this thread). First you have not identified the services you will provide and secondly you're doing it for $150?

There is a difference in offering a thermal scan of a property that will identify currently active water intrusion identifiable under current atmospheric conditions for a one time walk-through rate of $150! (No thermal inspection report provided).

[it came straight from the United Infrared Power Point that I received during a $2500 MoistureFindIR class taught by Scott Wood.]

I didn't see this blog you are discussing, but I think we have discussed using other peoples stuff already. It is very easily to change the intended context of the published document when modifying it to your use.

This is where the difference of cut and paste versus paraphrasing or referencing someone else's work comes to play. You can use someone else's work as an example, but when you cut and paste it to become your own you will always have problems.

The entire thermal imaging industry is plagued with using the work of just a few thermographers out there. You could spend a month scanning the Internet and see the same old stuff website after website.

I am not just addressing Brandon in this response. Everybody that passes around this alleged liability BS concerning thermal imaging when they don't have a clue what they're talking about and everyone's claims as to what thermal imaging can do is the point of this discussion.

All of this stuff is not intentional in most cases. We actually operate our businesses different than what our marketing stuff shows.We must all be careful of how we phrase our statements in our marketing and conversations with our clients. We are going to get into legal trouble because of these implied or misspoken statements.

A statement such as this camera measures temperature… Is not even accurate!

Temperature defined: is the measurement of the average speed of molecules or the average kinetic energy of molecules that make up a substance.

Temperature is not a form of energy. It is the consequence of more or less energy.

The thermal camera measures energy, not temperature. The camera converts the measurement of energy to temperature (after we make the necessary adjustments to the camera).

Is this being too picky?

Actually mixing the words energy, heat and temperature is not of concern to your unknowing client but if the thermographer thinks along these lines and muddies the water, you'll also distort your clients perceptions and subsequent expectations.

The end result is this mysterious fabricated liability we are all responsible for.

There is nothing definitive in thermal imaging. If you go into a job or a contract making these definitive statements that your camera sees all and knows all, you are wrong and you are in fact harming this industry in every shape form and fashion.