PRO-LAB deal on IR Camera: $2,995.

[Ron C. Bibler]

I was talking to an inspector that works for a law firms as an expert witness inspector. He just had a case that another inspector was sued over issue from an IR scan. The main part that the def lost the case over was he noted one item in his scan but did not note another item. The inspector that works for the law firm was using 320X240 And was able to see the second anomaly. The def. was using a low 120x120 cam.

I think it would be very hard to make a case on a moisture condition as things can very from day to day. what is wet today can be dry the next. just like a plumbing leak. Ive had things leak for me and had another inspector look at the same plumbing just an hr later and have no leak.

But if there is blood in the water...

We will see a lot of things over the next 5 years or so. I would say that IR will be a standard in all inspection. Buyers will want it. just as an inspection i did today and the buyer saw information about IR on a TV Show. He wanted my services and a $ 200.00 fee was a good deal to him.

If an inspector is not getting in on things now he will be by the request from buyers and the Real Estate agents.

Best

Ron

[John McKenna]

As Seen On TV

[William J. Decker]

Originally Posted by jbushart

The day is coming...and is not far away...when an SOP will be exceeded by an inspector with an IR camera who misinterprets a cool temperature reading as moisture and will cost the sale and be sued by the seller.

THis has already happened, in this area at least. I was called in, by the contractor's attorney, to inspect a new condo (1 year old) because the buyer was complaining about water intrusion. The owner hired a local HI who did thermal and he called out all the insullation defects as water intrusion. I checked it out and found that they were just insulation defects (double check with a moisture meter). I had myu wife cann the other guy and ask questions about their thermal imaging. The other guy said "No, we don't use a moisture meter. The IR camera works better." and "No, we don't have any certification for IR. We don't need it and it is not required. These small cameras are easy for anyone to use."

These are startling statements, indeed. And, this guy is just begging for trouble. I know of many inspectors who have the camera and no training. This is just a liability magnet.

He will turn and read his E&O policy that requires his compliance with the NACHI SOP while the plaintiff's attorney is introducing into evidence his "marketing" materials whereby he advertises how he "exceeds" (aka "does not comply") with the NACHI SOP.

There seems to be some common misconception of SOPs. SOPs (orustate one and the iNACHI one) are bare minimum requirements. In the case of our state SOP, it is the bare minimum that is required by state law. In the case of iNACHI, it is the bare minimum requirement for membership compliance.

But, just like building codes (which are also the bare minimum requirement), SOPs are not a requirement for quality or even for "best practices".

Compliance with an SOP (in the case of the state SOP) is a legal requirement for the bare minimum acceptable practices. They are not a legal safeguard to getting sued.

Plenty of builders build a home to the bare minimum codes, but still get sued for shoddy workmanship.

When that happens...(not if)...it will be broadcast like wildfire through the used house salesmen's communication systems and there will be a pandemic of issues regarding people who are "exceeding" instead of complying with the SOP with their use of their IR cameras "to show more".

I really don't care what agents think. I don't work for them. Good, ethical agents (especially buyer's agents) want the best, most thorough inspection for their clients. In my opinion, only a dishonest agent would disagree with an IR inspection (done by a certified and trained inspector).

I would be lying if I were to suggest that I, among others, will not have a slight smile my face as I pretend to be shocked and concerned about this horrible turn of events as I am being told about them.

But I salute the inspector who inspects and reports according to the SOP and, in addition, provides and charges for the extra services that he can provide with his IR camera. When the prices become more reasonable, I plan to do so, myself.

I do not "charge extra" for an IR "add on". I include IR in every inspection and charge more for the inspection. To just offer it as an add on, like Radon, is the real cause for liability. Try explaining, in front of a jury, that you could have found a water leak (that had not given any surface, naked eye indication) if only the client had paid more. You would get creamed.

With the camera, you can honestly say (and back it up in court!) that you did the best possible, using the best available technology.

Just my 2 1/2 cents.

[Richard L. Bennett]

Will

I agree with 90% - Here is where I have a problem - Training is not all good or bad so to say one has been trained will not cover your ***

Inspector said some things that were true but he did shoot himself in the foot

He did spot an issue that was good -- What he did not do was to use his head. That was not a result of no training that was just being stupid

later

rlb

[rmaday]

Originally Posted by rbennett

Will

I agree with 90% - Here is where I have a problem - Training is not all good or bad so to say one has been trained will not cover your ***

This is true, however the logic is flawed. The converse
- lack of training (Knowledge) in how to use your tools - will certianly be a worse scenario.

Originally Posted by rbennett

He did spot an issue that was good -- What he did not do was to use his head. That was not a result of no training that was just being stupid
later
rlb

Perhaps he did not know any better, and by his statements that he had no training we can assume this to be the case.
If he had training (Knowledge of how to use the tools) perhaps he would have not been "stupid"

This is an example of my original point, the tools by themselves are useless unsless you know how to use them (knowledge).

[Richard L. Bennett]

A lot of maybe's and if's here

Nick is building an inspection home and if he were to put some IR isues in it with the exam we could see what trainging is worth with a stupid camera or a smart camera

Smart camera are already being used in industry so it will not be long before we will see it in our profession

The first one that I saw was at the airport when we had the SARS problem

Peoples faces were looked at with the IR camera for high temp. If the alarm went off they were stopped for addional checking

NO CAMERA OPERATOR AT ALL - camera was smart enough to look for just the face and follow it. It was also part of this automatic "find the bad guy" software that did not quite work yet.

I understand that the automatic DNA and finger print software does work

The automatic color codes on the side of box cars also works

Will --- with you background do you think that pattern reconition "smart camera for the untrained and uneducated" will come about. Or do you think that as they get smarter our job performance will just get better?

Just some thoughts to throw around

Wonder was the smartest camera of today costs and what does it do??

rlb

[rmaday]

Originally Posted by rbennett

Smart camera are already being used in industry so it will not be long before we will see it in our profession

The first one that I saw was at the airport when we had the SARS problem

Peoples faces were looked at with the IR camera for high temp. If the alarm went off they were stopped for addional checking

NO CAMERA OPERATOR AT ALL - camera was smart enough to look for just the face and follow it. It was also part of this automatic "find the bad guy" software that did not quite work yet.

The problem again (still) is that one needs to know how to interpret the information by the "smart camera". Simple enough to say that this is "hot" (the peoples faces) - in that instance, they didn't care WHY they were "hot" just that they were. As a side note what happened next? Did the camera diagnose SARS? Do a medical workup? This is the point that you continue to miss - the data alone is worthless, the big question is WHAT HAPPENS NEXT? What does someone do with the information?

In Will's example there was an anomaly detected. The problem arose when someone who was not knowledgeable interpreted the results incorrectly (insulation vs water intrusion).

You can have all the tools in the world, but if you don't know how they work or what to do with the information provided, then you need some EDUCATION.

I am done with this topic - I refuse to have a battle of wits with.....

nevermind.

[James H. Bushart]

If I ever find the single invention...the "wonder tool"...that will provide the key to being right in every inspection, to find parts of the house where no man has seen before, to bring about the next era in home inspections....

...I'm not telling anyone.

I'm buying it, putting it in my tool bag, and using it. Let my competitors discover it some time later...much later.

But, of course, if I want to start a school and want to shift from making money using it to making money teaching it to others....I'll start a thread on the message board.

[John McKenna]

Originally Posted by jbushart

If I ever find the single invention...the "wonder tool"...that will provide the key to being right in every inspection, to find parts of the house where no man has seen before, to bring about the next era in home inspections....

...I'm not telling anyone.

I'm buying it, putting it in my tool bag, and using it. Let my competitors discover it some time later...much later.

But, of course, if I want to start a school and want to shift from making money using it to making money teaching it to others....I'll start a thread on the message board.

Witty exaggerations intended to mock lack substance.

[bkelly1]

Personally, I like finding items like these for my client , but it is all personal preference.