We talked a bit about IR in this interview.

[John McKenna]

Originally Posted by jfarsetta

John,



If the other guy missed the defect, his defense will be that the defect is concealed, he is experienced, he is properly trained, and that he followed the SOP.

But if the cause was from a flaw in the roof flashing, then he
cannot say roof flashings are outside the SoP.

If you missed it using your camera, you would have no defense, as you are promoting the technology as giving you the ability so detect things that other inspectors cannot.

Not exactly.... My disclaimer that says I cannot find all defects
would help me and I am setting proper expectations. But since
my ability to find defects is enhanced with an IR camera, I feel better
with my IR camera, than without it. The SoP
offer little protection in the real world... IMHO.

You lose. He does not.

If the source of the moisture goes back to an item that is contained
within the SoP... he looses. Lawyers can help you see 20/20 .

It is not his responsibility to purchase the camera, nor is it yours. Of the two, you made the decision to purchase it, and market your use of it.

You lose.

If I find the defect... I win.
I find a lot of defects with my IR camera.

If you miss the defects and trust the SoP to save you... you loose
your deductible even if you win. And your rates go up... you loose.

The only way he loses is if he failed to discover the defect using industry-standard protocols and techniques, and he failed to follow the industry standard, or state-mandated, SOP.

If there is moisture in the wall and it goes back to the flashing, then
another inspector comes along and testifies... "I can see it".
He looses.

In your state, the SOP is the law. One cannot be culpable for failing to find something using the protocol that the State has determned to be required, and more importantly in the hypothetical you cited, what is NOT required.

In my state, we have crooked lawyers, like in all states, and they make
minced meat out of the SoP. You know this.

But... I like a good discussion.

In theory, trusting in the SoP sounds nice.

In the real world, finding more defects works better... IMHO.

A lawyer told me if I tell my clients up front that I do not claim to
find every defect, then I am not promoting a magic bullet or
setting false expectations.

InterNACHI promotes a lot of things that go beyond the SoP.
You teach courses that are beyond the SoP. Nothing wrong
with that. Doing more is a good thing... IMHO.

[Nick Gromicko]

The camera reduces liability by finding defects without expanding the scope of services delineated in the SOP like code certifification implies.

Period.

It is better to explain how you found a defect than to have to explain why you didn't.

[Nick Gromicko]

A ladder, like an IR camera, also allows you to see better and more easily find defects within the SOP too.

[Nick Gromicko]

It's just another tool to help you do your job... not another service outside of SOP such as engineering or code compliance.

[John McKenna]

Originally Posted by gromicko

The camera reduces liability by finding defects without expanding the scope of services delineated in the SOP like code certifification implies.

Period.

It is better to explain how you found a defect than to have to explain why you didn't.

Exactly.

[James H. Bushart]

Originally Posted by gromicko

A ladder, like an IR camera, also allows you to see better and more easily find defects within the SOP too.

But if I advertise that my ladder has magical powers and can do wondrous things (i.e. find electrical faults before they cause a fire)...and people hire me as a result of that claim....I cannot later claim that my ladder is just some other tool.

[James H. Bushart]

Originally Posted by jmckenna1

In theory, trusting in the SoP sounds nice.

In the real world, finding more defects works better... IMHO.

LOL

This is NOT the argument you make for your state mandated SOP when you argue in favor of licensing.

[John McKenna]

Originally Posted by jbushart

LOL

This is NOT the argument you make for your state mandated SOP when you argue in favor of licensing.

The SoP works good as a guideline for honest inspectors and strong training
requirements produce a better qualified inspector.

The SoP and strong qualification are a good thing.

The SoP is a minimum standard and I advise inspector to do even more
than the SoP require and find as many defects as possible.

The SoP can be twisted in the hands of a crooked lawyer. That does not
make SoP a bad thing, it just shows what a crooked lawyer can do. Some
lawyers can make a wonderful document like the US constitution say
things that the founders never dreamed of. This does not imply that the
constitution is a bad thing.

Think about it, it will come to you.

BTW... do you do the bare minimum only when conducting an inspection?

[John McKenna]

Originally Posted by jbushart

But if I advertise that my ladder has magical powers and can do wondrous things (i.e. find electrical faults before they cause a fire)...and people hire me as a result of that claim....I cannot later claim that my ladder is just some other tool.

Is Nick advertising that thermal imaging is magical.?

Can thermal imaging detect elelctrical hot spots that may stop a fire hazard?

In the hands a trained Infrared Certified Thermographer, yes it can.

Is it possible that some defects will not be found?... yes.

Can an IR camera find defects that the naked eye cannot see?... yes.

What's wrong with the truth?

No one is condemning inspectors who choose not to use certain tools.
I went for a long time and never used a moisture meter. I was
taught that it would make me liable for law suites. Later I changed my
mind. I understand your position.

[Kevin A. Richardson]

Originally Posted by jbushart

But if I advertise that my ladder has magical powers and can do wondrous things (i.e. find electrical faults before they cause a fire)...and people hire me as a result of that claim....I cannot later claim that my ladder is just some other tool.

Infrared technology is a non-destructive testing method. If properly used by a compotent and trained thermographer, it can and will find electrical faults before catastrophic failure. Period.

Nothing "magical" about it!

Kevin

[James H. Bushart]

Originally Posted by krichardson

Infrared technology is a non-destructive testing method. If properly used by a compotent and trained thermographer, it can and will find electrical faults before catastrophic failure. Period.

Nothing "magical" about it!

Kevin

In an empty house with no load on a circuit?

[John McKenna]

Originally Posted by jbushart

In an empty house with no load on a circuit?

When doing a plumbing inspection, I turn on the water fixtures.

When doing an electrical inspection, I turn on all the lights, fans,
vent blowers, AC-Heat, etc... then I look at the circuits.

I would also test all the plug outlets and do a visual inspection
of the accessible parts of the system as well.

A thermographer does the same inspection as a regular home
inspector, but is able to see more with the IR camera. It
is impossible to find every possible defect and this should
always be communicated to the client before the inspection
and included in your inspection agreement and written on
your ads and web pages.

If the power was off, then I would inform the client that the
inspection of the electrical was incomplete. I would tell
them this before I would even come to the inspection.

What would you do?