TOPIC: IR and investigative studies

"There is a discussion of this on Nachi too, with an interesting twist.?  The twist being that if you pull your IR camera out, even once, and you miss something anywhere else in the home (even if its hidden), you could have just increased your liability exposure.?  Good Point.? "

No. It is a bunch of B.S. that's been conjured up by someone who sits on the message board 24/7 with nothing better to do!

If trained properly, preparing a proposal which contains the scope and purpose of the inspection will clearly line out to the client what is and is not covered with the use of thermal imaging. If your client sees a water stain in the ceiling and wants to know about it and you use thermal imaging, it doesn't mean that you are responsible for every other building leak that may or may not be detectable at the time of the inspection. It doesn't even mean that you're even responsible for that specific leak! It also doesn't mean you have to identify thermal anomalies in the main electric service panel!!

Thermal imaging is not an x-ray machine that works under every condition. The conditions of testing must be present or created prior to the use of thermal imaging (thus the required education). Your contracts/proposal should specifically line out what it is you're using the camera for. Just because you take it out does not mean you will be required to perform and identify every potential thermal anomaly or exception present in the building you are working. Just because you own it, does not mean that you must use it on every home inspection following your camera purchase! This is totally a bunch of nonsense derived by people they just want to tear down a procedure that obviously puts them to a great disadvantage.

Please do not start to spread that nonsense here or in other areas.

The only liability thermal imaging creates is if you do it wrong!
If you are a "camera owner" attempting an application that you are untrained for, then yes your liability does increase because of the chances that you are "wrong"!

I see countless examples across the Internet of thermal imaging scans claiming moisture versus air infiltration that are incorrectly diagnosed because due diligence was not used to further identify the exception identified by thermal imaging.

Even when backed up with a moisture meter, you could be wrong!
In some parts of the country were high moisture conditions exist in the summer months, when air comes in contact with air-conditioned buildings, moisture is present. During the winter months when excessive humidity from the interior comes in contact with cold exterior wall components, moisture is present. Is it a water leak or an air leak resulting in water damage?

I have three investigations pending where I was called in for roofing leaks where the client spent thousands of dollars trying to locate and fix a roof leak. There was no roof leak! However, there was water present. The thermal camera does not identify anything but emitted energy. No temperature, no moisture, no mold, no termites. You can have a hot spot and a cold spot related to water intrusion at the same time and in the same thermal scan! Depending upon the circumstances of the leakage, it may show up hot or it may show up cold. Actually, I have some thermal images that are both hot and cold at the same leak!

Are you ready for thermal imaging? Ponder the following condition and formulate a hypothesis based upon thermal principles as to what you would expect to occur during a water leakage investigation.

brainteaser: if you have an active water leak in the ceiling and you add heat to the room, the anomaly will raise in temperature/fall in temperature (select one); and why?


Participation in this brainteaser does not need to be public. Respond by e-mail in my profile if you wish to discuss this critical subject off-line. I would venture to say that over 95% of thermal camera owners cannot answer this question correctly (specifically the "why")so I prefer to not discuss this publicly.

Please do not expect an immediate reply is I have a crap load of work on my plate.

"If trained properly, preparing a proposal which contains the scope and purpose of the inspection will clearly line out to the client what is and is not covered with the use of thermal imaging."

Ultimately, I think this is the same point I was making, only emphasizing the CYA part. But different people market differently, and some state too much, again similar to your points.

My HI agreement (& marketing) states that full house thermal-image scan is not part of the HI  service, unless contracted for separately. In other words, I'm just using it as a tool, unless full-house imaging is purchased.  Others may not differentiate, and simply charge more, or have it as a marketing feather...&/or perhaps hype it too much.

The other point, is to make money with the camera & investment in skills training, either by higher HI charges, or by charging 4 ancillary service, & make sure expectations re. the tool vs. the ancillary service is understood.  That is the structure that makes sense for my business model, your structure may be different but works for you...

I found the discussion on Nachi to be quite helpful, so, I suppose, to each his own.

whatever?

I wasn't directing anything towards you.I just hope that you didn't find the liability conversation of any help because it is nonsense.

You put the question marks after your statement, I'm just responding.

brainteaser: if you have an active water leak in the ceiling and you add heat to the room, the anomaly will raise in temperature/fall in temperature (select one); and why?

I would guess the warm air circulating in the room can hold more moisture and so the moisture in the stain would more rapidly evaporate into the room causing the wet stain to drop in temperature.

Correct, Never underestimate the power of evaporative cooling in thermal imaging!

AMEN!!!!!!!!!!