I think they are great, but I don't want one in my tool bag.

If you get dragged into court say for termite damages, and the attorney know you have this type of equipment, you have no leg to stand on.

Can't claim you just could only perform a visible inspection for that particular client when you had the equipment available to see within the wall.

Then they find something else with the camera like mold, its all over for your career.

Never mind trying to use the comment that its an added service at an additional cost to the client. Won't fly in court.

I had a Boroscope once that can be used within wall voids to see termite infestations. The one and only case I've ever been to court on, the judge asked me why I didn't use the tool when it was available to me. I told the judge that it takes more time for use and the client did not want to pay the extra charge.

Do you have a signed agreement stating the service was available if they had chose that option?

No, I said.

Guilty. He said.

1250. out for treatment on my part.

__________________
Rick Hurst_Home Works Inspection Co_Rockwall TX
In the words of Mike Tyson.... "Everyone has a plan until they get hit inda mouf"