Thread: Mike Holmes said we need an IR camera

Mike Holmes' home inspection checklist

Similar Threads:

• infrared camera for sale
• Clipboard out, infrared camera in - Port Townsend Leader
• Could MIKE HOLMES miss P trap & vent so easely?
• Could MIKE HOLMES miss P trap & vent so easely?
• camera

Well, if Mike says so, I guess we had better order one right away.

I particularly liked his incorrect description of efflorescence.

Whatever...

He states that as a contractor he has a half million dollars in equipment and that his camera is a $20,000 unit.
He states that he can rip open walls because it's a Holmes inspection.

No wonder people's expectations can be so distanced from reality.

Obviously, he's had some success so he's doing something right. At the same time, I'm not sure I've ever heard anyone say anything about the show other than a home inspector.

Of course, he doesn't check for recalls like many of you- so he's missing fire hazards if you want to tell folks at least one reason you're better

Well if you should have one then you should have a backup also.

It is mostly theater of the absurd. Like the home shows with 2 people appearing to do the work when in reality there is a crew of workers actually doing the work. The actors just act like they are doing the work for the cameras and it all gets done in 30 min or an hour.

It is not reality only reality TV which is not the same.

Originally Posted by Garry Sorrells

It is mostly theater of the absurd. Like the home shows with 2 people appearing to do the work when in reality there is a crew of workers actually doing the work. The actors just act like they are doing the work for the cameras and it all gets done in 30 min or an hour.

It is not reality only reality TV which is not the same.

Amen!! A few years ago I worked on an episode of "Extreme Makeover: Home Edition" as a seamstress (my former career). It took very little time to recognize the whole setup is scripted from start to finish; many of the "spontaneous" scenes were filmed over and over until the director was happy. We did crowd reaction shots several hours before the event we were supposed to be reacting to. The designer I was working with designed a headboard that didn't fit up the stairs, and once we cut it in two to get it upstairs, realized he had never measured the wall space for it... turns out it wouldn't fit. It ended up in the dumpster (of which there were many!!).

When the episode aired, I ended up being on screen at least four or five times (more than any other of the dozen other people sewing for the episode), and I'm convinced it's because I recognized what the deal was and played along with it.

Ever since that experience I haven't been able to stomach any "Reality" shows because of the total lack of reality behind them.

Nope, you don't need an IR camera, just like you don't need reporting software or a digital camera.

You can fight technology or embrace it. You can fight Mike Holmes, a semi-media giant who nearly every home buyer is familiar with, or you can work with it.

You can try to eek out a living doing just the basics or you can thrive by offering an inspection that's better than your competition.

My IR camera paid for itself in two weeks, but the income from my increased inspection fee is still coming in. I hope this Mike Holmes segment goes national.

...and Eric, he stated as a contractor, building houses, he has half a million dollars in equipment. He's being modest. Most of the home builders I worked for had well over half a million dollars in equipment.

Your iR camera paid for itself in two weeks? Wow.

Mike has no certifications for his IR.

His camera was given to him by Flir as Flir is one of his sponsors, ditto for most of his equipment, other sponsor supply it gratis.

I have seen Mike introduced on various TV shows and radio as a mould expert and asbestos expert, yet he holds no certifications to claim that.

Originally Posted by Raymond Wand

Mike has no certifications for his IR.

His camera was given to him by Flir as Flir is one of his sponsors, ditto for most of his equipment, other sponsor supply it gratis.

I have seen Mike introduced on various TV shows and radio as a mould expert and asbestos expert, yet he holds no certifications to claim that.

It doesn't matter if he has no certifications. He is perceived as an expert by the general public (our clients). He has extreme media access. Instead of wasting time and money trying to fight it, except it and use it to your advantage.

For some reason there is a tendency to pound on anyone who sticks their neck out. Is Mike perfect...no of course not but for any faults you can find, his show is both entertaining and informative. Has he made some misstatements, of course but that is not the point. Is his opinion his opinion?... He is making good points and attempting to improve the industry. You do not need to agree with him at all but at least give him the benefit of the doubt and stop picking nits.

Y'all remember Bob Vila? He was touted as an expert and the homes he built and remodeled were revered as some of the best homes one could buy. It took a few years for the claims and lawsuits to catch up with him but he faded into the sunset after several years.

I look at Mike as our Bob Vila.. albeit Vila had a little more class!

I think Mike is fine and has actually helped to educate the home buying public with what they need to look for in a home inspector. He touts experience as the number on factor to look for with a good home inspector. Like Bob Vila, he has become an expert in the eyes of the media watching public and if you try to disarm or dispute what Mike says or does you will not look very good in the eyes of those who watch his shows; and those are the folks that are buying homes and hiring home inspectors.

Certainly a different world when all costs and exposure is covered by media money. I admit being intimidated by the I.R. camera seemingly bottomlesss pit of equipment cost/s, training, maintenence, etc. However, it is the liability that concerns me most. If you have and use an I.R. camera, the standard / expectation / bar has been raised exponentially. If your use of a camera is known, you best not miss any moisture, interior wall leaks, excessive electrical termination heat or insulation problems anywhere. I suspect a good law smith could eat up an I.R. inspection regardless of the report quality.

It seems every week I read about someone selling their iR camera.

Have been inspecting since 1991 and only have had one client request a iR scan and it was for a legal case I was working on.

There is no way I am spending $10-20K or more on a camera, I can't justify the cost nor do clients seem prepared to spend addtional monies on their inspection.

Originally Posted by Raymond Wand

It seems every week I read about someone selling their iR camera.

Have been inspecting since 1991 and only have had one client request a iR scan and it was for a legal case I was working on.

There is no way I am spending $10-20K or more on a camera, I can't justify the cost nor do clients seem prepared to spend addtional monies on their inspection.

I too have gotten very few requests for IR scanning, less than 10 over 9 years of inspecting. And around here, people love the idea of extra tests and inspections until they see what they have to pay for those services.

I use an IR camera, 2 grand model, works fine for me.
I don't advertise it's use and I don't even tell customers what it is. I tell them it's atool i use to read temperatures in the home.
It makes my job easier and has allowed me to find leaks I may not have found othgerwise.
Also testing heat and a/c is easy and accurate.
I do agree that it is overboard
But I like tools, i can use the write off, and I sleep better
As fas as MH goes
Why does every panel he installs lay on its side?
Is that a Canada thing.
Doesn't fly down here.

Originally Posted by wayne soper

As fas as MH goes
Why does every panel he installs lay on its side?
Is that a Canada thing.
Doesn't fly down here.

I never watched a full episode of the show but did see one where the panel they installed was on its side. I didn't understand it either.

Up here the panel can be installed horizontal or vertical.

Originally Posted by wayne soper

I use an IR camera, 2 grand model, works fine for me.
I don't advertise it's use and I don't even tell customers what it is. I tell them it's atool i use to read temperatures in the home.
It makes my job easier and has allowed me to find leaks I may not have found othgerwise.
Also testing heat and a/c is easy and accurate.

Basically the same as me. I am not a moisture intrusion specialist nor do I do moisture intrusion testing nor am I a thermographer, and I tell the clients this. I do not do entire IR scans on homes or perform energy audits, but use it for suspected problems I observe.

However, I do advertise, on my website, that I have it and what I use it for. I've also gotten several calls and jobs of locating in floor heating pipes and wires for peoples' remodeling projects.

IR cameras are now quite good in the under$5k range. Years ago I paid over $13k (maybe $15k, don't recall exactly what I spent anymore) for the camera and training.

BEST INVESTMENT I MADE with regards to tools.

The key is to not get hung up in using it to find moisture (although it works quite well for that too), but to let you mind search out new ways to use it AT EVERY INSPECTION.

Over the years that I had my IR camera I would put 'using it to find moisture' at less than 20% of the time. The other 80% of the time I was using it for everything else I could think of: showing structural items which were missing, showing insulation which was missing, showing (anything which created a temperature difference on the surface I was reading.

The simple fact that I had an IR camera and used it on basically every inspection brought in untold new clients, which means 'more $$$$' ... so, if you are looking for increasing the number of $$$$ you bring in, I suggest starting with an IF camera, and it does not have to be a top of the line $60k camera, probably those $3k-$4k ones work just fine for the uses you will put it too.

Using the IR camera as I did will also make you look at structures differently, and make you look at your inspections differently.

I suspect the reason so many inspectors are selling their IR cameras is that they thought they were buying the latest and greatest moisture and mold seeking x-ray machine - and that is simply not what they are for.

Hi Jerry

'showing structural items which were missing' How so? Thats a new claim, I have never heard that one.

I think if iR were so popular you would see more inspectors getting them. I know more inspectors who bought them for whatever reason and then sold them.

I am going to stick to my moisture detector.

Cheers,

Ray,
If you are looking at a ceiling with no access above and the surface is smooth as MH's wallet.
You can't determine if framing was installed properly.
With the camera you can see the distance between studs or rafters in the temperature differential.
If an exterior wall is set at 3 feet on center because mo larry and curly were there, you can see it.
As you work with the camera you can just sweep the room and pick up abnormalities.
Now I am not by any way an expert with it as I am just starting with IR, but have found it very helpful.
It also confuses the brokers, which is not too difficult, but is alsways fun to watch

IR is a very useful tool but it is not the "Silver Bullet". Unfortunately there are those that sell it as such... in my opinion because it is all they have to sell.

I have a IR cam and although I use it all the time, I make it clear that the results are not always definative. There are cases where had I not had the cam I would not have gotten the job. There are jobs that the client does not want or can not get approval for probe testing, in which case IR is another level of testing (albeit not definative).

Prior to getting my cam, when a client asked if I did IR, I had to go through the whole spiel about IR not being definative, and had to hope I got the job. Now I simply respond "of course", and move on.

As far as Ken's claim to having paid for his cam in two weeks... .
And as far as his hope that the MH segment goes national... .

Mike Holmes said in that video clip he can see mold inside walls with it. Huh???

Originally Posted by Nick Ostrowski

Mike Holmes said in that video clip he can see mold inside walls with it. Huh???

Remember ... that is an ACTOR on a TV SHOW.

That said, if there is enough moisture for the mold to be growing, it may be possible to see *the temperature differences* in the surface of the wall between where the mold is (moist, which will likely show as cooler) and no mold is (dryer, which will likely show as warmer). The 'cooler' and 'warmer' may depend on if the season is air conditioning or heating as there are circumstances in which the too areas change temperature relationships and the mold may show as warmer and the non-mold area may show as cooler.

Attached are some photos showing the differences in 'warmer'/'cooler' and 'cooler'/'warmer' caused by daytime and nighttime temperatures

Think some cells which were supposed to be filled were missed in the attached photos? The darker areas in the first two photos are the filled areas (the lighter areas in the third photo are the filled areas), the walls were filled in 5 foot lifts ... well ... were *supposed to be filled* in 5 foot lifts. Think they missed some cells, even some entire wall areas?

Think some they missed some insulation in the attached photos?

Could not tell it from inside the house or from inside the attic, but if the insulation is not installed properly ... it is like it is not even there. Darker areas are from cold air in attic going right past the insulation which *was* installed in the attic ... just not installed properly ... but not such that I could see it from in the attic.

Jerry. the 6th photo looks there is someone having a drink in the attic

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

Remember ... that is an ACTOR on a TV SHOW.

That said, if there is enough moisture for the mold to be growing, it may be possible to see *the temperature differences* in the surface of the wall between where the mold is (moist, which will likely show as cooler) and no mold is (dryer, which will likely show as warmer). The 'cooler' and 'warmer' may depend on if the season is air conditioning or heating as there are circumstances in which the too areas change temperature relationships and the mold may show as warmer and the non-mold area may show as cooler.

Attached are some photos showing the differences in 'warmer'/'cooler' and 'cooler'/'warmer' caused by daytime and nighttime temperatures

Think some cells which were supposed to be filled were missed in the attached photos? The darker areas in the first two photos are the filled areas (the lighter areas in the third photo are the filled areas), the walls were filled in 5 foot lifts ... well ... were *supposed to be filled* in 5 foot lifts. Think they missed some cells, even some entire wall areas?

We as inspectors understand that part but he said he can see mold with the IR cam. I'm all for him putting the home inspection profession on a higher plane and giving it more credence and publicity. But the accurate explanation would have been that the camera can help detect conditions that are conducive to the presence of mold.

Originally Posted by Steven Turetsky

As far as Ken's claim to having paid for his cam in two weeks... .

When a person calls to place an inspection order we always ask how they heard about us and why they chose us. My camera cost a little under two grand. In the first two weeks after I posted on my website that I use an IR camera I got four $500+ inspection specifically because they saw I have an IR camera. I also got a job locating the wires for an in-floor heating system which was $175. And they continue to come in.

Yes, it's a cheap low res camera. But I'm not doing moisture intrusion testing or energy audits and it works well for what I use it for. As Steven said, IR is not the definitive answer for moisture or mold, in fact, the basic IR classes I took stated that several times.

Originally Posted by Nick Ostrowski

Mike Holmes said in that video clip he can see mold inside walls with it. Huh???

No, he said ...with the temperature difference he can see mold and all sorts of moisture issues.

Originally Posted by Ken Rowe

No, he said ...with the temperature difference he can see mold and all sorts of moisture issues.

I was incorrect about the "inside walls" part but he said he can see mold. The temperature difference doesn't mean there is mold there. It means that a condition exists that may be conducive to the presence of mold. When Mike Holmes puts himself out there as an expert and says the camera allows him to see mold, it creates an unrealistic expectation for the capabilities of the camera and what home inspectors do. Please correct me if I'm wrong here but it is my understanding that IR cams read temperature differences only. I have never heard it be said that these cameras can see mold. And a moisture issue doesn't mean mold is present either. It's just another condition that is conducive to the presence of mold.

I have no problem with IR technology. If it works for you and get you business, great.

I have been reading up on this ability of iR to find mould. However the consensus seems to be that one might be able to see conditions which cause mould, however the camera is incapable of finding or seeing mould.

Big difference in my mind.

Originally Posted by Nick Ostrowski

We as inspectors understand that part but he said he can see mold with the IR cam.

That's why I said this first:

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

Remember ... that is an ACTOR on a TV SHOW.

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck View Post
Remember ... that is an ACTOR on a TV SHOW.

And that's part of the problem. The general viewing public don't see him that way. He's comes across as a champion for all homeowners who got screwed or were lied to. He may indeed know what he's doing and I have no doubt that he is very knowledgeable and experienced. But he also said a home buyer should ask an inspector if he has and IR camera and if he says yes, tell him to come on in.

Originally Posted by Steven Turetsky

As far as Ken's claim to having paid for his cam in two weeks... .

Originally Posted by Ken Rowe

When a person calls to place an inspection order we always ask how they heard about us and why they chose us. My camera cost a little under two grand. In the first two weeks after I posted on my website that I use an IR camera I got four $500+ inspection specifically because they saw I have an IR camera. I also got a job locating the wires for an in-floor heating system which was $175. And they continue to come in.

Yes, it's a cheap low res camera. But I'm not doing moisture intrusion testing or energy audits and it works well for what I use it for. As Steven said, IR is not the definitive answer for moisture or mold, in fact, the basic IR classes I took stated that several times.

Ken,

Did you think my smiley face equated to doubt?

Originally Posted by Steven Turetsky

Ken,

Did you think my smiley face equated to doubt?

Nope, I didn't know what it meant. So I decided to give further explanation of my personal experience so there would be less confusion.

Originally Posted by Raymond Wand

Hi Jerry

'showing structural items which were missing' How so? Thats a new claim, I have never heard that one.

I think if iR were so popular you would see more inspectors getting them. I know more inspectors who bought them for whatever reason and then sold them.

I am going to stick to my moisture detector.

Cheers,

I think he's referring to this type of image. JP can correct me if I'm wrong.
I look for missing structural components all the time. Especially in room adds, but only if solar loading permits.

Originally Posted by Raymond Wand

I have been reading up on this ability of iR to find mould. However the consensus seems to be that one might be able to see conditions which cause mould, however the camera is incapable of finding or seeing mould.

Big difference in my mind.

I agree with this 100%. I get calls from prospects saying other guys will find mold with the IR cam and I say, "you should use them".

Originally Posted by Raymond Wand

Hi Jerry

'showing structural items which were missing' How so? Thats a new claim, I have never heard that one.

Attached are some photos showing filled cells ... er ... where filled cells *should have been*.

One photo shows the filled cells as lighter areas, the other photo shows the filled cells as darker areas, the difference is the time of day and whether cold or hot - the filled cells take longer to warm up on hot days (thus the filled cells are darker - cooler) and retain the heat of the day longer as the walls cool at night (thus the filled cells are lighter - warmer).

You can see the 5 foot lifts they were filling the cells at, and where they did, and did not, fill the cells, and where they did, and did not, do the second lift.

And a third photo showing a well done wall with filled cells showing as darker, and you can even see the vertical webs in the blocks and the horizontal mortar joints.

You can see the unfilled cells which should have been filled - those unfilled cells which should have been filled are structural issues. Just one aspect of finding structural issues with an infrared camera.

Hi Jerry

Thanks for the clarification, that clears it up for me.

At first I was disappointed when I discovered that the camera and certifications were not the gold mines I had envisioned. Over the years I have found the camera to be a valuable tool for verifying or refuting what I suspect; particularly in the air loss/ insulation areas and for tracking down the musty odor source.

It also makes really cool pet pictures!

Originally Posted by Thom Walker

At first I was disappointed when I discovered that the camera and certifications were not the gold mines I had envisioned. Over the years I have found the camera to be a valuable tool for verifying or refuting what I suspect; particularly in the air loss/ insulation areas and for tracking down the musty odor source.

It also makes really cool pet pictures!

I guess we all have different niches (and needs). Today I met a man who owns an inspection business that specializes in vibration analyzation and remediation.

For amusement purposes only.
Thread: Mike Holmes Inspections - BEWARE

Mike Holmes Inspections - BEWARE - RedFlagDeals.com Forums

Another thing I found out is that Mike gets a royalty for every Flir iR that is sold. No wonder he flashes his camera around every chance he gets.

Is the importance of this thread the value thermal imagining or the person who said it?

The right inspector can do a good inspection without Infrared, but the same inspector can do an even better inspection with IR.

The wrong inspector will do a bad job... even with IR.

I find that people whom are critical of Mike Holmes always leave out the facts to which they argue. Did the I.R. camera show a substantial heat loss, yes, in order for you to find out why do you need to open up the wall or surrounding area, yes. Was there a problem, yes. Was it fixed, yes. And he always states, that in a home inspection the inspector will not open up walls or pull up carpet etc. But he very clearly shows you what they missed in plain sight or did not comment on for whatever reasons, mainly due to lack of experience in that particular trade; plumbing or electrical. Inspectors are not a guarantee that if they diddnt see it it is not there of a problem. Remember why hes there in the first place...Hmm Who really cares if he gets royalties. If all inspectors did as good as he does up in Canada, there would never be a show for some to criticize.

Mike is not an accredited home inspector and holds no memberships.

He does not conduct the inspections, he subcontracts them out, and the fee is split between Holmes inspection group and the inspector.

Mike also is not certified in the use and interpretation in the use of his free camera.

He has been falsely promoted on TV, print and radio as an expert in asbestos abatement, mould, home inspector, and yet he has no accreditation to substantiate those claims.

Originally Posted by Steven Turetsky

Is the importance of this thread the value thermal imagining or the person who said it?

The right inspector can do a good inspection without Infrared, but the same inspector can do an even better inspection with IR.

The wrong inspector will do a bad job... even with IR.

Well said Steve.

@ Raymond. I have been watching Mike Holmes shows for a while now and not once has he ever declared to be a home inspector. He specificall states the he is there to do a , "Holmes Inspection" Which means he uses his knowledge and tools as well as the home owners complaints and digs down to ALL issues he finds. Also he has never said he is an expert on asbestos abatement, he very clearly states that when ever he suspects there might be asbestos to call in the experts to be sure. Same thing with mold. If you can tell me which episode he said any of those exact words or if he said them anywhere like a radio show, please prove me wrong. I am a very open minded person and know when to admit Im wrong. But having seen almost every episode and having NEVER heard him claim what you say he has clearly shows at this point your comments are not fact based. And to the other poster regarding his camera, Im wasnt aware that you had so much insight on what exact purchases Mr Holmes has made ? Please fill me in on what he has bought VS free gifts................

Originally Posted by Kevin Wood

Darren

It took a bit to dig it up!

Fox News - Breaking News Updates | Latest News Headlines | Photos & News Videos

Kevin.. Why did it take you so long to dig it up??

Most Non Master Certified Inspectors on this site would have find it, [your link] . on the first post of this topic

Darren

He (Mike) has been introduced on Dr. Oz as a abestos expert and mould expert.
I have heard him being interviewed on radio (CFRB) extolling how he was going to re-write the inspection standards. When I called in and questioned him about the current standards and how they were tried and true, and recognized by the courts and how he would go about changing it all and having his SOP recognized, he got testy and the radio station cut me off.

However I do agree that the episode I have viewed I too have never seen him openly state he is a home inspector, but perception is everything and he is looked up to by the public as an expert in home inspections.

Cheers,

[QUOTE=Kevin Wood;203274]At least I can right a complete sentence that makes sense.
QUOTE]

Yea your write

You claim to be a master inspector and instructor.. Me I'm just a lowly inspector that failed to change a word after I re-rightted my post

I don't begrudge MH anything. He found a pony to ride to the bank and he hopped on. That said, he enters a situation when something is already evident. That's quite an advantage and I love those kinds of jobs. I make far more money than I do on a regular Home Inspection, with none of the liability.

I do resent the two very different circumstances being presented as though they are the same.

Re the cameras, they are valuable tools, but I disagree that one cannot be a good general inspector unless he has one. And if he is not trained on it, he should not be using it.

After watching the link, the only thing I find is that he does say he can see mold with the camera. If theres more please inform me and I will watch again.

I use 'mold like substance' in my reports. Also explain that it needs to be tested to verify what it is exactly, blah, blah, you know the drill.

I use the word mould.

Inspected a 125 year old house today, the basement with dirt floor, stone rubble foundation, poor site grading, poor downspout management.

The basement reeked of mildew odour, was damp, the earth was wet, water staining, rotting wood column bases.

My client suffers from respiratory illness. I reported observable mould and rot.

The previous inspection a pre-listing inspection done by another inspector never even mentioned the water issues, let alone the rot and mould.

My client was very pleased and passed on the house.

I call a spade a spade I am not about to sugar coat a mould issue given the litigation which I have read about by those who neglected to say anything.

In my opinion if there is a lot of mould screw the testing and that is recommended by CMHC who state any mould should be treated as bad and the conditions fixed which created it; water entry.

Maybe someday you Canucks will learn to spell proper english without all that british and french influence

and all the computers spell check to USA english,,,very frustrating...

Originally Posted by Markus Keller

Maybe someday you Canucks will learn to spell proper english without all that british and french influence

Canadian case law suggests law suits result due to inspectors not pointing out conditions which cause mould, or there was mould but they didn't explain the implications of same to client, and/or failed to have the client take further investigative measures.

Here is one most recent example and the resultant costly outcome for the inspector who I happen to know. This case was posted sometime ago on this site.

CanLII - 2011 ONSC 390 (CanLII)

I've always said mold, mildew, fungi, whatever you want to call it, the problem is not the mildew, its the moisture causing it.

Then I explain that, heck, mold can be a helpful thing, take penicillin as one example, and cottage cheese, and the fuzzy stuff which forms on cheese that you simply cut off and the rest of the cheese is still good - "mold" - is not necessarily a "bad thing" and does not necessarily mean that you throw the entire cheese block out just because it has fuzzy stuff growing on the outside of it, no, you replace the fuzzy drywall and solve the moisture problem ... it is ... after all ... a *moisture problem*.

In Danish Blue, for example, a form of penicillium bacteria—also used to make penicillin—is intentionally used to develop a harmless, edible and really delicious blue mould. The downy white rind we see on a cheese like brie is another form of penicillium—one that instead of being blue, develops an edible white mould on the surface of soft-ripened cheeses.

Say cheese!

Originally Posted by Raymond Wand

In Danish Blue, for example, a form of penicillium bacteria—also used to make penicillin—is intentionally used to develop a harmless, edible and really delicious blue mould. The downy white rind we see on a cheese like brie is another form of penicillium—one that instead of being blue, develops an edible white mould on the surface of soft-ripened cheeses.

Say cheese!

Raymond,

Yep.

Another thing I frequently added to my mildew and mold spiel is to ask if they knew that chlorine is a poison, when then replied that they knew it was, I asked why they drank it everyday? After a brief bewilderment period, if they did not get it themselves, I would run some water out of the faucet into a glass and say 'Here, have some chlorine.' It's not necessarily 'what', it is more often 'how much' that makes something good into something bad.

I like visual things.

The other day I had a contractor laying out a sloping walkway and telling me that it was going to have natural stone on it and be slippery when wet, but his client did not want steps in the walkway.

I suggested that if he (the contractor) had some Viscreen plastic he could lay it down the walkway and run some water on it, then ask his client if he (the client) wanted to take a walk down the walkway. I then said, to make it even more visual, he could get a Slip 'N Slide and lay it down the walkway, that is going to tell his client what is going to happen ... slip ... and ... slide ...

The contractor called today and said they were going to put steps at the bottom of the walkway to reduce the slope of the walkway from the steps up to the pool deck.

Originally Posted by Raymond Wand

In Danish Blue, for example, a form of penicillium bacteria—also used to make penicillin—is intentionally used to develop a harmless, edible and really delicious blue mould. The downy white rind we see on a cheese like brie is another form of penicillium—one that instead of being blue, develops an edible white mould on the surface of soft-ripened cheeses.

Say cheese!

My kids were and still are big blue cheese fans. They were and are still also hardly ever sick. They attribute this to their almost-daily intake of natural antibiotics in the blue cheese!

Interesting thread. Going back to the original topic, Mike Holmes.
You Tube has numerous videos of inspectors criticizing Holmes. The IR camera thing is very misunderstood. In fact, cameras in general are misunderstood. Inspectors that do not put photos in a report almost always state legal concerns. Looking closer at this, I find that the main reason is agent push-back. If you generate a report with photos clearly showing defects, it can be very compelling and very convincing. The "words" are the report but the photo combined with words is very powerful. Inspect a building with a high number of "reportable conditions" and you have the potential for a very incriminating and powerful document. Well placed, well taken, annotated photos with concise, direct wording leaves much less "wiggle room" in negotiations than a report that uses the word "serviceable" a couple hundred times. (not to mention the word "appears" or potential, etc.) Most agents pride themselves as negotiators. Deliver a document that leans more toward "finite" and it leaves less room for negotiation. Throw an IR camera in the mix and it ratchets up the criticism even higher. If you read enough reports from 'others", you start to see where much of reporting is at or is headed. Deliberately vague, ambiguous, lots of "further evaluation" wording. Well taken conventional and IR photos are a powerful tool for a buyer to be used against a seller. I bought a Raytek (now Fluke) Ti30 8 years ago. It sits behind the seat in pick-up and only gets brought out when I feel the situation warrants it.

There will always be the "where do you draw the line" arguments. If you are doing all that you can on behalf of the person paying your fee, within the boundaries of your pre-inspection agreement, you are going to piss off a lot (not all) of agents. These are the people that are always gravitating to the lowest common denominator. Kind of like fast food vs a sit-down meal. Don't be afraid of an IR camera. You will make a lot of friends and also piss off a lot of agents. (but isn't that where a lot of this criticism of Holmes and the IR camera comes from?)