| Back in January of 2002, I wrote
an article about the growing problems that mold were causing.
Unfortunately, the mold issue has grown beyond
an extent that is reasonable, as scam artists take advantage
of the fear of mold.
Part of the problem is that there are no standards
regarding mold cleanup and no regulations to control opportunists
from posing as legitimate mold remediation contractors.
In 2002, a contractor in Texas was indicted
for running a mold remediation scam that reportedly cost insurance
companies over $7 million dollars.
Here’s how the scam worked.
The contractor would have friends or family
members purchase a home, who would then move in for a short
period of time. Over time, they would remove their own furniture
and belongings, then replace them with cheaper ones. The interior
of the house would be doused with water, then would be left
for over a week to allow mold to grow.
Once the mold was “discovered”, an insurance
claim would be filed for the cleanup that was performed by,
you guessed it, the contractor. Sometimes the invoices for the
cleanup totaled up to three times the value of the home. This
was done dozens of times before the law finally caught up with
him.
Texas has been especially hard hit by these
scam artists, primarily because the high humidity levels in
that state make mold growth much more prevalent. A February
16, 2003 article in the Dallas Morning News stated that “across
the state, Texans whose homes were gutted, or left unfinished,
say that they are casualties of botched mold remediation. Some
fly-by-night companies, they say, have abandoned jobs after
stripping the interior of the houses to the studs”.
The article goes on to say, “What does it take
to be a mold remediator? While the state requires manicurists
to complete 600 hours of instruction in an approved program,
the training requirements for mold remediators are not quite
so rigorous: There are none.” At both the state and federal
level, anyone can paint a sign on their truck to instantly become
a mold remediator.
Standards based on bad science can lead to unnecessary
insurance claims as well.
The asbestos debacle is a prime example of that.
From what I have studied about asbestos, I concluded that asbestos
poses virtually no danger to non-smokers, but poses a serious
threat to smokers. However, since you could not ban people from
smoking, it was deemed necessary to remove asbestos from all
buildings even when removal actually worsened the exposure problem.
Attorneys have made a fortune on the asbestos
scare, but now that most of the asbestos has been removed from
buildings, mold litigation has become the next gold mine.
Is mold in the same league as asbestos? In a
way, yes. Mold can make those with allergies or asthma very
sick, but may pose no risk to those who are don’t have those
conditions.
But is it necessary to go to the expense of
“moon suits” and elaborate decontamination procedures to eliminate
the same mold from a home that occurs out in its back yard?
I doubt that.
Manufacturers of building products are also
getting on the mold hysteria bandwagon, finding that if a case
can be made that their product somehow inhibits the growth of
mold, the mere mention of its affect will influence people to
buy their products. That is unfortunate, especially when their
product can stand on its on merits without bringing mold into
the equation.
There is no doubt that standards need to be
established for the science of identifying harmful molds and
how to remove them. There should also be standards, or even
licensing, of mold remediation contractors in order to protect
the public, not just from unscrupulous scam artists, but also
from those who, however well intentioned, are harming the public
by providing erroneous services that they in fact believe are
legitimate.
The bottom line to all of this is that anyone
who has a mold problem should be much more diligent in selecting
a mold remediation contractor and accepting a prescribed treatment
for its removal. We all need to practice good science and good
business so that mold problems can be addressed at a reasonable
cost.
If you would like a quick refresher on mold,
go to www.churcharchitect.net to find the January 16, 2002 article
on mold.
| 