Toxic Mold: A Serious Health Problem or Consumer Hysteria?
Words: Dan KesterIn preparation for this article, I did a great deal of research, much of it via the
internet. What I found was very interesting. In fact, when I browsed the web, I
discovered 72,359 links using the key words ?toxic mold?; that was just from one
search engine. (Okay, I admit it; I didn?t look at all of them!) Those links
primarily contained news stories (some horror stories); sites offering mold training
seminars; companies that offer inspection, remediation, removal, abatement and
testing; certified toxic mold inspectors; mold case evaluation businesses and, last,
but certainly not least, a special site for referral to toxic mold attorneys (truly a
play on words).
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) web site includes ?A Brief Guide to Mold,
Moisture, and Your Home,? which provides information and guidance for homeowners and
renters on how to clean up residential mold problems and how to prevent mold growth.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) site has information on air
pollution and respiratory health, including a question and answer page. The CDC says
there are very few case reports of mold in the home causing internal bleeding or
memory loss, and no link has been established. But given the mounting interest in the
mold issue, the CDC is funding a broader study of mold?s health effects. Most
scientists say the only proven effects from mold are allergic reactions and possible
respiratory problems ? including asthma. Still others believe that mold fear is being
whipped up by lawyers and mold cleanup companies eager to ?turn mold into gold.?
Whatever you might believe, the stories of mold panic are very widespread.
In some states like Texas, some insurance companies have placed a moratorium on new
home insurance policies, causing rates to skyrocket. In some instances, home closings
have been delayed because people couldn?t get insurance. According to the Texas
Department of Insurance, water-related claims of $5,000 or more in Corpus Christi, in
which mold damage is a component, cost insurers an average of 537 percent more than
the average statewide cost per policyholder. A Corpus Christi homeowner with an
$80,000 brick veneer home can expect to pay anywhere from $800 to $1,745 annually for
home insurance for a comprehensive policy. That figure jumps to a high of $2,094 for
a wood-frame home. If framed properly, that could be a big marketing angle for our
industry.
In California, legislation is now on the books requiring landlords and owners of both
commercial and residential property to disclose to prospective buyers and tenants the
presence of toxic mold that exceed certain exposure limits. The law does not require
landlords to sample, inspect or test for levels of such toxins, but it doesn?t attempt
to shield liability either. Nevertheless, case law has held landlords liable (and
builders and contractors as well) and may continue to hold others liable even if they
don?t test. Courts have ruled that just as motorists must know the rules of the road
failure to inspect prior to leasing is something landlords do at their own peril
because there is an implied representation of habitability that accompanies the lease.
At the federal level, legislation has been introduced by Representative John Conyers
(D-MI) which, among other things, would establish a research and public education
program on mold and create a national toxic mold hazard insurance program. This
legislation, the United States Toxic Mold Safety and Protection Act of 2003, otherwise
known as the Melina Bill, has been referred to several Committees in the House of
Representatives, including Energy and Commerce, Financial Services and Ways and Means.
The bill currently has 26 cosponsors, but has not been the subject of any hearings in
either committee. To put it mildly, the bill is very broad and, in my view, will have
significant budgetary impacts, not to mention potential impacts on the construction
industry.
In addition to requiring the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) to undertake a joint study of the health effects of indoor
mold growth, the bill also seeks to establish standards for mold inspection, mold
remediation and toxicity testing as well as standards for the design, installation and
maintenance of air ventilation and/or air conditioning systems to prevent mold growth
or creation of conditions that foster mold growth. The EPA, CDC, National Institutes
of Health and the Department of Housing and Urban Development would also have to
sponsor public education programs to increase public awareness of the dangers of mold
growth or toxic mold.
Like it so far?
Lessors of each unit of public housing property would be required to conduct annual
inspections in accordance with model standards and techniques for preventing and
controlling mold in new and existing buildings as set forth in the bill. These
standards and techniques are intended to accommodate geographic differences in
construction types and materials, geology, weather and other variables that may affect
mold levels in buildings. The HUD Secretary and Administrator of EPA would also be
required to promulgate regulations for the disclosure of mold hazards in public
housing which is offered for sale or lease. There are civil penalties for willful
misrepresentations of mold inspections.
It gets better.
The bill further authorizes grants to be made available to State and local governments
to cover costs associated with remediating mold growth in buildings owned or leased by
such governments, including but not limited to schools and multifamily dwellings. The
grants would also cover the costs of temporary housing, food and moving costs for
periods not in excess of 6 months for individuals severely impacted by toxic mold in
their residences who are without insurance coverage and who don?t have the financial
resources to obtain alternate housing.
Better still, tax credits of up to $50,000 would be authorized to cover 60 percent of
the mold inspection and remediation expenses paid or incurred by the taxpayer and not
reimbursed by insurance in any taxable year.
The most extensive sections of the bill are those that pertain to the creation of the
National Toxic Mold Hazard Insurance Program. The Director of the Federal Emergency
Management Agency would be required to establish and carry out an insurance program to
enable interested persons to purchase insurance against losses resulting from mold
hazards in real properties throughout the United States. Residential properties
designed for the occupancy of from one to four families would have priority for
insurance coverage. But the Director of FEMA would also be granted wide discretion to
make insurance available to cover other types and classes of properties ? residential,
business, properties owned by State and local governments or properties occupied by
private nonprofit organizations. It doesn?t take much imagination to foresee the
expansion of bureaucracy and dedication of taxpayer dollars that would result from
such an effort.
But given the increasing number of law suits around the country and the level of
hysteria related to them, it may well be that, just as the government did with
terrorism insurance post 9/11, not to mention the legislation Congress is currently
working on to resolve asbestos claims, they are once again asked to step in and
resolve the legal quagmire surrounding mold.
Stay tuned.