When to Consider Thermal Imaging

I

 recently came across a claim that thermal imaging should be required in home inspections. While thermal imaging is valuable, any claim that it must become a universal, non-optional, non-premium service is neither practical nor aligned with industry standards, economics, or liability realities. 

As a second generation master inspector, here are my thoughts on thermal imaging’s role in the profession:  

Thermal Imaging is a Premium Specialty 

Clients won’t value thermal imaging any more when it’s included as standard. Clients understand that specialized services cost extra, and thermal imaging is, by any reasonable definition, a premium diagnostic tool.

The High Cost of Imaging

Camera prices may have dropped, but the true cost of becoming a trained thermographer is high. Level I training, travel, lost inspection time, and equipment can easily exceed $4,000 for a single inspector—and far more for multi-inspector firms. Thermal imaging also adds 30 to 60 minutes onsite and additional reporting time. Expecting inspectors to absorb these costs without compensation is unrealistic.

Home Inspections are Visual, Not Technically Exhaustive 

The ASHI SOP is intentionally built around visual inspection. Thermal imaging is non-visual and technically exhaustive. Mandating it would fundamentally alter the nature of home inspection and push inspectors beyond the scope defined in their agreements, their training, and often their insurance.

Mandating Thermal Imaging Increases Liability 

Once an inspector performs thermal imaging on every job, their personal standard of care rises above the ASHI SOP. This creates significant exposure: missed anomalies, misinterpreted images, or conditions unsuitable for accurate readings can all become claims. Optional thermal imaging allows inspectors to define scope, limitations, and fees—mandatory imaging removes that protection.

Environmental Variables Make Mandates Impractical 

Thermal imaging is highly sensitive to weather, temperature, solar loading, wind, and time of day. If conditions are unsuitable, would inspectors be required to return later? Refund part of the fee? Disclaim required portions of the inspection? Mandating a tool that cannot be reliably used in all conditions is unworkable.

The Slippery Slope of Required Specialized Tools 

If thermal imaging becomes mandatory, what follows? Sewer scopes, drones, radon, mold, combustion analysis? Each tool adds cost, training, time, and liability. Optional services are a business decision, not an ethical failure.

The SOP Exists for a Reason 

The ASHI SOP keeps inspections accessible, affordable, defensible, and within a manageable scope. Thermal imaging is intentionally outside that standard. Making it mandatory would turn home inspection into a quasi-diagnostic, quasi-engineering service that most inspectors are not trained or insured to provide.

Conclusion 

Thermal imaging is valuable, and it enhances inspections, but it should remain optional. Mandating it would increase costs, expand liability, exceed the SOP, and remove inspectors’ ability to structure their services according to their market, training, and business model.

Thermal imaging should remain what it is today: a useful, optional premium service—not a required standard. 

Jamie Dunsing is a second generation home inspector. He has been a home inspector since 1989 and an ASHI member since 1990. In that time, he has inspected over 12,000 homes and buildings. He has traveled to six states to inspect properties, as well as attended continuing education conferences around the country and outside of the US. Learn more at dunsing.com.

Opinions or statements of authors are solely their own and do not necessarily represent the opinions or positions of ASHI, its agents, or editors. Always check with your local governmental agency and independently verify for accuracy, completeness, and reliability.