The radon business is a scam. (RE market, contingencies, vents, agent)

[Barking Spider]

Just to clarify. I am a certified radon tester. but not a mitigation contractor. I actually believe that testers and mitigators should not be the same, or at least work on the same houses.
That said, I know of no way to "make" a house have radon to sell a mitigation system.
I do make some money testing for radon as a side to my home inspection business. I have been a home inspector since 1989 and have inspected many thousands of houses. There are some people on this board that think that home inspections are a scam too, so I guess I qualified as a double scammer to some. It's interesting, because I feel that I have a pretty high ethical standard that I live by. probably to a fault.

As far as radon in granite, or nuts, or lava soap.......all I can say is get a life. I think if enough research is done on these claims, you will find they do not really hold much weight. The granite one was a joke, as well as the others. I mean, come on, a guy with a geiger (sp?) counter going around checking everything under the sun, and getting high readings of something.
I bet that if he checked out enough children's toys he would find something there too.

I can see it now, "Radiation found in Barbie Dolls with Wonder Woman bracelets, story at 11".

[Heiwos]

Maybe it should be "get a life" for radon in general? I searched for "radon scam" and got 67,000 hits. The first site I checked, Michigan state gov't, says "there is no safe radon level". That's pretty much all I need to know from that site, because it's just like saying "there is no safe sun exposure level", which is also true, but just as meaningless and obvious scaremongering. The site says that the EPA recommends lowering radon to as low as reasonably possible. Well if we did the same thing for sunlight--which may well be more harmful than radon--maybe we should all sleep during the day. As a longtime news junkie, I've noticed that whenever business benefits from the mitigation of dangerous conditions, it's a major problem for the public to be corrected by them at any cost, whereas in the opposite case (e.g. the cell phone / brain cancer correlation), it's completely safe for the public and they should not worry one bit.

[Eeeee22895]

Originally Posted by Barking Spider

I know of no way to "make" a house have radon to sell a mitigation system.

This issue isn't that the test is inaccurate; it's that the magic number of 4 was pulled out of a hat.

It makes a bit more sense you would ridicule doubters now that we know you have a financial stake in the debate.

[Eeeee22895]

Originally Posted by Heiwos

Maybe it should be "get a life" for radon in general? I searched for "radon scam" and got 67,000 hits. The first site I checked, Michigan state gov't, says "there is no safe radon level". That's pretty much all I need to know from that site, because it's just like saying "there is no safe sun exposure level", which is also true, but just as meaningless and obvious scaremongering. The site says that the EPA recommends lowering radon to as low as reasonably possible. Well if we did the same thing for sunlight--which may well be more harmful than radon--maybe we should all sleep during the day. As a longtime news junkie, I've noticed that whenever business benefits from the mitigation of dangerous conditions, it's a major problem for the public to be corrected by them at any cost, whereas in the opposite case (e.g. the cell phone / brain cancer correlation), it's completely safe for the public and they should not worry one bit.

Exactly, Heiwos. Follow the money.

[mathjak107]

Originally Posted by Heiwos

Maybe it should be "get a life" for radon in general? I searched for "radon scam" and got 67,000 hits. The first site I checked, Michigan state gov't, says "there is no safe radon level". That's pretty much all I need to know from that site, because it's just like saying "there is no safe sun exposure level", which is also true, but just as meaningless and obvious scaremongering. The site says that the EPA recommends lowering radon to as low as reasonably possible. Well if we did the same thing for sunlight--which may well be more harmful than radon--maybe we should all sleep during the day. As a longtime news junkie, I've noticed that whenever business benefits from the mitigation of dangerous conditions, it's a major problem for the public to be corrected by them at any cost, whereas in the opposite case (e.g. the cell phone / brain cancer correlation), it's completely safe for the public and they should not worry one bit.

what do you expect from a country where every year thousands of people get cancer from smoking and what do we do ? we ban an artificial sweetner because a rat died..... we never get the truth......

[Barking Spider]

"This issue isn't that the test is inaccurate; it's that the magic number of 4 was pulled out of a hat."
So now it seems that you are saying that you do understand that radon is a real issue, and can be a health risk, however you dispute the "action level" that was set at 4.0.

What I'm having a hard time understanding is your putting me (an others) in a category of scammers and dishonest business owners.
We have something (radon) that is on the periodic table. It isn't something that someone just made up to scam people.
It was determined by scientists that there was a health risk. This was not research that was only done by one lab, or even in one country.
Specific measuring protocols were developed to measure it.
To be certified to test for radon, I had to take a 4 day class, and pass a written exam (killer by the way).
I use equipment that is required to be calibrated each year.
I fail to see how I am scamming people.

Now if you were talking about ghost busters, or people that communicate with the dead, you are talking scammers.

While you may not believe in the health risks of radon, or maybe even that it exists, that does not mean it's not real.
To have a problem with the action level is understandable, many people do. However, to call the profession a bunch of scammers and frauds is not fair at all.

I can't comment on why Michigan would say there is no safe level of radon, I haven't seen their site. That's kind of like saying there isn't a safe level of carbon monoxide.

[fairmarketvalue]

Originally Posted by Barking Spider

"This issue isn't that the test is inaccurate; it's that the magic number of 4 was pulled out of a hat."
So now it seems that you are saying that you do understand that radon is a real issue, and can be a health risk, however you dispute the "action level" that was set at 4.0.

What I'm having a hard time understanding is your putting me (an others) in a category of scammers and dishonest business owners.
We have something (radon) that is on the periodic table. It isn't something that someone just made up to scam people.
It was determined by scientists that there was a health risk. This was not research that was only done by one lab, or even in one country.
Specific measuring protocols were developed to measure it.
To be certified to test for radon, I had to take a 4 day class, and pass a written exam (killer by the way).
I use equipment that is required to be calibrated each year.
I fail to see how I am scamming people.

Now if you were talking about ghost busters, or people that communicate with the dead, you are talking scammers.

While you may not believe in the health risks of radon, or maybe even that it exists, that does not mean it's not real.
To have a problem with the action level is understandable, many people do. However, to call the profession a bunch of scammers and frauds is not fair at all.

I can't comment on why Michigan would say there is no safe level of radon, I haven't seen their site. That's kind of like saying there isn't a safe level of carbon monoxide.

Barking- I think I can help you understand the animosity. There was actually another thread on this topic over a month ago. Anyway, the "scam" issue comes from its involvement in the RE game, where it was established by some "unknown entitiy" that if there are Radon levels, it should be corrected by the seller. If buyers are THAT worried about cancer, why shouldn't they take on that burdon? Since entering the RE transactions, buyers pay for the test, then demand the seller spends over a thousand to mitigate, then test again to prove it worked. And in many cases, they pursue the "credit route", wanting x amount of dollars so they can mitigate themsleves. In the end, they usually walk away with money and never bother to mitigate as they are not THAT worried after all.

Also, as example of eeeee's complaint of the number of 4 pulled out of someone's a$$, I agree. When we sold, we were tested and level 2 came in a 1.7, level 1 at 2.3, and the basement at 4.2. Naturally, it was a finished basement, had a sump pump that was covered, but not sealed, and I GUARENTEE, if sealed, would have fallen below the 4.0 "number out of the a$$" we're supposed to all get paranoid over. And the most frustrating part- you "testers" say there is no such thing as an average number, but suggest that if ANY of the levels of a home fall above, that's grounds for mitigation. THIS is why most of us feel this is a bunch of crap and a scam. Do you know of ANY basement that will fall below 4 where if the sump pump is not sealed? I might add that our tester put a monitor in the CRAWL space, under the garage! What the hell purpose did that serve? is the homeowner going to go down to the crawl on a daily basis and sniff in the toxins while he/she hangs out in the crawl space? Give me a break!

And on top of that, weather conditions play a part. If it has been raining a lot or been a wet winter, levels will come in higher than if tested in a dry summer. So there are ways to "manipulate" the numbers, it's just not obvious to the average consumer.

Lastly, as to the numbers and why they don't consider averages? perhaps you can explain why. And please don't give us the same BS the RE agents, the radon tester, and everyone else involved gave us; that it was the "rules" set by the EPA. If we would have taken an average of our numbers, 2 of which were way below the 4.0 in the 2 main living parts of the home, we still would have fallen well below that number on a average, even though the basement came in at a whopping 2tenths of a point above the "TOXIC 4.0"!

[Eeeee22895]

Originally Posted by Barking Spider

"This issue isn't that the test is inaccurate; it's that the magic number of 4 was pulled out of a hat."
So now it seems that you are saying that you do understand that radon is a real issue, and can be a health risk, however you dispute the "action level" that was set at 4.0.

What I'm having a hard time understanding is your putting me (an others) in a category of scammers and dishonest business owners.
We have something (radon) that is on the periodic table. It isn't something that someone just made up to scam people.
It was determined by scientists that there was a health risk. This was not research that was only done by one lab, or even in one country.
Specific measuring protocols were developed to measure it.
To be certified to test for radon, I had to take a 4 day class, and pass a written exam (killer by the way).
I use equipment that is required to be calibrated each year.
I fail to see how I am scamming people.

Now if you were talking about ghost busters, or people that communicate with the dead, you are talking scammers.

While you may not believe in the health risks of radon, or maybe even that it exists, that does not mean it's not real.
To have a problem with the action level is understandable, many people do. However, to call the profession a bunch of scammers and frauds is not fair at all.

I can't comment on why Michigan would say there is no safe level of radon, I haven't seen their site. That's kind of like saying there isn't a safe level of carbon monoxide.

Barking,

I'm not really calling you dishonest. I'm sure you believe in all this stuff. As a businessman, you are using a system that enables you to do what you are doing. It's the overall system that's a scam. The crooks are several layers higher than you; the ones who created these arbitrary thresholds and those who made it the official government and "scientific" position that household radon is a health hazard.

You're in the same class of banks who made bad loans to unqualified people that caused the entire financial crisis we have today. By this I mean, it's not really these banks' fault. They made these loans knowing Fannie Mae would buy them up, both good and bad. These banks were simply playing the game and making money legally as the system allowed. Without government interference, no loan officer in his right mind would have made such risky loans.

Same with personal injury trial lawyers, whom I have a great loathing for. But again, they are simply doing what the system allows.

[Barking Spider]

FMV - ok got it.
As far as your tests go....there should not have been a monitor placed in the crawlspace. It is "lowest level living area" in the protocol.

There is also a part of the EPA protocol, that when results come back slightly over 4, you can do a retest and average the numbers.
Your comment about weather affecting results is valid. It can. That's when the training and testing comes in. If I come out to get the results, and there had=s been adverse weather conditions, and I felt it affected the test, I will re-test.
I use a continuous monitor, and it prints out an hourly reading. You can actually see how the levels go up and down and I know what time it was.

For instance, if a huge storm blows in during the 48 hours, there can be a huge spike, or a huge drop in the readings. Yes, high winds can actually lower the radon levels in a house (or raise them).

As far as rain and wet ground go. Keep in mind that radon testing is a 2 day sample, not a long term test (those can be done). In the course of a year, you will have rainy periods, and dry periods. So you may have periods of elevated levels, and periods of low levels. Its just the way it is. So if the levels are only high when it rains, or the ground is wet, then you may not want to stay in the basement during those periods. But in my area, we get over 50 inches of rain a years, and it rains pretty much every month.

Testing is designed to take a snapshot in time,and not try to look for the worst possible conditions, or the best possible conditions. It's just a random test.

I'm trying to think of an analogy so you can relate to this, but can't come up with anything at the moment.

As far as real estate contracts go, a seller can always opt to NOT agree to having a radon test affect the purchase of the house or related expenses. In fact, I do many tests where the buyers just want to know, and have not put it in the contract or expect the seller's to do anything about it.

As far as where the 4.0 comes from. While I may not agree with that level, the fact is, IT IS THE LEVEL set by the EPA. Just like I may not agree with the speed limit being 55 in places, it is still the limit that has been set by the Authority having Jurisdiction, and I have to abide by it. Right or wrong, if we agree or not, it really does not matter, it is what it is - it's the limit that has been set.

[middle-aged mom]

Originally Posted by Barking Spider

FMV -

As far as real estate contracts go, a seller can always opt to NOT agree to having a radon test affect the purchase of the house or related expenses.

My state requires both the buyer and seller execute a radon disclosure, regardless of the ivolvement of a real estate brokerage, or not.

The state disclosure strongly recommends that ALL have an indoor radon test performed prior to the purchase and mitigated ( by a qualified and licenced radon mitigator) if elevated levels are found.

The buyer is not bound to any contract if the seller refuses to complete the disclosure.

My state compels the homeowner to disclose knowledge of radon or test results.

My state allows any seller to not agree to a radon test.

It is likely that a prospective buyer would either assume radon was present and adust their offer accordingly or take a pass, and find another home.