
Overview
Paul Gaston provides mold inspection and moisture-source identification as a supporting capability for construction matters in Chicago and Cook County. He identifies visible mold and traces the moisture condition that produced it, always tied back to installation workmanship or envelope detailing. He does not offer health-effects, toxicology or medical-causation opinions of any kind.
Related: Chicago Mold Expert Witness · ExpertWitnessChicago.com
This service supports a workmanship or water-intrusion opinion. It is not offered as a standalone mold practice, and it is deliberately positioned that way.
What is included
Visual identification of mold growth, moisture readings, and identification of the building condition or installation defect that allowed the moisture to persist.
- Visible mold identification and documentation during inspection
- Moisture readings and mapping of affected assemblies
- Identification of the workmanship or envelope condition responsible
Why the scope is limited
The Mold Inspector Certification Paul holds is an inspection credential and states on its face that it is supplementary. Presenting it as more than that would invite a challenge and misstate his qualifications, so it is used only alongside the construction opinion.
- Visual inspection
- Moisture readings
- Source identification
- Workmanship correlation
- Supporting findings
Referred out
Air sampling interpretation, laboratory analysis, toxicology and any opinion on occupant health are referred to appropriately qualified specialists.
Essential Details
Discuss a Matter
Request CV and Availability at paul@expertwitness.co or 773-619-1226.
Questions Attorneys Ask
Not as a headline discipline. Paul holds a Mold Inspector Certification and uses it as supporting knowledge alongside a construction workmanship or water-intrusion opinion.
No. Health effects, toxicology and medical causation are outside his qualifications and are referred to appropriate specialists.
That visible growth is present, where it is, and what moisture condition or installation defect allowed it to persist.
No. Laboratory analysis and air-sample interpretation fall outside the inspection credential he holds.
It links visible damage to a moisture source and then to the workmanship or envelope condition that caused it, which is the construction question in the case.
Yes, and that is the usual arrangement. It sits alongside the workmanship, envelope or repair-cost scope.