Plumbing discussions and local services.
Discussion options
Is a second camera pass worth it after sewer cleaning?
If deposits or an obstruction hid part of the pipe on the first camera pass, a follow-up after cleaning might show more of what’s going on. But it also adds time or cost, and a clearer-looking pipe doesn’t automatically mean an undamaged one.
What would you ask before approving that extra pass? I’d want to know what was obscured initially, what cleaning changed, and whether the new footage will cover the same section and be included in the inspection report. Are there cases where that second look is especially useful, or is it mostly a judgment call based on how much the first video could actually show?
Join the conversation
Share your experience or ask a follow-up question.
2 replies
I’d lean toward the extra pass if a substantial stretch was hidden and the cleaning may have made it visible; that could answer something the first inspection couldn’t. If only a small spot was obscured while the rest was clear, I’d be less inclined to pay for a full repeat unless that gap could affect a decision. The key for me is whether the added footage resolves a real uncertainty, not just whether it looks cleaner.
For a useful comparison, I’d have the report identify the stretch that was hidden on the first pass and whether the second recording shows that same stretch after cleaning. That makes it easier to see whether the visibility gap was actually resolved. If some part is still obscured - or the views don’t line up well - the report should say so rather than letting a clearer image sound conclusive.
Find a local plumber.
Loading local plumbers…