Surveyor's

[jjavanda]

I have recently moved into my newly acquired property only to find that certain parts are suffering from a damp problem. It looks as though parts of the dpc (old slate type) have been bridged, and the rear of the property (kitchen) which seems to have the worst problem of the lot doesn't even seem to have any form of dpc.

Surely the surveyor should have picked this up in the mortgage report?? (even though I opted for the cheapest survey).

Do I have any form of back-up or do I face another visit to the bank manager??

Thanks J

[Mike Taylor]

sorry but why should the surveyor pick it up You went purely for a valuation survey not a structural survey All the surveyor wanted to ascertain was the value of the house

Trip to bank manager I am afraid

[Marcus]

(Snip)

Surveyor's what?

(Guess who had 'Eats, Leaves and Shoots' for Christmas ;-) )

[Set Square]

If the surveyor was employed by the Lender (Building Society or whatever) as implied in your post, his responsibility is limited to ensuring that the lender isn't lending more than the property is worth. Condition is more or less immaterial - he's only looking for re-sale value.

If you want a full report on condition, you need to employ your own surveyor, and pay the going rate.

[Angela]

problem

bank

the cheapest "survey" is not a survey at all, it is merely to tell the lender if the property is worth as much or more than the money they are lending you. You have bought yourself a problem!

Angela

[Clive Summerfield]

The cheapest most basic survey isn't really a survey at all. It is just to help ensure that the property is worth what you're borrowing from the lender. If you wanted to know the true state of the property, you should have employed your own surveyor.

No back-up I'm afraid. However, things may not be as grime as they first appear. For starters, your building society/bank is obviously happy with the amount borrowed against the property, so you're not forced to pay for an expensive (and potentially unnecessary) injected DPC. First thing to do is rectify the bridged dpc. This could be as simple as removing piled up soil, but may involve breaking up or removing concrete paths/patios/etc. Then check your gutters and downpipes for any leaks.

You may need to consider a system of drainage routes (french drains?) to channel surface water away from the wall(s) with no dpc (if possible). Otherwise drylining and improved ventilation may be all that are necessary to sort out the kitchen.

Cheers Clive

[Peter Taylor]

Angela wrote

Yes this is correct. But I'm sure there have been cases where a borrower has successfully sued a mortgage valuer for negligence. It was held that as the borrower has to pay the fee and is given a copy of the report, then the valuer has a duty of care towards him, even though he is acting on behalf of the lender. The OP would need a really strong case though, that's for sure, as the PI underwriters will appoint very experienced lawyers. Note I am using the term Valuer, not Surveyor - often valuers don't know their DPC from their RSJ

Maybe uk.legal could advise

[Richard Faulkner]

In message , Peter Taylor writes

Historically you are correct. However, most valuations I see have a normal print notice making it clear that the valuation is for the lender only, and that the borrower should commission a survey.

Some lenders dont even provide a copy of the valuation, merely stating how much they will lend, and what further inspections they require.

[Angela]

stating

I actually benefited from not having a survey or even sight of the valuation. I bought a new house that was only 6 months old, as a second owner I cannot raise any problems with the builder that I am aware of before I purchased the property, so as I didn't have a survey and never saw the valuation report I could honestly say I wasn't aware of the problems that I found and the builder is having to put them right. I would however, never advocate anyone buying a house that is over 2 years old without a survey as you don't have any come back against the builder, and the NHBC guarantee doesn't cover everything that the builder has to in the first 2 years.

Angela

[John Rouse]

In article , [e-mail] writes

Rising damp is a myth. It doesn't exist. There is even a council in London offering a reward for anyone who can show them an example of rising damp.

How can he pick up on something that doesn't exist?

You face a visit up a ladder, as most damp comes from leaking rainwater goods.

If you are sure there are no leaking rainwater goods, no leaking pipes buried in the wall, no soil piled up against the outside, no dodgy render, and no gypsum plaster on lime mortar walls, then ensure the kitchen has plenty of ventilation, and a reasonable amount of heat, and see if the problem goes away. It could take up to a year if the house has been empty for a while.

John

[Robert Irwin]

We had a nightmare buying our new place becaouse we paid the extra for a full survey. The surveryor reported subsidence in a shed at the bottom of the sodding garden which caused the building soc to have an epi. They wanted builders estimates and reports extra (paid for by us) about a shed that would never have been looked at in a normal survey. the really stupid bit is that its about 60 feet away from the main building and is an eyesore which lowers the value anyway. In the end sopmeone at the building soc with an IQ higher than a gerbil finally looked at it and saw sense. On the other hand I missed getting to work on the job in the week I'd booked off before Xmas.

Robert

[G&M]

I'm afraid that's a myth itself. This happened years ago and they were shown many cases. My house doesn't have a DPC and I can show you moisture rising up the random stone walls most effectively. Key thing is to ventilate both sides of the wall well, using only water permeable lime plaster or render if needed.

[Ed Sirett]

However before doing anything too much, a period of considered inaction is called for. See if a few weeks with proper levels of heating and ventialation make the damp go away - or is it _so_ bad the valuer could only have been blindfolded?

[Ed Sirett]

Oh well since it's new maybe there are some more ideas?

1) It should have been built with a DPC perhaps building control didn't clock the builders negligent managment.

2) Bear in mind that a typical new house has to lose many _1000s_ of litres of water content from the building materials during its first few years. So all what I said about considered in action is the other post should now be redoubled.

BTW what is it with new homes that makes someone want to buy a building that a) Has not weathered its first really big storm.[1] b) Has a high water content in its structure. c) Commands about +20% price premium. d) Probably lacks a host of minor fixtures and fittings. e) Likely has the major fittings in 'contract' grade.

[1] Admittedly it's no risk _if_ it were built to regulations.

[OldScrawn]

Will they give me one for what is undoubtedly rising damp in my stone cottage in Gloucestershire?

[stuart noble]

IIRC the BRE findings refer to brickwork. Stone is a different kettle of fish.

[stuart noble]

Bear in mind that most damp is not *rising* but penetrating. A DPC will therefore make no difference and you will be wasting the bank's money having it done. IME surveyors know sod all about damp in older properties.

[stuart noble]

You like the damp then?

[RichardS]

"stuart noble"

[G&M]

"stuart noble" random

Not really. We've installed French drains outside and dealt with guttering and so on to keep water away from the house, but in a house as old as ours there will always be a little moisture left wanting to come in. Good ventilation keeps it from being a problem.