Bought huose but Survey Didn't spot the dry rot - help!

tbs624

Ian_Griffiths_Halifax wrote: »

Both the Homebuyers Report and the Valuation for Mortgage Purposes (basic valuation carried out by the lender) are unaccountable.

Can you clarify what you mean Ian?

AFIAA if a surveyor failed to exercise due care when compiling a home buyers report, and failed to notice something that /she really ought to have done (within the limits of the standard HB report) then I think a consumer may well be entitled to redress.

This is why surveyors generally cover their backs with the " it is recommended that you get an additional "specialist" damp/woodworm/drain /anything- else- I -can't- be -bothered- to- check (because my polyester suit will get dirty) survey" . Clearly it's different with the valuation , because that is for the mg company's benefit.

marybishop

A Homebuyers Survey can only be undertaken by an RICS surveyor as they have to be licensed by the RICS to do so. As a member of the RICS he/she is required to have professional indemnity insurance to cover any claims made against them. Therefore you have as much redress against a surveyor for a Hombuyers Survey as you do a Building Survey (full structural survey).

By the way if someone is offering to carry out Homebuyer's Surveys and they're not a member of the RICS steer well clear!!

Ian_Griffiths_Halifax

tbs624 wrote: »

Can you clarify what you mean Ian?

AFIAA if a surveyor failed to exercise due care when compiling a home buyers report, and failed to notice something that /she really ought to have done (within the limits of the standard HB report) then I think a consumer may well be entitled to redress.

This is why surveyors generally cover their backs with the " it is recommended that you get an additional "specialist" damp/woodworm/drain /anything- else- I -can't- be -bothered- to- check (because my polyester suit will get dirty) survey" . Clearly it's different with the valuation , because that is for the mg company's benefit.

Thoughout my 19 years in business and years of training and refreshers and new regulator training etc etc. I have been advised/educated to believe that ONLY a Full Structural Survey would have any comeback.

If a Homebuyers Report has as much come back as a Full Stuctural Survey, why would anybody ever take on the additional expense?

Unless marybishop knows different?

I'm only going by what I've always been advised and a bit of common sense, but it's let me down before :rotfl:

TomsMom

Ian_Griffiths_Halifax wrote: »

Thoughout my 19 years in business and years of training and refreshers and new regulator training etc etc. I have been advised/educated to believe that ONLY a Full Structural Survey would have any comeback.

If a Homebuyers Report has as much come back as a Full Stuctural Survey, why would anybody ever take on the additional expense?

Unless marybishop knows different?

I'm only going by what I've always been advised and a bit of common sense, but it's let me down before :rotfl:

I used to be a secretary in the valuation department of a large building society. We used to do Homebuyers Reports as well as mortgage valuations. Our surveyors were always very diligent with their reports as legally they had a "duty of care" to the applicants regarding the contents of their reports.

My son purchased a house about nine years ago, a do-er upper. He had a Homebuyers Report, the surveyor being chosen by his building society as we live in a fairly rural area with a distinct lack of surveyors around here.

When my son started renovating the house he discovered a crack in the hall which ran from the top floor down to the basement - it is a four storey house. The crack ranged from 1/4" wide to over 1" wide in places. This had been completely missed by the surveyor although the wallpaper did have "splits" or "tears" (can't think of another word) in places.

He contacted the building society who arranged for the surveyor to return to check it out. Upon seeing the crack the surveyor actually said "Oh, I missed that"!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Needless to say my son took it further, the firm of surveyors settling out of court for a sum which covered the work necessary to remedy the crack - which included tie rods - and redecoration.

So unless things have changed in the last few years then yes, when a Homebuyers Report is carried out then the surveyor is accountable and the purchaser does have redress if something is missed.

littlesos

Ian_Griffiths_Halifax wrote: »

Thoughout my 19 years in business and years of training and refreshers and new regulator training etc etc. I have been advised/educated to believe that ONLY a Full Structural Survey would have any comeback.

If a Homebuyers Report has as much come back as a Full Stuctural Survey, why would anybody ever take on the additional expense?

Unless marybishop knows different?

I'm only going by what I've always been advised and a bit of common sense, but it's let me down before :rotfl:

You are wrong, we had a homebuyers survey, the surveyor missed some very obvious things. We contacted them, they sent out another surveyor and then presented us with a detailed report and a cheque towards the cost of repairs.

A full structural survey looks in a lot more detail at the structure and fabric of the building, which is why people pay for it. A homebuyers survey is really a quick walkthrough by a surveyor, looking out for obvious problems, they won't move furniture or lift carpets etc, it has to be an obvious problem for them to note it.

d900

seems to me anyone not having a full survery when moving house is a little silly.

Ian_Griffiths_Halifax

Well, thanks to the posters who have shown that there IS some comeback on Homebuyers Reports. Fortunately I've not had any clients that have needed to, but now that puts them in a different light.

Debt_Free_Chick

Ian_Griffiths_Halifax wrote: »

Well, thanks to the posters who have shown that there IS some comeback on Homebuyers Reports. Fortunately I've not had any clients that have needed to, but now that puts them in a different light.

As I understand it, the basic valuation report is done for the lender, so the lender is the client and the only party that has any recourse should the valuation be deficient/negligent.

With the Homebuyer's Report and full Structural Survey, the buyer is the client and therefore has any recourse should either be deficient.

The Homebuyer's Report is a "restricted" survey, so any recourse is only in relation to those matters that the surveyor inspects. The surveyor owes a duty of a care to the client (buyer) but it's restricted to those matters that the report covers.

For a full structural survey -again the surveyor is "on the hook", for those matters covered by the survey.

Regards

mike555

Hello there, sorry for the delay. They had the middle survey, the homebuyers survey. And I think it was rising damp they've had to spend a lot of money on, they had lots of floorboards replaced, they had to pay for everything themselves.

TomsMom

mike555 wrote: »

Hello there, sorry for the delay. They had the middle survey, the homebuyers survey. And I think it was rising damp they've had to spend a lot of money on, they had lots of floorboards replaced, they had to pay for everything themselves.

If I remember correctly, there is a time limit if you want to raise an issue that you think the surveyor has missed, it may be something like 5 years but I'm not absolutely sure. A call to the RICS would be able to answer that.

However, something isn't right here. If your friends had a bona fide specialist firm carry out an inspection and remedial work for the dry rot, that firm should have checked ALL the timbers at the time of their inspection to ascertain the extent of the rot. They would have then treated all the rot that was apparent or at risk. If, since the remedial work was carried out, more rot is appearing then the firm carrying out the remedial work didn't exactly do a good job did they? Perhaps they should be contacting the specialist firm.

As far as the survey is concerned, there's a couple of things your friends could do. First of all - did the mortgage lender choose the surveyor or did your friends? If the mortgage lender, make a formal complaint in writing to them and include copies of the report and remedial work carried out by the specialist firm who remedied the dry rot problem. If your friends chose the surveyor then they can contact him direct. This will address the problem of the rot being missed in the first place but will have no bearing on the fact that the rot is recurring in new places.

I really do think the firm carrying out the remedial work could possibly be at fault for not doing a thorough job. Who were they? Was a guarantee issued? Do they belong to an association whereby they have to adhere to certain standards?

Get your friends to dig out all their paperwork and check to see what guarantees the specialist firm gave them. It's usually 20 years.