House in radon gas area

amandajp_2

We are currently in the process of buying a house. The environmental search has highlighted that the house (built around 1999-2002) is in a radon area. Apparently a radon test can be done but takes about 3 months as it has to be tested over a period of time. We certainly don't want to wait that long before completing (and would probably lose our buyer if we did) although it has been suggested that we could have a sum of money held by our solicitor whilst the tests are carried out which would either be used to pay for preventative measures if necessary or passed to our seller if the tests did not reveal a problem. What would you do? Would you bother with the tests or would you assume as the house wasn't built that long ago that the builder (Bloor) would have taken any measures necessary when the house was built?

Obviously ultimately this is our decision but we would appreciate any thoughts.
Thanks
Amanda

GDB2222

I know that there are a lot of people who have houses in areas which are subject to radon gas, so I am going to get some stick for saying this. The problem is not with the cost of preventive measures that can be taken now. The problem is that in future the standards for protection may vary, indeed are quite likely to vary. You can bet your bottom dollar that nobody is going to reduce the standards, so the only variation is going to be for better protection, i.e. more cost in the future. When you come to sell your house, you may find that your purchaser wants you to fund new, much more expensive works. Also, of course, there is the little problem that you may be subject to radiation levels that appear to be all right at the moment but are subsequently found to be too high.

For these reasons, I would not buy a house in a Radon area unless it is very markedly cheaper than a similar house outside a radon area. Otherwise, you seem to have only downsides without any positive benefits. Sorry to be so gloomy.

I certainly would not assume that the builders have taken all necessary steps. The principle of caveat emptor applies here, with bells on.

chickmug

amandajp wrote: »

We are currently in the process of buying a house. The environmental search has highlighted that the house (built around 1999-2002) is in a radon area. Apparently a radon test can be done but takes about 3 months as it has to be tested over a period of time. We certainly don't want to wait that long before completing (and would probably lose our buyer if we did) although it has been suggested that we could have a sum of money held by our solicitor whilst the tests are carried out which would either be used to pay for preventative measures if necessary or passed to our seller if the tests did not reveal a problem. What would you do? Would you bother with the tests or would you assume as the house wasn't built that long ago that the builder (Bloor) would have taken any measures necessary when the house was built?

Obviously ultimately this is our decision but we would appreciate any thoughts.
Thanks
Amanda

Which county is the house in?

My advice is for you to call the Local Authority explain the problem and ask what Radon Gas tests they can do or if they don't do them who can they suggest does them. My pal who is an agent in a radon area has always said there is a much shorter 'time length' test so you need to start making enquiries. He also tells me that it is rare to have a positive test and most local solicitors feel it is a waste of time.

chickmug

GDB2222 wrote: »

I know that there are a lot of people who have houses in areas which are subject to radon gas, so I am going to get some stick for saying this. The problem is not with the cost of preventive measures that can be taken now. The problem is that in future the standards for protection may vary, indeed are quite likely to vary. You can bet your bottom dollar that nobody is going to reduce the standards, so the only variation is going to be for better protection, i.e. more cost in the future. When you come to sell your house, you may find that your purchaser wants you to fund new, much more expensive works. Also, of course, there is the little problem that you may be subject to radiation levels that appear to be all right at the moment but are subsequently found to be too high.

For these reasons, I would not buy a house in a Radon area unless it is very markedly cheaper than a similar house outside a radon area. Otherwise, you seem to have only downsides without any positive benefits. Sorry to be so gloomy.

I certainly would not assume that the builders have taken all necessary steps. The principle of caveat emptor applies here, with bells on.

When buyers hear the word radon they panick but for those in the radon areas it is a common issue that comes up in searches. Buyers need to get their solicitor to talk to the other solicitor if they are in the radon area to get this reassurance. I repeat it is not a big deal or no houses would ever sell in the South West as it is a general item to come back on the searches. Like in Cornwall with Mundic block.

amandajp_2

Thanks for the responses. Unfortunately buying a house outside the radon area is not an option GDB2222 as moving outside this area would be outside comfortable commuting distance to work. It is something that everyone buying a house in the town and in fact the wider area (South Leicestershire) will come across so it is unlikely to affect re-sale unless it is someone buying from outside the area who subsequently chooses to live in a different part of the country. I have to say our solicitor is very relaxed about it and has suggested the builder will have taken all necessary precautions, but I'm just not sure if that is good enough. Good advice regarding contacting the local authority Chickmug, thanks. We will definitely follow this up.

Amanda

ab7167

The first thing you need to find out is if the house needs "basic" or "full" radon protection. These are quite different things, and basic protection can often be provided with a suitable damp proof course. Full protection is a little more involved, and I am not sure of the exact details of what would be required. This is usually something dealt with by the Architect (not me!)

There is a map produced by the BGS (British Geological Society) that will tell you which kind of area you are in.

If the house has been built in the last 5 years or so, the Building Regulations approval will probably contain details of the radon protection as this is something that they look at. Might be worth contacting the local Building Control office and asking if they have any records of this sort.

I have a copy of the map, but only at work and I am not back at work until Tuesday now. I can look at it for you if you would like to PM me with your full postcode - this will tell you if you need full or basic protection, which might give you somewhere to start from?

Alex

Suzy_M

Ooooh testing and preventative measures for the naturally occuring and very common Radon Gas. Haven't seen these for a long time!

I thought all those "absolutely necessary" tests and measures had been superseded by all the different indemnity policies for this that and the other surveyors and solicitors are selling.

OP - Seriously in South Leicestershire you are probably more at risk of seeing 'Big Cats' on the commute to work than suffering ill-effects from Radon gas.

amandajp_2

Suzy_M wrote: »

I thought all those "absolutely necessary" tests and measures had been superseded by all the different indemnity policies for this that and the other surveyors and solicitors are selling.

Funnily enough, our solicitor never even suggested an indemnity policy on this one, even though they do seem increasingly common. Although we nearly had to buy one to cover the conservatory the original owners built...

littlesnuggy

1) 10-day radon tests are available, for situations exactly like this. If they indicated there may be a problem, it would be wise to follow-up at a later date with a 3 month test, but the short term tests have been proven to give an accurate indication. PM me if you'd like the name of a company who can do these.

2) In no way assume that because the house was meant to have radon protection installed, that the house is fine. A study of radon barriers in Northampton found that 60% of those fitted were failing to keep the gas out.

3) A damp-proof course does not offer protection from radon. The normal DPC material is not radon-retardant and is likely to get damaged during construction - a small hole may not affect its waterproofing performace but it sure as heck will let any gas from the soil through

4) I wouldn't be put-off buying a house in a radon area. I'd simply get it tested (less than £50) and if high levels were found, I'd get the problem sorted (usually under £2K). If you've found a house you like, don't let a fixable problem make you dismiss it!

ILW

It can save on electricity when you and your family all get a nice green glow. Look on the positive side.

GDB2222

This is not a trivial problem. The US Environmental Protection Agency estimates that 21000 deaths a year are caused by Radon. The estimate for the UK is 1000-2000.

The UK action limit is 200 becquerels/cubic metre, which translates to 5.4 pCi/litre. The US limit is significantly lower, at 4 pCi/l.

The UK limit was set in 1990, so there is scope for downwards revision. Besides that, the US is looking to reduce their action level.

As I said, the risk is that radiological protection standards change in the future, and the house needs very, very expensive measures to bring it up to the new standards.

I am not surprised that lawyers and estate agents don't know about this sort of thing. After all, it's science, innit?