Help - big problems found with new home

Fire_Fox

You are refusing to address the issue of why you spent tens of thousands of pounds on an investment and did not have the property surveyed! You clearly DON'T understand damp in general otherwise you would not make such a ridiculous statement about rising damp (invariably a longstanding problem!). Would you buy a car without turning the engine over?

The surveyor undoubtedly did look at the roof, to ensure (a) there was one and (b) it was not sagging which would be a sign of a major structural defect. A leaking drainpipe, whilst destructive, is NOT a major defect and would not be a reason to refuse a mortgage. The surveyor was acting in the interests of the lender, and the lender does not care if you have to pay a few £K to get some damp fixed.

There is a massive difference between suspecting that the vendors painted over the damp and proving they did in a court of law. Again that is why you pay a surveyor for a detailed report, or at the very least you get an experienced builder out to give the place a once over BEFORE you exchange contracts. I would direct you to the Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) website which details what you can expect from a simple valuation as opposed to a full structural survey.

pie81

The fact this is clearly an ongoing long term leak and they have been there for 25 years suggests they must have been aware of it. I'd think your prospects of a claim against the sellers would be reasonable. Their phrase "not aware of any but rely on your own survey" is an interesting one from a legal point of view, but I think they would still get caught by the words "not aware of any".

As regards the surveyor... maybe you might have a claim if it was really really really obvious, like water obviously leaking, or a big dark stain on the outside of the building, but otherwise I doubt it since you only got the basic survey.

Speak to your solicitor, no point really getting guesswork answers from us when you'll have a lawyer available tomorrow who knows all the facts.

jack_spratt_2

I think you need to also get a second opinion from another builder on the extent of the damp !!
Is the builder a person whom you have used before !! I am not doubting the problem is there but its always best to get another builder to look at it

lincroft1710

surely if something is going to require substantial work to fix it then it affects the mortgageability of the property

Not necessarily - depends on LTV and definition of substantial.

You can come up with as many "surelys" "shouldn't it/theys" "It/they must haves" as you want but unfortunately the person picking up the bill will still be daniel0408

pie81

I don't get why everyone is so negative about this. Yes the OP was daft not to get a proper survey done. But all the facts point to the vendor having lied about not knowing about the damp. A court will not require the OP to prove absolutely that the vendor lied, just that it is more probable than not that they lied. Leave aside the surveyor's duties, surely the vendor has some responsibility here?

new_home_owner_3

i had a homebuyers report, and it did say there was damp, however the person who pulled out before us had a full damp survey and the estate agent gave us that, even that said it was inconclusive until they had pulled the carpets up.

We have now moved in and the damp problem isnt has bad even with the very best surveys they will recomend you get it specific things checked by a specialist ie a plumber, electrition, damp specialist. roofers and gas fitters.

A lot of valuation surveys will just be a drive buy valuation and a look at what other people have paid for similar properties, i dont think you have a leg to stand on its a shame but damp isnt that much of a problem.

daniel0408

Thanks - there are indeed two separate issues here and everyone seeems to only want to tell me why I'm wrong about one rather than thinking about both.

I didn't lie about a problem that occurred in my last place. I didn't expect to be lied to when I bought mine.

I've accepted some minor issues with the property and paid out for them. This is different though - it seems quite major and damp proof paint has been used on the area to cover up damage that was known about.

googler

OK, the builder says it's obvious from the outside - WHAT is obvious?

Have you gone outside and looked at it with him? If so, what did you see? What did he point out?

Also; you're spending tens, possibly hundreds of thousands on this purchase - did YOU look at the outside of the house before you bought it? Really look at it? If so, what did you see?

Even if the internal problem has been covered up, the difficulty will be proving that the immediately previous owners knew and did the covering. There's the (very) remote possibility that this was done by the previous owners to them.

There's also the possibility that the owners you bought it from genuinely thought they'd cured the problem by covering it, and don't know any the wiser.

daniel0408

dark when I got in so I haven't looked. Apparently some lead cover is missing that's present on other houses in the row.

The question asked by the solicitor was if they were aware of any damp in the property. If they covered it up that should be a yes - you can't conveniently forget something like that.

pimento

Caveat emptor.