Update - maybe I won't be pulling out - could surveyor be wrong??

milliebear00001

poppysarah wrote: »

Well you wouldn't be able to justify the possible repairs expense either.

But I wouldn't need to, because as I said, if it had those problems, I would pull out.

Cissi

milliebear00001 wrote: »

But I wouldn't need to, because as I said, if it had those problems, I would pull out.

But the key question is: what will you do if the seller's survery comes back clean?

If it were me there is no way I'd proceed without my own full structural survey. Actually I never understand why some people choose not to have one. We always have, regardless of the age of the house. Otherwise it could be the most expensive mistake you'll ever make!

milliebear00001

Cissi wrote: »

But the key question is: what will you do if the seller's survery comes back clean?

If it were me there is no way I'd proceed without my own full structural survey. Actually I never understand why some people choose not to have one. We always have, regardless of the age of the house. Otherwise it could be the most expensive mistake you'll ever make!

If hers comes back clean, I will commission my own as I feel there is then much more justification for spending the extra money.

Catblue

I would also get a full structural survey done for myself.

If there are two big problems already that have been identified by your current surveyor (was this a homebuyers' survey?), then it seems likely that other problems will be lurking.

If you can't afford a new survey, then you can't afford to take on this particular house, unfortunately.

One solution might be that the vendor pays for half of YOUR survey, which is done entirely on your behalf and with you as the sole client of the surveyor. If you subsequently do not wish to proceed with the purchase, you can then hand over the survey to the vendor (you will have no use for it anyway). This would be a cheaper alternative for the vendor, so if the vendor won't agree to this then you have to wonder if they are already fully aware that there are things wrong with the house.

milliebear00001

Catblue wrote: »

I would also get a full structural survey done for myself.

If there are two big problems already that have been identified by your current surveyor (was this a homebuyers' survey?), then it seems likely that other problems will be lurking.

If you can't afford a new survey, then you can't afford to take on this particular house, unfortunately.

One solution might be that the vendor pays for half of YOUR survey, which is done entirely on your behalf and with you as the sole client of the surveyor. If you subsequently do not wish to proceed with the purchase, you can then hand over the survey to the vendor (you will have no use for it anyway). This would be a cheaper alternative for the vendor, so if the vendor won't agree to this then you have to wonder if they are already fully aware that there are things wrong with the house.

I'm not sure if I'm making myself clear. I didn't say I can't afford a structural survey - I said I cannot justify spending extra money as my surveyor has already found problems that mean I am prepared to walk away. The only reason I am still interested in the house, is because the vendor has now come back and offered to get a full, structural survey done. I won't spend a penny more until her report is back. If it shows the problems identified are not as serious as my surveyor fears, then I will commission my own report. If it comes back with the same issues, I will walk, without having spent any extra money.

Apple45

If in major doubt I would walk away and I would remember caveat emptor. I suspect when you bought the house you will have very little rights.

sonastin

Ulfar wrote: »

Sorry but you do have this wrong. The surveyors contract is with their client, their liability insurance will not cover the properties future owner(s).

I would be highly suspicious of any survey commissioned by the vendor that comes back clean.

I wasn't talking about contract law. Obviously there is no privity of contract. But I think there might be a duty of care under the tort of negligence. Liability insurance usually covers negligence.

milliebear00001

Apple45 wrote: »

If in major doubt I would walk away and I would remember caveat emptor. I suspect when you bought the house you will have very little rights.

I'm only in doubt because my surveyor is in doubt. He said his best estimate is that the cracking is more than thermal - but I need a structural engineer to confirm. It is possible he is wrong in his 'best estimate' - especially as the valuation report stated the cracking was 'highly probable to be thermal and non-progressive'.