Same surveyor disagrees with original survey

Jonl

Hi, hope someone can advise on this.
A property was purchased around 10 years ago after a full survey was carried out by a nationwide chain, all came back okay.

The property is now for sale. A survey was carried out by the same surveyors November, and it came back non-standard construction (originally stated was standard construction). This caused some problems for the purchasers but they were overcome; however the sale didn't proceed.
The same chain has now carried out another survey, and this time saying it may not be possible to take a mortgage against the property.
The house was vacated late last year and is still incurring mortgage payments.

If the property is of non-standard construction, or is not mortgageable (it's in good condition, better then when it was purchased) is there any redress with the surveyors?

Thanks for any advice.

ILW

Lending criteria have changed. 10 years ago you could get a mortgage on a cardboard box.

G_M

Have they defined 'standard' and 'non standard' in either of the surveys?

What IS the construction?

motherofstudents

I'd suggest you contact RICS. If I'm not mistaken, you should still have some redress up to 12 years. Obviously you need to clarify what the construction is.

taxsaver

ILW wrote: »

Lending criteria have changed. 10 years ago you could get a mortgage on a cardboard box.

That may be so, but it doesn't alter the construction of the property and that the same firm of surveyors originally defined it as 'standard' construction and now claim that it is not!

I agree that you should have a word with RICS and then probably solicitors and quickly as time is probably not on your side.

motherofstudents

in fact, the surveyors you used should have a complaints procedure and that would be the first port of call. The original surveyor will have had PI but I can't quite remember how long you have.

Jonl

Hi, thanks for all your advice. The construction was described on the original survey as "Traditional" on the full homebuyer survey. It seemed very thorough, even down to minute detail. The purchase went without problem.
The property has been remortgaged over the years - not massively, about £20k - and I believe again the same company signed off the remortgage survey valuing at c. £150k (putting mortgage up to c. £90k from £70k)
In Nov 2010, they surveyed and reported it as non-traditional but with a small indemnity it was to be fine. Now they are saying it's non-traditional and that it may not be mortgageable.
We now know that the construction is timber frame with brick on the outside, a non-traditional construction. There is apparently insulation between the timber frame and brick which could potentially get damp and cause the timber to rot. Not that there's any sign of it, but there is a potential. As a result, they have recommended that £90k should be the max price paid and it likely won't be mortgageable.
Had any of this come up on the original survey, the property wouldnt have been purchased.

Thanks once again for all your help and advice

taxsaver

I love how timber frame is seen by many surveyors to be 'non-traditional'.... yet timber frame construction has been around for hundreds of years and even now is the prevalent method of construction in many, many countries! **rolls eyes**

Anyway, I wish you luck as it's likely to be a long and tiresome fight but if justice is served you should win.

zzzLazyDaisy

It is possible that the definition of 'traditional' and 'non-traditional' has changed in the intervening years.

Certainly if timber framed houses are now classed as 'non-traditional' there are going to be thousands of Barrett houses built in the 70's and 80's that are now going to be unmortgagable as that was their standard construction method. There is no doubt that mortgages were available on these houses back then because my cousin had one of these houses on a mortgage. Which is why I am wondering if the banks have changed their lending criteria for this type of construction.

Jonl

Thanks. Can anyone advise if the definition has changed over the last 10 years? We'll speak to solicitors Monday.

If the definition hasn't substantially changed then it would appear as though an error was made at the initial survey which is now having a large financial impact - a property that was on the market at a similar / lower price 10 years ago has recently sold for £130k - and the property we purchased we'd struggle to repay the mortgage and selling costs. Does anyone know if and to what extent surveyors would be liable in this case?

MX5huggy

Did you add the insulation between the bricks and frame?

As this must be the sticking point.

I see about 10 new house plans a week about 40% are timber frame.