The wrong survey....opinions please!

courtjester

I think you have to take a step back and consider an overview of the real situation.

The lender is not responsible for making sure that the property you buy is suitable or in good condition or free of defects. It is you that is selecting, checking and buying the property and you have approached a lender for funding - these are two entirely separate matters.

The law says that property purchase is at buyer's risk - therefore it is your responsibilty to eliminate the risk. If you have commissioned a survey, it is your responsibility to make sure this is received and checked. If the survey is not done, you can hardly point to someone else and say they are responsible because you chose to go ahead with the purchase.

Too many people assume that a valuation is to protect their interest, where it is clearly not. Sure, lenders have a duty to lend responsibly, but they have no duty to ensure that their customers are making the right choices over property, nor that the purchase may be unwise physically or financially.

A bit harsh maybe, but it is too easy when things go wrong to cast around and try and find someone else to blame other than yourself. It is *your* purchase and *you* must take responsibility for it. The valuation as you rightly point out, highlights the fact that the report is NOT a structural survey and recommends one. This should have been sufficient to put you on notice that you were missing something.

Legally, I suspect that the building society would only have responsibility in terms of what you ordered and they agreed to supply - if they failed to supply a survey you paid for, they would be liable to produce it or refund your payment - but that does not confer any consequential liability for the outcome of the survey or for the decision you made to proceed without the proper survey at the time of exchange.

On the up side, I agree with an earlier post clarifying that homebuyers surveys ALWAYS flag up various points as a matter of course - they don't cover electrical wiring or plumbing and will always suggest separate inspection reports. It doesn't mean there is anything wrong with these installations. Most defects that are highlighted are minor and would if you consider them objectively not have made much or any difference to negotiations over price (if you were to have a legal claim for consequential losses, you would have to demonstrate what difference in your financial situation has occurred, otherwise there is no value at all to the loss).

Properties require ongoing maintenance and improvements - this is a responsibility you take on when buying a building, so you can't realistically expect to move into an old home and have nothing to do - if the vendor had already fixed everything, the price would have been higher, so in reality, you have probably lost nothing.

A complaint to the lender is of course worth pursuing as you may gain some benefit now or later through highlighting their administration error (as admitted), but you should avoid getting pumped up about any 'legal rights' to compensation you may think you are entitled to.

Don't let this spoil the excitement of acquiring a new home you can call your own. Think about this objectively. Common sense may tell you that you are not actually disadvantaged and wasting your time making a big deal out of nothing just gets in the way of getting on with your (new) life.

benood

I think that you probably have quite a strong case against the building soc. - you paid them for a HBR and only received a valuation, you aren't an expert so why should you know what one would normally look like?

To obtain compensation you need to establish what you have lost - ie how much you sould have bargained the cost down had you received the report - this will be difficult to prove but easy to guesstimate.

So as action I would try and put a reasonable cost against each of the items of work identified by the survey - total it and write a polite letter to the BS suggesting that they contribute 50% as this amount is what you consider you would have been able to knock the vendor down by. It's important not to over claim - remember the valuation came back ok. Minimum - they should refund your survey fee, maximum say 1% of purchase price.

fedupwiththehouse

Thanks again for all the responses - very helpful and everyone has a lot of common sense!

PoorDave

The building society's argument is bound to be "you can tell the difference between a valuation and a homebuyer's survey this week. Why couldn't you when the survey was originally sent to you?"

It is then difficult for you to agree with them on whether you would have bought the house, and for how much, if you knew then what you know now. The problem is that a lowered offer might not have been accepted by the vendor, so you might not have bought for as much less as you may first estimate.

Does logic then dictate that the vendor should now be involved ("would you have accepted £xxx less for the house?")?

Also, who is to say that you would have renegotiated on the basis of the homebuyer's survey? Some people don't - they want the house too much, so they keep quiet.

I wouldn't expect to get more than a token gesture payment out of them, personally

PoorDave

The building society's argument is bound to be "you can tell the difference between a valuation and a homebuyer's survey this week. Why couldn't you when the survey was originally sent to you?"

It is then difficult for you to agree with them on whether you would have bought the house, and for how much, if you knew then what you know now. The problem is that a lowered offer might not have been accepted by the vendor, so you might not have bought for as much less as you may first estimate.

Does logic then dictate that the vendor should now be involved ("would you have accepted £xxx less for the house?")?

Also, who is to say that you would have renegotiated on the basis of the homebuyer's survey? Some people don't - they want the house too much, so they keep quiet.

I wouldn't expect to get more than a token gesture payment out of them, personally

granville_2

Not wishing to pour water onto burning oil, but are you (OP) saying that you made the biggest purchase of your life without a proper buildings survey?

I thought it was common knowledge not to trust a basic home buyers report.

Sure, a full building survey costs money but they provide a very thorough report on the state of the property and can often be used to barter with the seller.

I personally don't think you have a claim, but then IANAL.

PoorDave

granville wrote:

Not wishing to pour water onto burning oil, but are you (OP) saying that you made the biggest purchase of your life without a proper buildings survey?

I thought it was common knowledge not to trust a basic home buyers report.

Sure, a full building survey costs money but they provide a very thorough report on the state of the property and can often be used to barter with the seller.

I personally don't think you have a claim, but then IANAL.

Did you read the post? You seem to be confusing a homebuyer's report/valuation report/full structural survey.

Your comment doesn't help the OP with the actual problem a whole lot!

silvercar

If it wan't common to have homebuyer's reports commissioned they wouldn't exist!

granville_2

PoorDave wrote:

Did you read the post? You seem to be confusing a homebuyer's report/valuation report/full structural survey.

Your comment doesn't help the OP with the actual problem a whole lot!

meh!

i did indeed read the post. having a full building survey would have flagged up any issues with said property before purchase and the OP wouldn't be in the position (s)he is now.

PoorDave

granville wrote:

meh!

i did indeed read the post. having a full building survey would have flagged up any issues with said property before purchase and the OP wouldn't be in the position (s)he is now.

Hehe. Agreed! Can't dispute that