Damp/dry rot problem/insurance - help!

somefriendlyuk

Keep us up to date bo, intrigued how this all pans out -

Some

marz

Hi all, sorry to join this thread with nothing helpful to add.....instead I am hoping for some advice....
We bought in Jan 07 and we had 2 informal surveys done by work colleagues of my hubby. One found damp in front corner of living room but not significant, and suggested it might be drain/gutter work. He did not think it was rising damp. So, about 6 weeks ago, we found dry rot growing in about 4 patches along the front skirting.
Have had about 5 quotes, and they are all pretty much the same, stating rising damp and possibly the drain/gutter work. So we have fixed the drain/gutter and paid a deposit for work from specialist company. They will clear skirting and lift the whole laminate floor and scrub (what I had said I thought was a concrete floor underneath) and then do DPC and fungicide etc. They will then replaster.
Problem is...the other day, I lifted a bit of the laminate and underneath....is parquet flooring....ie...wood across the whole floor.
Then, we looked under the cupboard under the stairs yesterday and the bottom step has been replaced and the step above has dry rot....(not sure if this is active or not, there are mushrooms, but not big and look rather dry, and mostly white...)
Now, on the side wall of the living room, the skirting is plastic, and NOW, it is obvious that there was a major cover up job done.
So now, I need to go back to the specialist co and ask them to requote as the job is more extensive, and then I need to see if the insurance will cover it.....I am worried the specialist co will bump up the quote if I tell them I am trying ofr insurance, and then my big question., what do I say to insurance?
I have heard vaious stories, that I might not get it as dry rot is neglect of the original problem. Also, I was told that they will insist that it was my responsibility to have bought the house in good condition. Thing is, even the surveyors that quoted said that they would not have found the dry rot as it was obviously covered and short of ripping skirting on the day of the survey, it was not evident.
So. Am I wasting my time with asking the insurance to cover?
If not, how do I go about informing them?
Any ideas please?

somefriendlyuk

Hello, sorry to here of your troubles. Yes i would re-contact the specialist company imeadiately and tell them what you have found and ask them to come back asap to re-estimate. Remember an estimate is all you wil get with dry rot because until you get into it you reallly just don't know the extent of it. I was worked on durham castle keep and a very small area at the top of the keep & ended up with all the plaster removed along with the roof!. (sorry if thats a bit scary most D R's are fairly localised.)

Insurance companies seem to be a law unto themselves sometimes. It is my understanding that if the Dry rot is caused by a leak of some sort (ie your gutters) then as long as you haven't left them unrepaired for a long time then they should pay up for the work. However insurance companies being what they are i have known them pay up and not pay up in identical situations but this can be costly and i would certainly get them involved. Get your policy document out as well to make sure you can quote it. I sometimes think insurance personel tell everyone there not covered just to put them of so know your stuff.

post back here if i can be of any further help, as long a bo dosen't mind as this is his thread really

Hey Moderators, how about a thread for companies that have paid up for stuff so we can all see who the good ones are?

somefriendlyuk

come to think of it bo may be able to help on the insurance policy side of things?

marz

Thankyou for your fast response, somefriendlyuk, am waiting for the specialist co to get back to me, prob not till monday, they said.
So, I will speak to the insurance after that. Do you think that I would have any comeback with the previous owners? I mean, obviously they knew about it, and have not adequately treated...to have left the parquet flooring underneath. Is that not something that they ought to have disclosed on the questionnaire that they filled in?
Regarding Bo, please say if you object to me postion on your thread....I was hoping to get some comments from you too.....in terms of insurance...I could start another thread if you prefer....

somefriendlyuk

Hi, Well i'm no legal expert and i may well be wrong but i doubt it very much-how do you prove they knew about it -very difficult and i have the feeling that it is buyer beware on purchase of houses.Sorry!

Bojangles_3

Have you read thisthread from the beginning? Just copy what I've done, I'll update the site with my more recent letters - I've been advised to go for everyone. Don't delay though - this whole process can take ages and they rely on you getting fed up - meanwhile any spread of the rot & you're liable so act quicker than I did.

somefriendlyuk

do as bo says -i for one are interested in how this pans out

keep us posted

Some

Bojangles_3

NEGLIGENCE CLAIM

Dear
Re:

We bought this house from X, the developer, in December 2004. On the 6th April, 2007, we invited him into the property to look at a recurring ‘damp’/’rot’ problem in and around the bay window and cupboard area to the front of this property. We also invited yourselves around on 23rd April 2007, given that you were the damp and timber specialists appointed by Mr. X whilst he was developing this property back in June 2004. His concerns at that time were about rising dampness, wood boring insects and/or wood rotting fungi in the same area of the house.

We have just had this problem clearly identified as dry rot by a wood and timber specialist appointed by our insurance company. This problem is extensive and getting worse as time goes on.

The main reason for this is inadequate or no sub-floor ventilation. The rot is effectively spreading like cancer through the house. If it is not stopped, it will (if it has not already) spread to neighbouring properties.

We are left with a house that effectively cannot breathe. There is one vent in the centre of the bay. Having lifted the floorboards, someone had placed a brick at the top of the opening, thus restricting the airflow. Beyond this however, there is no other outlet or inlet for air in that room or the next room. To compound this even further, the developer had added a conservatory to the rear of the property, which has a concrete floor, with no channels for vents to the back whatsoever.

These observations have been verified by several specialists in this field and we believe they are indisputable.

On the ‘certificate of guarantee’ given by you dated 21.6.04, you clearly make fundamentally important observations and recommendations to Mr. X to combat his concerns about rising dampness, wood boring insects and/or wood rotting fungi.

Why did you go ahead and spray sub-floor timbers for “woodworm” when it’s clear from your worksheet, signed by your technician Mick, job number 2633 on the 23.6.04, that there was wet rot to be dealt with. In an email I received from Graham Coleman (arguably the country’s leading expert on damp and rot issues), he says that 'Applying simple spray treatment to timbers in the face of rot and sustained conditions of dampness is simply asking for significant trouble. It should be considered of no practical value!!' During a telephone conversation I had with your secretary at 4pm on the 8/6/07, she told me you did a ‘standard timber treatment’ i.e. ‘spray of timbers with woodworm’ because that is ‘all the developer allowed.’

It is going to be difficult for us to find a company to thoroughly deal with this problem. In order to provide the kind of ventilation required, extensive work is likely to involve breaking up of the concrete floor in the conservatory to put in vents. Without adequate ventilation, no company will issue a guarantee.

Abbey Woodcare, who came to us through our insurance company, said they would not even take the risk of doing the work as with inadequate sub-floor ventilation, a suitable guarantee could not be issued. Your company did. Why did you, knowing full well that none of your observations and recommendations had been properly dealt with by the developer? We believe this was a significant error on your part – you were not acting with due care.

The issue I have is on paper, when we bought the house, it looked like there was a suitable guarantee for the damp/rot problem and there clearly was not. We hold you and Mr. X jointly and severally liable. You were negligent for going ahead and carrying out limited measures to prevent this problem knowing full well none of your recommendations had been adhered to.

It was an ill thought out, quick fix, simple glossing over the underlying issue to get the property ready for re-sale. Businesses that operate in this way should be held accountable and I will be writing to the housing minister and my MP to try and outlaw this practice.

This issue has caused us a great deal of stress and discomfort and at times we have been coughing due to the fumes and air of the fungi particles. It is very difficult keeping the children out of the front room. If major work does have to be done, we may have to relocate whilst it is undertaken, as our kitchen is in the conservatory area.

The costs for everything are extremely worrying.

We have given Mr. X the opportunity, as we are giving you, to come back to the property and do what should have been done three years ago at no extra cost to ourselves. However, I will not hesitate, if the job is not done correctly, to proceed to hold you liable under negligence.

As time is of the essence, we look forward to receiving a reply from you within seven days with regard to rectifying this problem.

Bojangles_3

NEGLIGENCE CLAIM

Dear X
Ref: X

We spoke on the telephone on 18/6/07 regarding the email we sent to X on the 7/6/07, requesting that he confirm that he was the person that signed off the development of the former (our address)

Eventually we got to speak to Mr X on the 21/6/07. Worryingly, he told me over the telephone that the former (our add) was split into two ‘flats’. It is actually two houses (next door is now called 26A, for your information). He said that the entire development was signed off as one job in November 2004. We bought this house in December 2004.

We are deeply concerned that Mr X signed off this work especially to our property – the new (our add). What checks did he or should he have made for sub-floor ventilation, especially given there was a concrete extension built onto the back of this property with no provision for the through-flow of air? When I spoke to him, he said he was not aware of any problem there.

This is deeply worrying. We believe he has been negligent and has shown a lack of due care & diligence, for the which, we wish to claim damages from X Council for our resultant loss.

Within six months of ownership, we first noticed a build up of black mould inside a cupboard in our front room – the side that was against the exterior wall, where the developer had a vertical DPC fitted. We would wipe it down when it appeared, but it kept coming back. After about a year, we began to notice staining on the laminate wood flooring in front of the cupboard. This got worse over time. The floor began to bulge, the skirting boards to split. We contacted our insurance company in the beginning of March 2006.

They carried out a repair soon after but the problem has come back and moved across the room making it much worse than before.

In April 2007 this problem was clearly identified finally as dry rot by a wood and timber specialist appointed by our insurance company. This problem is extensive and getting worse as time goes on.

The main reason for this is inadequate or no sub-floor ventilation. The rot is effectively spreading like cancer through the house. If it is not stopped, it will (if it has not already) spread to neighbouring properties.

We are left with a house that effectively cannot breathe. There is one vent in the centre of the bay. Having lifted the floorboards, someone had placed a brick at the top of the opening, thus reducing the airflow. Beyond this however, there is no other outlet or inlet for air in that room or the next room. To compound this even further (as previously mentioned) the developer had extended our section of the original house adding a conservatory to the rear of the property with a concrete floor, with no channels for vents to the back whatsoever.

These observations have been verified by several specialists in this field and we believe they are indisputable.

As time is of the essence, we look forward to receiving a reply from you within seven working days.


Cc Jerry White, Local Government Ombudsman, South Thames