old house: survey?

AdrianC

racing_blue wrote: »

Thankyou to Alanmilstein for taking the time to give advice as a professional.

I can't help feeling that Alan's position is not quite as clear as that. He's not only a professional surveyor, but with his trade association hat on, he's a salesman and champion for the profession.

I have decided that in this case the decision to go ahead with a building survey boils down to three things:
A) individual's confidence in their own ability to understand the house
individual's willingness to take risk
C) cost of getting the survey

Seems fair to me.

Don't think anyone who posted chose NOT to have a survey, and later regretted it.

We had a full structural survey on our last house. After 15 years of living in it, and doing a LOT of work to it, we read back through the survey when we sold it. All of the things that had been flagged as potential issues had not been. None of the unpleasant surprise issues we'd had had been flagged.

The buyer's surveyor was a very nice chap. I have no idea what the buyer paid for the survey, but I doubt it was terribly good value. It wasn't very comprehensive. Sure, the damp detector buzzy-stick got waved about, a little half-heartedly. I have no idea what the survey _said_, either, but the buyer didn't raise any comments. (Not that there _should_ have been any...)

The new place? We didn't bother here. As yet, we've had no unpleasant surprises. But I'm sure they'll happen. We're not bothering with a survey on a BtL at the moment, either. We won't bother with a survey next time, either.

BUT... If _I_ spot something I'm not happy with, then I'll skip straight to that particular trade for a second opinion, without a moment's notice.

As it is, if an unpleasant surprise arises, I'll take it on the chin. No matter how big it is. I won't regret my decision not to have a survey - because it was a decision taken in full awareness of the risks.

Lord_Baltimore

Thank you for the detailed response. You are clearly a man of integrity. Please read my comments and bear in mind they are delivered with respect to you.

alanmilstein wrote: »

Yes, I am the Chairman of the Residential Property Surveyors Association, and, yes, I desperately want to see higher, and more consistent, standards in residential surveying. The contributors to this post clearly highlight the variability in standards across the country. So, yes, I AM trying to do something about it!
I should point out that my role at the RPSA is voluntary and, as a surveyor with my own business I am fortunate enough to have a good and steady workload.

You see, that worries me. The top job at the RPSA is a voluntary position. There is no way with the best will in the world that a volunteer can be fully effective in this role. For starters, you have a money-paying job that will always take priority; you probably don't have much time to devote to your volunteering; and your authority in such a role is diminished by its tenure.

I say that by way of explaining that my contributions here are not to drum up business for myself or because I receive any personal financial benefit in promoting the RPSA. It also explains why I don't get onto the forum too often as time is always at a premium.

I have no doubt at all that your time is at a premium. In all honesty, can you do justice to a task in which you are a toothless volunteer (no insult intended) because there are people, evidenced in this thread alone, who are not getting value for money from the inconsistent and sometimes derisory perfomances of surveyors who feed on the low confidence of its cash cow clientele?

It is always easy to criticise an entire industry based on the bad experiences of a few (noting, however, that no one should have such bad experiences), but I do know of many conscientious and dedicated surveyors who do a thorough job for their clients and provide genuine value in the house buying process.

I agree. But there is growing evidence that the reports many surveyors produce simply:

• state the obvious;
• appear to be plagiarised from previous investigations;
• don't help buyers with decisions but simply pass the onus for the decision back to the person who commissioned 'expertise';
• could be wrtten at a desk after a very short visit to the property.

The trouble is that,for an individual consumer who buys into the service, perhaps only once every 10-15 years, it is very difficult to decide on where they will get the best result.
My advice, therefore, for anyone considering a survey is as follows:-
1. Do not be forced into using a particular surveying service by your lender, estate agent, or anyone else. By all means let them recommend someone to you, but it is YOUR choice who does your survey. Nothwithstanding the fact that most lenders will require you to have a valuation carried out by one of their own valuers (who may or may not be a surveyor, and for which you will probably have to pay through the nose)....on this you will have no choice, but you should not be hoodwinked into having your valuation "upgraded" to a survey by the same surveyor.
2. Contact two or three surveyors and talk to them about their service and how they like to work. A good surveyor will take time to explain their report style, content and support services.
3. Choose someone appropriate to the property. If you're buying a specialist property, such as something that is listed, historic, or of unusual construction, make sure that the surveyor specialises in that type of building.
4. If you're not sure then ask the surveyor for a sample report, or for some references.
5. Make sure the surveyor is someone you can talk to easily and who you can build a working relationship with. In many cases, if you get a survey through your lender then the surveyor will be part of some remote panel and often uncontactable easily.
6. Price - always a key issue. And, like most things in life, you gets what you pays for. Choose the cheapest option off the internet and you are very likely to be disappointed by the result. It takes me a good 3-4 hours to survey an average sized 3 bed semi (of which about 2 hours will be outside...because that's where most internal defects stem from), and around 4 hours in pre and post survey research and writing up. That level of work and expertise comes at a price. But at the end of it I will provide a report that "as far as is reasonably possible" describes the property, and any defects, fully and completely. So, if you want a surveyors report that will give you the answers to the questions you have then the simple fact is that you will need to reckon on £300-500 for an average home and significantly more (say,. £800-£1500) for specialist and larger properties.

I know you mean well but 'this' surveyor or 'that' surveyor isn't a quandary for most prospective buyers. Who has the time to vet each individual? People want 'a surveyor' based on the seemingly naive misconception that every surveyor is of a level of skill to a recognised professional standard. I mean, that's what all those letters after their name means right?

7. The caveats and surveyor speak - like "as far as is reasonably possible" quoted above. Unfortunately, in this litigious world, we all have to cover our backsides to some extent. Yes, I have to explain in my report that I couldn't inspect the floorboards because the floor is covered in laminate, or fitted carpets. If there's no accessible underfloor void that will allow me to see the floorboards from underneath then, quite simply, is impossible for me to see them! And hence the "I was unable to inspect...." comments. And so it CAN seem like we're copping out when you read through the report. Sadly, though, if I don't put that comment in and subsequently someone finds some woodworm in a floorboard having ripped up the fitted carpets, then the first thing they think to do is to come after me for recompense. Sadly I don't have x-ray vision or any other super-natural powers to allow me to see through boxes, furniture, carpets, walls etc. and hence why it's necessary to explain the limitations that were experienced during the survey.
No-one expects a surveyor to have x-ray vision. But there is a gulf between that which surveyors report and that which the client thought they were buying. What use is a report that says "sorry, I couldn't get into the loft but that'll be £500 please"
However, what I can, and do, do is to use a wide range of equipment (including ladders, binoculars, moisture meters etc) - which are ALWAYS carried with me during surveys - together with knowledge of building pathology, experience, significant training on the use of standard and specialist materials, and an inspection based on a thorough and methodical approach, to provide me with evidence in which I can deduce what is actually going on in those parts of the building that I can't see.

I'm pleased to hear that you come tooled-up. It seems others in your profession feel a torch and a clipboard is enough to supplement their BS qualifications (for clarity, in this context BS means Building Surveyor )

I genuinely believe that there ARE good surveyors out there who can deliver valuable, and valued, results. My advice is to take your time to find the one that works best for you and who you feel comfortable with. Good surveyors will take the time to work with you to answer your questions about the property, so make sure that's who you employ.

I'm sure there are and noone would object to paying for their advice. It's those that don't meet these standards that get my goat.

bigadaj

I'm never sure what value us added by the majority of surveys, though they are necessary for mortgage valuations in most instances.

I am a specialist myself (geotechnical engineer) and so have more understanding than most, the problem to me is the role of the surveyor.

If the surveyor does find something wrong then his only option is to refer this to a specialist, and so it begs the question of what value it adds. A full structural survey makes sense if performed by a chartered engineer but is obviously more costly.

Basic survey reports simply seem to refer potential issue to specialists, whether this Be structural, gas, electric etc.

I'm aware that I have both a cynical disposition and also specialist knowledge (for clarity I would dal with anything below ground whilst above ground would be the domain of a structural engineer).

The main value in a survey to me is as potential leverage in price negotiations for the buyer, and I'd either do my own detailed inspections or go the extra yard and pay for the full structural survey by a chartered engineer.

alanmilstein

Lord_Baltimore wrote: »

Thank you for the detailed response. You are clearly a man of integrity. Please read my comments and bear in mind they are delivered with respect to you.



You see, that worries me. The top job at the RPSA is a voluntary position. There is no way with the best will in the world that a volunteer can be fully effective in this role. For starters, you have a money-paying job that will always take priority; you probably don't have much time to devote to your volunteering; and your authority in such a role is diminished by its tenure.



I have no doubt at all that your time is at a premium. In all honesty, can you do justice to a task in which you are a toothless volunteer (no insult intended) because there are people, evidenced in this thread alone, who are not getting value for money from the inconsistent and sometimes derisory perfomances of surveyors who feed on the low confidence of its cash cow clientele?



I agree. But there is growing evidence that the reports many surveyors produce simply:

• state the obvious;
• appear to be plagiarised from previous investigations;
• don't help buyers with decisions but simply pass the onus for the decision back to the person who commissioned 'expertise';
• could be wrtten at a desk after a very short visit to the property.

I know you mean well but 'this' surveyor or 'that' surveyor isn't a quandary for most prospective buyers. Who has the time to vet each individual? People want 'a surveyor' based on the seemingly naive misconception that every surveyor is of a level of skill to a recognised professional standard. I mean, that's what all those letters after their name means right?



I'm pleased to hear that you come tooled-up. It seems others in your profession feel a torch and a clipboard is enough to supplement their BS qualifications (for clarity, in this context BS means Building Surveyor )



I'm sure there are and noone would object to paying for their advice. It's those that don't meet these standards that get my goat.

Yes, you're 100% right in that, as a volunteer, I don't have enough time to devote to the Residential Property Surveyors Association. However, as a trade association we have many links to others who help us, and, little by little, we are working towards new qualifications for residential surveying specialists, and new survey formats that provide more accessible and useful information for consumers.
In essence, however, much of what you say is relevant and you highlight issues that we are addressing and working to improve.
The problem stems from the fact that the population of residential surveyors in this country is diminishing and ageing. There are too many reasons for this to go into here, but it is a relevant factor in the way that residential surveying is perceived.
I don't claim to be able to change things overnight, but I AM trying to do my bit to help. We need to get more people into the profession, more young people looking at it as a career choice, and to raise standards overall.
Most important is that there is a recognition that things are not right. Now all we have to do is to put in place the mechanisms to change it.

However, I would still say to house buyers that, in most cases, a survey IS worth having, but yes, you need to do some homework first to find the right surveyor.

alanmilstein

bigadaj wrote: »

I'm never sure what value us added by the majority of surveys, though they are necessary for mortgage valuations in most instances.

I am a specialist myself (geotechnical engineer) and so have more understanding than most, the problem to me is the role of the surveyor.

If the surveyor does find something wrong then his only option is to refer this to a specialist, and so it begs the question of what value it adds. A full structural survey makes sense if performed by a chartered engineer but is obviously more costly.

Basic survey reports simply seem to refer potential issue to specialists, whether this Be structural, gas, electric etc.

I'm aware that I have both a cynical disposition and also specialist knowledge (for clarity I would dal with anything below ground whilst above ground would be the domain of a structural engineer).

The main value in a survey to me is as potential leverage in price negotiations for the buyer, and I'd either do my own detailed inspections or go the extra yard and pay for the full structural survey by a chartered engineer.

As an "informed" buyer, I agree that you, as an individual, might find a survey insufficiently detailed for your personal needs. However that is not the case for the vast majority of home buyers, most of whom have little or no technical knowledge.
Where you ARE wrong, however, is in your summation of how a surveyor assesses a defect. It's not the case that a surveyor should automatically call for further investigations. Court cases have clearly indicated that a surveyor has a duty of care to "follow the trail of suspicion" when exploring a defect, and to try to trace it back to the root cause. And that's what EVERY surveyor should do EVERY time.
It's true, though, that in many cases this simply isn't possible as the cause lies in a hidden area of the property that may be within the structure of a wall, or underground. The surveyor's job in that case is to identify the defect and to advise that further investigations (which might involve lifting up a fitted carpet and floorboards, for example - obviously causing significant disruption in the process, hence why it can't be done during a general survey) are necessary. It's not coping out, just a lack of x-ray vision!

AdrianC

Lord_Baltimore wrote: »

I agree. But there is growing evidence that the reports many surveyors produce simply:

• state the obvious;

They might be "the obvious" to you or to me, but are they "the obvious" to the non-DIY-steeped FTB who hasn't thought beyond the pretty new wallpaper?

• appear to be plagiarised from previous investigations;

Plagiarised? There's only so many ways in which you can say "Look, the bit of the electrics that I can get to without ripping walls out and floors up looks fine, but I can't swear to the bit I can't see". There's no sense in reinventing the wheel to say exactly the same thing each time.

• don't help buyers with decisions but simply pass the onus for the decision back to the person who commissioned 'expertise';

It is, of course, their decision. It always will be.

• could be wrtten at a desk after a very short visit to the property.

Which, of course, is exactly what happens, what is always going to happen, and realistically what has to happen. I dunno about you, but when our recent buyer's surveyor came round, I was happy to make him a cuppa or two whilst he wandered and poked, but it was never going to happen that I'd provide him with a sandwich and a desk to sit and write the report at just in case he thought "Hmm. Maybe I need to double-check that detail..." half-way through... What if he needs to cross-check something in his undoubtedly vast library of reference tomes? Should they all be in the boot of the car?


When I produce a findings-and-recommendations document (which is exactly what a survey is) for a customer, I do so on the basis of a meeting and a fact-finding prod-and-poke, then I sit and write it in my office.

Dan-Dan

There are those that arent that worried about a property from their own viewings , but sometimes it feels good for the sake of a few hundred quid , to get a second opinion

I have read enough on here and my own knowledge to understand , there is no comeback to speak off on my surveyor but its good to have his eye looking at the same thing i was

After that , its buyer beware , you either join the rat race and take the chances on offer or stay in rented etc!

teneighty

I have read enough on here and my own knowledge to understand , there is no comeback to speak off on my surveyor but its good to have his eye looking at the same thing i was

I cannot comment on the Residential Property Surveyors Association mentioned above as I have never heard of them but if you employ a member of the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors they have a requirement that every member must have a formal complaints procedure including membership of a scheme such as the Property Ombudsman which gives clients free access to independent expert arbitration. You also have the option to lodge a complaint with the RICS, which is a large professional organisation with offices in London and Coventry including a department of full time staff who just monitor surveyors conduct and handle client complaints. Finally all chartered surveyors have to maintain professional indemnity insurance to a minimum value of £250,000 to cover each claim.

How much more comeback do you want? This myth that surveyors are untouchable is nonsense and needs to be corrected. Maybe if more people took action against the rogue surveying companies it would improve standards across the sector.

My one nugget of advice that I have mentioned here many times is do not use the big national chains of surveying companies that are owned by the lenders and estate agents (I suspect this is the cause of Lord Baltimore's disillusionment). Go to a local independent Chartered Surveyor and if it is a special property, old, listed, or dilapidated etc. as this thread originally asked, an independent Chartered Building Surveyor

Dan-Dan

Errr , not sure how much of that was aimed at me , but i did use a local well established firm , RICS member etc , what i am saying is , if he cocnurs with me , i`m more than happy to pay him £350 for his time

Lord_Baltimore

AdrianC wrote: »

They might be "the obvious" to you or to me, but are they "the obvious" to the non-DIY-steeped FTB who hasn't thought beyond the pretty new wallpaper?

Fair comment to a point. But,conversely, what value to 'the non-DIY-steeped FTB' is the comment 'there may be dry rot'. That could sound quite innocuous when in truth the ramifications border on the disastrous. Instead of 'get yourself a specialist' (just how many specialists can a FTB afford on a property they may or may not buy?) couldn't an expert surveyor be more forthcoming about the issue?

Plagiarised? There's only so many ways in which you can say "Look, the bit of the electrics that I can get to without ripping walls out and floors up looks fine, but I can't swear to the bit I can't see". There's no sense in reinventing the wheel to say exactly the same thing each time.

With respect, you miss the point. I'm not saying specific descriptions should be varied, I'm saying a report should be property specific and that repetition of the generic from previous encounter with a type of property is just not good enough.

It is, of course, their decision. It always will be.

Of course it is. But they want that to be an informed decision hence the commissioning of expertise.

Which, of course, is exactly what happens, what is always going to happen, and realistically what has to happen. I dunno about you, but when our recent buyer's surveyor came round, I was happy to make him a cuppa or two whilst he wandered and poked, but it was never going to happen that I'd provide him with a sandwich and a desk to sit and write the report at just in case he thought "Hmm. Maybe I need to double-check that detail..." half-way through... What if he needs to cross-check something in his undoubtedly vast library of reference tomes? Should they all be in the boot of the car?

That's not the point with respect. The point is after an hour or so poking around, surveyors can comfortably produce a report at their desk because the report will be full of generic,and virtually therefore valueless, terminology.

When I produce a findings-and-recommendations document (which is exactly what a survey is) for a customer, I do so on the basis of a meeting and a fact-finding prod-and-poke, then I sit and write it in my office.

I'm pretty confident that with no engineering qualifications whatsoever I could achieve the same result for a customer. To save him time, I will also print in on a bog roll for easy disposal:D.