should a home buyers report report this water pipe?

JustAnotherSaver

Hopefully we'll have someone on here who does these reports. Failing that i'm just throwing it out there...

Basically we bought a house that has damp issues due to a fair bit of water in the living room crawlspace. There is a sump pump fitted in there which spits out to the main drain outside.

We didn't get a structural survey done (on the back of advice from our IFA when we asked which we should get done), instead we got a Home Buyers Report done.

Damp was reported but nowhere near to the extent that exists (clever positioning of furniture).

Everyone we have spoken to says the sump pump should've been reported on the survey. We've spoken to everyone, from joe bloggs, to many different tradesemen who come into my work, my wifes work, our neighbours, and down to the woman who was going to buy our house years & years ago but didn't for this reason.

I was in touch with our solicitors who said the issue is with the previous owners for not mentioning flood risk in the report (7.1 springs to mind) & not declaring the sump pump.


I'm no expert but i disagree. Surely it's not for them to declare?

Also depends on your view of 'flood'. Mine is if water is entering the rooms. Yours might be if a sump pump is required to keep the water at bay.

I put it to our solicitor that the surveyor should've reported it. They disagreed & said the issue is still with the previous owner.

Going down that route i think we will certainly get nowhere. However this is the pipe:




It's easy for me to say now because i know what it is, but then it's not my job to know the ins & outs.
Knowing what i know, it's a pipe leading from the subfloor to the drain. It's not a money pipe, a gold pipe, an air pipe. As it's to the drain it has to be a water pipe.

So i'm thinking now, surely the surveyor should've at least questioned it?

Or not? (not at all? Or just not on a home buyers report?)

dimbo61

What did you pay for the home buyers report ? Was it a drive by for mortgage valuation !
When did the IFA become a RICS surveyor ?
What is the underlying problem ! Stream under the property or water seeping into the cellar / under property.
Could get very expensive

davidmcn

It's not within the remit of a homebuyer's report to investigate the route and purpose of every pipe. You'd have to find an expert witness who thinks that pipe is so obviously suspicious (it doesn't to me) that a competent surveyor ought to have picked up on it.

Annisele

Often, if any damp at all is found, the survey will recommend you get an expert in to look at that bit (also known as surveyor covering his back).

Did your survey say anything like that?

DRP

Given that a home buyers report will often comment negatively on gutters, electrical, damp, and structural work without any actual evidence, I'd agree with op that I would be very disappointed if the surveyor hadn't picked this up. It is just a pipe to the layman, but I would hope an 'expert' would be mentally connecting up the dots (pipes, conduits, cables) that he sees inside and outside to build a picture - and identifying anything suspicious in the report.

As is the case for many surveyor posts on mse, no doubt they have covered themselves for any actual responsibility in the small print, but I would definitely be doing my research and contacting the surveyor...

OP - How's the underfloor issue by the way?

JustAnotherSaver

dimbo61 wrote: »

What did you pay for the home buyers report ?

Sorry i can't remember off the top of my head. We were told that there was a [something] report which was like 1 page long & worthless, a homebuyers report for a few hundred £ & then a structural survey for over £1k. We were told that most people go middle of the park & we were advised the same although told we could go structural if we wished, it was our choice. We opted for middle of the park. Still, that's done now, we need to concentrate on the matter at hand, not what we should've done. And as i keep saying to those who say you should only ever buy a structural - would this remove furniture so you could see things? Would this remove wallpaper? Lift up carpets & floorboards? If so then we should've gone for it. If not then it wont have helped.

What is the underlying problem ! Stream under the property or water seeping into the cellar / under property.
Could get very expensive

Stream under the property is the problem & it cannot be solved. We've contacted the council & water board. Our only solution is to 'manage' it as best we can. The appropriate plaster setup, any plastic membranes etc etc etc, but we cannot 'stop' it.

davidmcn wrote: »

It's not within the remit of a homebuyer's report to investigate the route and purpose of every pipe. You'd have to find an expert witness who thinks that pipe is so obviously suspicious (it doesn't to me) that a competent surveyor ought to have picked up on it.

I am not asking for "every" pipe. Some are quite clear. The down pipe with the hopper on the top that leads into the drain is quite obviously collecting all the water from the roof & sending it down the drain. The pipe out the back which is bang in line with the sink is quite obviously leading from the sink.

This one on the other hand was leading from underneath the floor. Isn't that unusual? Or no?

Annisele wrote: »

Often, if any damp at all is found, the survey will recommend you get an expert in to look at that bit (also known as surveyor covering his back).

Did your survey say anything like that?

Yes it did.

The survey reported a small section of damp. This is because furniture was covering the rest of the sections. Over a room 6.5mtr long the entire 6.5mtr on the party wall is damp. The report only mentioned a small portion of this.
Nevertheless, we got someone in on the back of it through the EA & they quoted the work that needed doing to fix it - about £500.

Once we removed the wallpaper, it became apparent that you could probably chuck another zero on that. It was only when the paper came off that this became obvious.

DRP wrote: »

Given that a home buyers report will often comment negatively on gutters, electrical, damp, and structural work without any actual evidence, I'd agree with op that I would be very disappointed if the surveyor hadn't picked this up.

Indeed, the HBR was quite critical of areas. This gave us a [false?] assurance that the report was thorough.

It is just a pipe to the layman, but I would hope an 'expert' would be mentally connecting up the dots (pipes, conduits, cables) that he sees inside and outside to build a picture - and identifying anything suspicious in the report.

This is my thought also.

As is the case for many surveyor posts on mse, no doubt they have covered themselves for any actual responsibility in the small print,

More than likely, but we can't see it

.and contacting the surveyor...

That was the first thing i did - no response, surprise surprise.

OP - How's the underfloor issue by the way?

As said, it cannot be solved, only managed.

We shelled out £1600 for the walls to be plastered only for the cowboys to have royally messed it up & i mean big time. They wont pick up so we're in touch with a solicitor now.

One 'solution' is to put studded plastic membrane on the wall & then board on top of it so the damp can't penetrate the visible surface. The concern here is it will condensate behind & with the timber floor we're not sure how we could work this.

A friend of mine who has done a few of these sheet jobs said that with the level of moisture it'll kick out, it will just absorb back into the wall. It wont be anything to get excited about. Another chap i spoke to said no chance - it'll run to the floor & end up rotting it.

So we're no further forward i guess. We're looking to move in upstairs & do the living room when we can get some sort of solution.

Our solicitor believes we may have a case against the previous owners regards the damp/sump pump, as well as the plasterers who hashed the job. The only issue is - they're charging £200 an hour. They 'estimate' it'll take an hour & half to see if we can get anywhere. My big concern is winning, but not getting any money, or even not getting enough to cover the legal fees.

All hassle we can do without.

On the plus side - we're still alive


EDIT: I found this week that when our extension was built, it is apparently on 'floating foundations' i was told, due to the water underneath. No idea what this is/means. I'll have to look it up some time. Doesn't feel like we're floating but i'm sure it can't mean that.

ging84

Seems like you want the surveyor to be liable, rather than have any reason to believe that he is.
If wishes were horses....

bris

The surveyor isn't liable, the homebuyers report would not pick up anything unseen, it a pretty basic report for obvious faults and valuation purposes.

The report did mention the damp that was seen so at this point the specialists should have been brought in, its al very well blaming everyone else but at the end of the day when damp is reported you should always fear the worst.

And yes a structural survey would have investigated the damp in greater detail, thats why you pay the big bucks.

davidmcn

JustAnotherSaver wrote: »

I am not asking for "every" pipe. Some are quite clear. The down pipe with the hopper on the top that leads into the drain is quite obviously collecting all the water from the roof & sending it down the drain. The pipe out the back which is bang in line with the sink is quite obviously leading from the sink.

This one on the other hand was leading from underneath the floor. Isn't that unusual? Or no?

Not particularly, pipes do tend to be underneath floors. And even if it was obviously not currently in use for anything else, properties will often have redundant pipes, cables etc - I don't see why a surveyor would report on them unless there was something else about the circumstances which made them noteworthy.

JustAnotherSaver

ging84 wrote: »

Seems like you want the surveyor to be liable, rather than have any reason to believe that he is.
If wishes were horses....

I've always been stumped as to why some on MSE are quick to jump to conclusions & put the OP down.

Please go on to tell me why it seems that? I would really be interested. Genuinely.

But to put the record straight - i am trying to find out where we stand. If we have a case then we have a case, if we don't then we don't. I'm no expert in this so i thought the surveyor would be more likely to blame for the reason i gave. The solicitor (the original one i spoke to) thinks the previous owner is the one liable. I personally don't see how they are. MUST they tell us there's a sump pump? I wouldn't have thought so.

bris wrote: »

The surveyor isn't liable, the homebuyers report would not pick up anything unseen, it a pretty basic report for obvious faults and valuation purposes.

If that's the case then fair enough. I suppose our solicitor will tell us.

The report did mention the damp that was seen so at this point the specialists should have been brought in, its al very well blaming everyone else but at the end of the day when damp is reported you should always fear the worst.

Then my understanding of damp was severely lacking. We have damp at my mums house & it doesn't cause this much damage. I was wrong in thinking this would be the same. The quote for £500 to put it right didn't seem so bad. If they'd have said £1000s then i'd have been put off.

And yes a structural survey would have investigated the damp in greater detail, thats why you pay the big bucks.

This is what i keep getting told but everyone fails to elaborate on that.

How? How would it go into more detail?

My understanding is they can't remove furniture. They can't remove carpets. They can't remove wallpaper.

For example:

* There was a small black speck on the bedroom wall. A small bit of mould. The wallpaper was horrid so we stripped it. Only then did we see a whopping wet patch all over the wall where it'd been leaking in & hadn't been allowed to dry out. Without the wallpaper off, this wasn't noticeable.

* The survey reported a small area of damp in the living room. Once their furniture was gone we saw a bit of bubbling across a larger area. Once the wallpaper was off we saw the effects of the damp right across the length of the room.

* We didn't even know what a sump pump was. It was our neighbour who told us we had one. Only when the carpet came up did we see the level of water under the floorboards & then the sump pump.

davidmcn wrote: »

Not particularly, pipes do tend to be underneath floors. And even if it was obviously not currently in use for anything else, properties will often have redundant pipes, cables etc - I don't see why a surveyor would report on them unless there was something else about the circumstances which made them noteworthy.

Fair enough.


So if the surveyor is a dead end, then i really can't see us getting anywhere with the previous owners through the solicitor. I don't even think we would win & even if we did, i don't see us receiving any money.


Which brings the claim on to the plasterers who aren't getting back in touch & basically shafted us out of £1,600.
I think we have a much stronger chance of a case against them, but the problem lays again - we may win, but receiving money is a different matter i've been told.

anselld

JustAnotherSaver wrote: »

Which brings the claim on to the plasterers who aren't getting back in touch & basically shafted us out of £1,600.
I think we have a much stronger chance of a case against them, but the problem lays again - we may win, but receiving money is a different matter i've been told.

How do you have a claim against plasterers? You ask plasterers to plaster walls, they plaster walls. It is not their job to resolve damp issues. They assume that is all sorted before they start.