Sulphur / shale floor - selling

vinny1684

Hi there.

I'm hoping for some advice. I bought my house in 2007 and now I am looking to sell it.

When I purchased it, my mortgage lender asked for a shale report. The owner at the time had one from 2003. The house had sulphur levels of 0.14 of an acceptable 1.2 level.

This was 1 bore hole at 650mm.

Concrete at 140mm
Dolomite and slight brick 550mm
Clay 600mm

My question is, how long would this test be valid for. My mortgage provider was happy with it in 2007. Would one be happy with it now in 2016?

I'm currently putting an offer in on another house and I can afford both mortgages. I couldn't afford mine not to sell thought after x number of months and having all the floors dug up. I hear buildings insurance doesn't cover it if it did need to be done.

Any advice appreciated.

Thanks!

AnotherJoe

sureiy the test would be valid indefinitely ? The floor isn't going to go moving elsewhere !

Your only issue might be, that a mortgage company won't take someone else's report for legal reasons.
Suppose for example you'd just made one up yourself ? So they may do it just to cover themselves.

eddddy

vinny1684 wrote: »

I'm currently putting an offer in on another house and I can afford both mortgages. I couldn't afford mine not to sell thought after x number of months and having all the floors dug up.

I know this isn't your question, but it's a bit risky to buy another property without having sold your current one - if that's what you're planning.

Even without digging up floors, your current property could be on the market for many months. And even once you get an offer - some offers fall through after months of effort.

(I guess you've confirmed with your proposed mortgage lender that you pass affordability tests for two concurrent mortgages.)

davidmcn

AnotherJoe wrote: »

sureiy the test would be valid indefinitely ? The floor isn't going to go moving elsewhere !

Your only issue might be, that a mortgage company won't take someone else's report for legal reasons.

Exactly, you can't just pass around a 13 year old report indefinitely - if it turned out to be wrong then nobody else can sue the original surveyor (if they even still exist). So in that sense, no, it's not "valid". But no harm in asking.

fed_up_and_stressed

AnotherJoe wrote: »

sureiy the test would be valid indefinitely ? The floor isn't going to go moving elsewhere !

Your only issue might be, that a mortgage company won't take someone else's report for legal reasons.
Suppose for example you'd just made one up yourself ? So they may do it just to cover themselves.

You don't seem to understand the issue

Sulphur attacks the actualstructure of the floor, in effect wet area from the natural water course will continue to allow chemical changes to occur until the material is removed an replaced with a non reactive alternative.

So, what may have been a neglible reading 10 or so years ago may now be a much larger reading due to the chemical changes which have been going on in the meantime unabated.

An example of a similar process would be rust on a car. To stop the problem spreading the rust needs to be treated or it will spread.


Also to the OP - I would be extremely surprised if your buildings insurance would cover it A) because it is classed as a chemical attack so one of the main exclusions and b) you have not mitigated any losses as you have not had the removal done as soon as you had the report done indicating the prescence of the material (even though it was not at a level causing damage at that time).


If you refused to have another test done (costs about £100-200) then I would expect any surveyor worth their salt to either a) put the mortgage value of the property is nil until the test is done or b) stick a retainer on the mortgage to cover the entire cost of removal and replacement of the subfloor and floor.

Sianybaby82

I was buying a property which came back from a survey that this was a possible issue.

I requested the vendor had the test done as I was not willing to proceed without it being known whether the infill was sulphur bearing. The findings came back that it was and it was not at an acceptable level, reactions had occurred and the sulphuric infill needed to be removed. I pulled out of the purchase as the cost of remedial works was prohibitive alongside other required works and even had it been an acceptable level I still would have withdrawn once it was confirmed as sulphuric infill.

I would not have accepted a report that was 16 years old stating that it was fine as this issue is progressive - in my opinion your property would be a ticking time bomb and I would not purchase as there are lots of other houses out there without this issue.