Misrepresentation by vendor? Dry rot

Hoploz

Carefully cautious is right - they always spend tuppence ha'penny on their refurbs and it's all done in no time. No time for the paint to dry that is!

Oh dear.

david1951

HouseBuyer77 wrote: »

Sounds like a pretty direct cover-up to me!

"Sounds like" isn't enough. Can the OP prove that the seller knew about the dry rot (not just the damp)? The other side could just argue that there weren't any signs of dry rot in the wood when they carried out the work. Or that the person carrying out the work wasn't qualified to spot dry rot, or had no obligation to tell the owner.

I'm playing devils advocate and admittedly this stinks of a cover up, but there needs to be proof.

HouseBuyer77

I'm playing devils advocate and admittedly this stinks of a cover up, but there needs to be proof.

Remember civil cases are 'on the balance on probability', not 'beyond reasonable doubt', sounds like could be enough.

But yes, it is a good idea to play devils advocate here. OP would be well advised to consider this a difficult case to win rather than an open and shut case.

[Deleted User]

Worth contacting the TV programme for footage though.., they can only say no.

To be honest, I'd expect them to but worth asking. Probably your best way of gaining 'proof' that the owners know about the damp.., even in the broadcast. If they say they had treated the damp, and hadn't made any attempt at all, just covered it up, I think you would be advised that's a cover up rather than any kind of treatment. Particularly with a current surveyors report saying the lack of treatment will soon affect the stability of the building.

Doozergirl

HouseBuyer77 wrote: »

Or going down a totally different line of thought, you could try contacting the TV programme. They might love a juicy story about a dodgy developer...

Still I wouldn't go down that route to start with. Possibly useful later on.

The presenters are supposed to be property professionals. If they can't see the blatent bodging that I can see goes on in half of those houses from my TV, no one can.

I've also seen exactly what the OP is experiencing, where horrible damp problems have literally been plastered over for the next owner to find. That program would have been long before this.

Doozergirl

Cakeguts wrote: »

How are you going to prove that the dry rot was there when you bought the house?

Dry rot is not dry at all. It needs the water that infiltrates the property. That water has a source. It also takes plenty of time to set in.

The source is either still in place or was ripped out with the renovation. It could have been leaky pipes, bath waste, or even something penetrating from outside.

Dry rot is also very visible once uncovered, the plaster will take on an appearance of almost having spider webs all over it. Anyone painting over wood wouldn't fail to notice the change in consistency.

The surveyor could be a bit wrong in suggesting that the dry rot will continue to spread. It still needs the source of water. If it isn't there, the rot cannot travel. Is the source still there?

Janey85

Thanks so much for all the responses so far! I am especially grateful for the “Devil’s advocate” replies as I know this isn’t a simple issue, and I appreciate the challenges being put forward.

I will try to respond to the questions raised

The presenter states that the skirting board (first floor, external wall) has clear evidence of dry rot.

The vendor confirms the damp is the biggest issue in the property.

In the ‘after’ programme, the vendor confirms that the damp issues were caused by “leaky guttering which has been fixed”.

We think it is plausible that the leaky guttering was the initial cause and was fixed at that time.

We also believe there is no way they could have done the refurbishment without seeing the dry rot, understanding what it was and deliberately covering it up. However, I realise that I also need the surveyor to confirm that the bodges we found on the architrave were done recently (i.e. during that particular refurbishment).

Apologies if I was misleading – I think the surveyor said we need to be sure the dry rot hasn’t already spread any further than we have currently seen.

A quick note on the company – they have been around for many years, seem well established and appear to perform high end refurbishments in places like Kensington and Chelsea . I’d really rather not go public in any way – ideally, I’d just like them to cover the direct costs of what they deliberately hid before (if I can satisfy myself that they did know and did cover it up!).

I suppose another question would be - is it reasonable for the vendor to fix the cause (i.e. leaky guttering) but cover up the effects of that cause (i.e. the dry rot)?

I have an independent surveyor coming in later this week to do a full survey. I will be asking him if there is any way he can identify when the dry rot would have first become evident (i.e. before we bought the house) to clear up any question as to whether the dry rot was there was the previous vendor did the refurb.

BTW, great idea about the extra unseen footage from the programme – that’s definitely worth keeping in mind!

Thanks again for all the responses, it is really helpful to get unbiased views.
J

caprikid1

I would be very much getting quotes to fix before worrying about blame on this.


Do you want to win a case or fix the issue ? Even if you win you still have to get the money out of them !!.

Bing2007

deannatrois wrote: »

Worth contacting the TV programme for footage though.., they can only say no.

They certainly won't volunteer footage. They need developers willing to appear on their shows and no developers, even the best ones, are going to take the risk that film shot will be used against them.

Doozergirl

Of course it's possible that the source has been fixed but the rot hasn't. And the surveyor would be right - there may well be more that isn't seen.

What concerns me is that someone has put a price on rectifying dry rot that hasn't been completely uncovered. Don't be taken for a ride.

Have you spoken to your solicitor? If there was ever a case for misrepresentation by a vendor then yours might be it with video footage of them being told there's a problem. Are you in Kensington & Chelsea?