Survey - Is it Necessary?

todaymorning

Hi,
I'm in such a dilemma. We are buying a property for 1st time and at time of viewing I brought in someone who has few properties under his hat and a builder.

After consultation, including with few people who have their own homes, we are in split decision whether to do a full structural survey (via RICs) or not to do one, as the bank have approved the mortgage and their basic valuation met the house price.

What is recommended? I understand it is each individual's personal preference but need some help to decide.

Thanks
TM

Surrey_EA

It really does depend on your attitude to risk.

What age is the property you are considering buying? What condition does it appear to be in? What is the proposed purchase price? Are there any issues that have been identified from your visits so far?

Some people will accuse surveyors of filling their reports with phrases solely to cover their own backsides. However, if you are spending a significant amount of money on the purchase of a property, would it not be wise to spend a few hundred pounds and have an expert carry out an inspection? Perhaps there is no need to go for a buildings survey (formerly known as a full structural survey) and look at a home buyers instead.

The valuation carried out by your lender will only be to assess whether the property is suitable lending security for your mortgage, and will not really be considered a survey.

G_M

* what is the age of the property?
* the general condition?
* what did the builder you took say?
* how much time did you all take looking beyond the general layout and colour scheme but specifically at structural issues (eg roof, walls, damp, previous changes like fireplace removal, etc etc?
* what's your opinion of the builder's competance? And your own?
* what's your attitude to risk?

Have you considered going back yourself, with or without builder friend, and a list of things to check in detail (much as a surveyor would do)?

david1951

Call a local surveyor and discuss the options with them. Tell them the location and age of the house. There is a good chance they will have looked at one in the area before, and can tell you common risks. If it is a new build then there are still things to look out for.

I would typically advise getting a buildings (/full structural) survey and go from there. If there is a problem then the cost of the survey may be a lot less than fixing the problem yourself post-completion.

The bank don't care because they won't be the ones paying to sort out any problems - you will.

always_sunny

I organised a survey for due diligence but it didn't tell me anything that I didn't expect.
The RICS HomeBuyer Report is a bit of a waste of time cause it relies on the property to be cleared and accessible to notice 'big' things.

As G_M suggested, next time I'd prefer to go back myself than pay someone to do it.

NicNicP

My thoughts are if you're spending £100,000+ on a property then why risk no survey just to save £500? Could be the best £500 you've ever spent if it alerts you to something serious. You'll probably have it and feel you've wasted the money if nothing comes up but better to be safe than sorry.

todaymorning

Thank you to all - i guess yes, in the long run it may be beneficial to do the survey although i dont think it will benefit for re-negotiation as we were told the seller wont negotiate further but maybe by getting it done and if there is something really bad (which I doubt) as visually it looks ok, then its for long term benefit anyway.

walwyn1978

It's not (so) much about renegotiation, it's more about recognising what may cost in the near future/further away/in 5 years time so you can start to keep money for them.

Basic is literally confirmation there is a property there and in their opinion it is lendable on. Of the other two, for the difference in price of the two, the full survey IMO is worth the extra, although both can miss things.

Remember they won't check electrics, gas etc - if uou want that doing that's extra and you'll have to arrange it yourself

AnotherJoe

NicNicP wrote: »

My thoughts are if you're spending £100,000+ on a property then why risk no survey just to save £500? Could be the best £500 you've ever spent if it alerts you to something serious. You'll probably have it and feel you've wasted the money if nothing comes up but better to be safe than sorry.

Perhaps because the £500 survey will be full of caveats, won't examine anything really key such as RSJs or structural stability, and thus practically worthless ?

The question I have for the OP is, what did your friends and builder say ? Did they suggest that a full survey was neeeded, or did they all say it seemed OK to them? Is there anything that is worrying you that you've seen, or are you just worried because you are a FTB? My first propert I may as well have burned the money I spent on the survey, at least it would have warmed me up.

SparksAlive

I paid £200 for a Homebuyers survey, which is the step above a basic valuation and the step below a full structural survey. I figured I didn't need the full structural one as there was nothing to suggest the house was in danger of having serious issues, but the Homebuyers survey did pick up some things I wouldn't have spotted like that the extractor fan in the bathroom doesn't work (£80 to fix) and the fuse box is seriously outdated and needs replacing (£350), plus some other minor things like a sticking hinge on the back door, and a hole in the roof lining.


It's a couple of hundred that gives me peace of mind that these are the only real expenditures I should have to make on the house in the near future. If it had picked up anything more expensive (there was a potential for damp in the bathroom for example, though it came to nothing) then I could have used that information to negotiate on the price a little. So it never hurts to know.

Grenage

A survey is unlikely to tell you anything more than you'd discover with a looksee alongside a more experienced person.