What exactly surveyor do?

PawelK

And my question comes from a fact that as its not compulsory and assuming surveyor would not pick up major electrocal or plumbing issues in the property, perhaps it would be better to spend similar money on specialists inspections instead? But it's probably for a reason that I have never heard anyone doing it so surveyors are experienced enough to spot any alerting sings?

G_M

http://www.rics.org/uk/knowledge/consumer-guides/home-surveys/

49IM

Waste of money, imo. Have you ever read anyone else's report that they got from a survey? You wouldn't even know it related to a specific property in particular, they're just full of general maybes and mights, broad recommendations to check this and that - nothing you wouldn't already know yourself just by having a look around.

They won't pick up on anything you wouldn't notice yourself, unless you are literally blind - in which case having a sighted person view the house would indeed be a good idea. To really examine in detail will involve ripping the place apart, and no one's going to want to do that so it's always a bit of a gamble as to whether there are significant hidden problems.

Davesnave

49IM wrote: »

nothing you wouldn't already know yourself just by having a look around.

You know the OP personally?

If I may make an analogy; imagine some people walk into an art gallery and look at a painting. They all see the same thing, but what they understand as a result might vary a great deal.

None of them can be sure, just by looking, that the work was definitely by Rembrandt, or that the paint isn't modern stuff, artificially aged, as those are things better checked in other ways, but some will have a much better chance of spotting a fake. Others won't have a clue.

That's how it is with houses. A builder or a surveyor who has seen thousands will have experience on which to draw, although they won't get it right every time.

The chance of litigation means a surveyor will probably say more off the record, and of course a builder, having no legal remit, will probably say most, though it won't make him/her any more 'right.'

PawelK

That is why I am considering my options. Just read another post on here that surveyors report indicated to have a specialist (electrician and plumber) view as there might be some problems. Well, if that would be the case with me, what is the point for paying to habe things pointed out 'Maybe' instead of going straight to the specialists? And even if I go with a survey, do I want bomebuyers one or just basic?

Davesnave

PawelK wrote: »

That is why I am considering my options. Just read another post on here that surveyors report indicated to have a specialist (electrician and plumber) view as there might be some problems. Well, if that would be the case with me, what is the point for paying to habe things pointed out 'Maybe' instead of going straight to the specialists? And even if I go with a survey, do I want bomebuyers one or just basic?

You can have as many specialists look at a property as you want, but a plumber or electrician won't usually be qualified to consider the structure, nor will a timber and damp specialist be able to investigate the drains!

The problem is that you are dealing with a hypothetical house here, and there's no such thing.

Once you know what sort of house it is, how old, what construction etc then you'll have a better idea about who to employ. How much of an idea is still down to your own practical knowledge.

I never have a survey, but I know pretty much what I'm looking at and the people I take with me are still more clued-up. I also don't mind an element of risk and I don't expect everything to be perfect.

But that's me, not you.

LadyDee

49IM wrote: »

Waste of money, imo. Have you ever read anyone else's report that they got from a survey? You wouldn't even know it related to a specific property in particular, they're just full of general maybes and mights, broad recommendations to check this and that - nothing you wouldn't already know yourself just by having a look around.

They won't pick up on anything you wouldn't notice yourself, unless you are literally blind - in which case having a sighted person view the house would indeed be a good idea. To really examine in detail will involve ripping the place apart, and no one's going to want to do that so it's always a bit of a gamble as to whether there are significant hidden problems.

You cannot possibly generalise. I worked as an assistant to a Chartered Surveyor for some five years. During that time he saved prospective purchasers tens of thousands of pounds by diagonising potential and actual faults in properties. He spent his days crawling around in roof spaces, measuring roof supports, the absence or otherwise of wall ties, inspecting cellars, questioning boundaries, investigating cracks and their possible causes and cures, noting the state of damp courses, recommending, if necessary, electrical and other tests, and advising on the costs of repairs etc., etc., and etc.

He'd then come back to the office and dictate pages and pages of detailed and valuable information and advice to our clients. He'd then often spend hours talking clients through their options.

He only ever did one structural survey a day so that he could give each one his undivided attention and the benefit of his expertise.

TDPIX

The homebuyers survey we had on our first time buy was fairly general and vague about everything, and essentially missed a couple of major things (but naturally the report was worded so vaguely that they could claim not to have missed things).

A few years on, we've recently sold and it was 'interesting' seeing the homebuyers survey being done on behalf of our purchasers. The surveyor turned up 2 hours late in a suit, and asked me to lift the man-hole cover... he said "because, well.." and pointed up and down at his suit.

He had maybe a 5 minute look around outside and a 2 minute look up in the loft, and maybe a 10 second look in each bedroom upstairs (that's not an exaggeration).

I didn't see him with a damp meter or any similar tools.

It was quite eye-opening really. Once he was done, he spent 5-10 minutes longer in the property whilst writing up some general notes for the homebuyers survey, but in general the actual real checks he done would have been done (and hence highlighted) in the valuation.

I will say that he'd been doing the job ages and we'd spent a lot of money on the house (in pretty much all areas), so I think it was clear he didn't need to go around with a fine tooth comb. It was still a bit disconcerting.

I think in future I would just get a valuation done and have my own specialist surveys done if I thought they were necessary.

It is difficult if you're a naive first time buyer though... but knowing what I know now, and having seen a homebuyers survey being carried out, I'd definitely steer clear of them.

LadyDee

TDPIX wrote: »

The homebuyers survey we had on our first time buy was fairly general and vague about everything, and essentially missed a couple of major things (but naturally the report was worded so vaguely that they could claim not to have missed things).

A few years on, we've recently sold and it was 'interesting' see the homebuyers survey being done on our current place. The surveyor turned up 2 hours late in a suit, and asked me to lift the man-hole cover... he said "because, well.." and pointed at his suit.

He had maybe a 5 minute look around outside and a 2 minute look up in the loft, and maybe a 10 second look in each bedroom upstairs (that's no an exaggeration).

I didn't see him with a damp meter or any similar tools.

It was quite eye-opening really. Naturally he was also carrying out the mortgage valuation and all the checks he done were for the valuation. He spent 5-10 minutes longer in the property whilst writing up some general notes for the homebuyers survey, but in general the actual real checks he done would have been done (and hence highlighted) in the valuation.

I think in future I would just get a valuation done and have my own specialist surveys done if I thought they were necessary.

It is difficult if you're a naive first time buyer though... but knowing what I know now, and having seen a homebuyers survey being carried out, I'd definitely steer clear of them.

There is a world of difference between a Homebuyers Report and a full structural survey. Just check the difference in price between the two - that will give you an idea.

TDPIX

LadyDee wrote: »

There is a world of difference between a Homebuyers Report and a full structural survey. Just check the difference in price between the two - that will give you an idea.

I completely agree (well, not about the price - you can easily pay £350 for a Homebuyers Report through your bank, and £350 for a full structural survey where I currently live).

But yes, in general a full structural survey is a better idea IMO. I recently read such a report and whilst there's still various general, 'don't sue me' type statements, they are a lot better than homebuyer reports.

LadyDee

TDPIX wrote: »

I completely agree (well, not about the price - you can easily pay £350 for a Homebuyers Report through your bank, and £350 for a full structural survey where I currently live).

But yes, in general a full structural survey is a better idea IMO. I recently read such a report and whilst there's still various general, 'don't sue me' type statements, they are a lot better than homebuyer reports.

Shows how long ago it was - a HBR was about £80 and a Structural Survey then (if I remember correctly) was about £250 for say a 3 bed house - this was in Southsea some 20 odd years ago. Goodness knows what they're charging down there now!