Surveyor missed woodworm

markhod

Hello,

I bought a house 2 years ago and had a full building survey. They inspected the cellar and wood joists/floorboards above it and said there is no sign of woodworm.

Subsequently I have discovered woodworm, which was spotted when a specialist came to identify a source of damp in a lounge wall. I have now had a second firm come and give their opinion - both have said the woodworm is not new and in their opinion is both historic and current, and was likely present when I bought the house. One firm explicitly said the surveyor should have seen signs 2 years ago, because the infestation is not new.

If I had known about this issue I would have asked for a price reduction to cover the cost of the work. Potentially the cost is more now, than 2 years ago, because one firm says 2/3 of the floorboards are now so damaged they will have to replaced (whilst the other says they can be treated - which is another issue as to whom to believe on that!). Presumably if the problem was flagged by the surveyor then they may have been treatable at the time before the problem got worse.

Would I have any comeback for costs of this work against the surveyor?

The exact survey words are:

"Whilst no sign of wood boring insect were found, older properties such as this one are very susceptible to such infestation which may well be uncovered when the property was completely emptied"

I fail to see how the caveat excuses not spotting the signs in the floorboards and joists which are not covered and hence fully visible from the cellar. My sister says after 1 year you have no comeback on a survey results though. Is that the case?

Thanks,

Mark

Doozergirl

You've lived in the house for two years and didn't spot it until recently?

Were these joists and floorboards exposed before the damp specialist arrived?

markhod

Doozergirl wrote: »

You've lived in the house for two years and didn't spot it until recently?

Were these joists and floorboards exposed before the damp specialist arrived?

Yes, because if one goes in the cellar the ceiling is the floorboards and joists.

No I didn't spot it during the last 2 years unfortunately Just going in occasionally to get garden tools in/out is not sufficient to notice, one would have to actually shine a torch on and take a look at the joists. I've perhaps learnt a lesson that I should have been doing that routinely then.

eddddy

If you think that the survey was not not carried out with "reasonable care and skill", then the surveyor would be in breach of contract, and you have up to 6 years to make a claim (in England/Wales).


But, bear in mind that the two companies that have diagnosed active woodworm are trying to sell you woodworm treatments.

What signs of active woodworm have you seen?

(If you google something like 'signs of active woodworm', you'll get some ideas of what to look for.)

G_M

Jut to be clear, these 2 experts - were they [STRIKE]surveyors[/STRIKE] salesmen undertaking a free [STRIKE]survey[/STRIKE] sales inspection on behalf of a company that treats woodworm?

Or were they specialists who do not work for a company with an interest in remedial work?

Cynical? Me?

There seems some uncertainty about the age of the evidence. If the holes were created 20 (50 etc) years ago, they would still be there now.

Wht is the evidence that the woodworm

* are actually active now and/or
* were actually active 2 years ago
?

markhod

I've seen holes and frass (which looks like images I have seen via google) + dead insects which look beatle like.

steampowered

In order to have a comeback against the surveyor, you would need to prove that the surveyor was negligent.

I don't know how you could prove that the woodworm was there 2 years ago, and that a decent surveyor would have caught it.

markhod

One was a surveyor ("salesman"?!) for a national company yes....and its this company that recommended replacing most of the floor.

The other was a builder, who owns a local company specialising in damp/woodworm type things. My own subsequent checks seemed to find frass in the locations he said had a problem, whilst the national firm told me its all over (even in areas I have not found frass).

Cheeky_Monkey

IMO, it's very rare for a Timber & Damp company to go into a house and come out again saying "no, no, everything's fine - have a nice life!"

G_M

Get an independant inspection done. Paying for this might save you £thousands£.

It will also provide better evidence if you decide to pursue the original surveyor.

Both these guys have a vested interest in identifying work that needs doing.

Yes, there might be active beetle (I agree frass is an indication), but there might not.

Yes the floorboards might be so rotten as tto need replacing, but they might be treatable for beetle, assuming the beetle is active.

davidmcn

steampowered wrote: »

In order to have a comeback against the surveyor, you would need to prove that the surveyor was negligent.

I don't know how you could prove that the woodworm was there 2 years ago, and that a decent surveyor would have caught it.

You get a retrospective opinion from another surveyor of what the first one ought to have reported.

No idea where OP's sister has got the one year thing from.