Vendor digging heels over Damp & timber survey

Cheeky_Monkey

OP, when you read that email, did you stamp your feet and then throw yourself onto the floor pummeling it with your fists by any chance?

The vendors are being more than reasonable, generous in fact, so I think you should be grateful to them rather than complaining that they are patronising you.

At the end of the day, it's their house not yours and if you continue to act like this, they may well decide that selling to you is more trouble than it's worth.

breakingbad

someone is not going to like the replies here

My view - vendors seem very reasonable.

Doozergirl

Bacon_Sandwich wrote: »

Thanks. there was no smell or stains or sign of any damp when we viewed on 3 occasions plus a further viewing to measure for furniture/curtains. its a nicely kept lived-in house. So i don't see why they'd kick up a fuss

They'd kick up a fuss because what these companies do is exactly what they're describing. If there is no visible evidence or smell of damp, then there is unlikely to be a problem. The meters that surveyors use are not a diagnosis of damp.

Yet, when people employ companies to survey for damp who also sell damp proofing solutions, there is always a diagnosis of damp and the solution always involves onjecting a chemical damp proof course and waterproofing the walls with a render. DPCs do not just fail after 100 years, they are usually breached by earth or new driveways. Airbricks are blocked up to stops draughts by people who don't know why they're there etc. Your vendor, quite rightly, doesn't want to be ripped off.

Their way is not the way to solve damp issues. If there is an issue, it is almost always a matter of a lack of maintenance somewhere and the solutions are very cheap and logical! Find why the damp is there and stop the source, then let the wall dry out. If it is severe then the wall may well need re-plastering, but we're not talking about a severe problem here, so it's not relevant.

I have seen several examples on this forum, post 'damp proofing', where the source of the dampness is still blatantly obvious from photographs and yet, they have 'treated' the walls, basically blocking damp from coming through from the brick to the plaster, but not stopping the source a something that in many cases costs nothing but a little bit of effort.

Without a doubt I'd say that your vendor has been on this forum or on the Heritage House website, which I suggest you look at also, for an idea of how one looks after period property properly. https://www.heritage-house.org/damp-and-condensation/the-fraud-of-rising-damp.html

As I said before, if there is no real evidence of damp, then there is unlikely to be a problem, but I guarantee you that the people you wanted to employ would say that the DPC has failed and recommend at least £1,500 of work.

It's snake oil. I've been renovating period houses for 20 years and I was duped for the first 8 by these people. We haven't had a 'damp proofer' (other than in lower ground floors) in for 12 years, just done all the required maintenance and not had a call back at all. Only anecdotal evidence to you, but outright proof to me.

Elliott.T123

Agree with all the other posters here, you seem to have found a very generous vendor who is willing to pay out to help protect you.


I am really struggling to see what the issue is here, you have a vendor offering to pay to ensure you get a higher level of service than the one you initially wanted?

Doozergirl

Bacon_Sandwich wrote: »

OK I've dug out what they said in email to the EA.
"While we acknowledge the requirement for a damp & timber survey, and are happy to accommodate, we have concerns regarding the company that **** have employed to carry out the survey. Having spoken the firm in question, and taking the liberty of researching them on the internet, we think we have valid reason to object to their employment on this occasion. Our concerns stem from the fact that they are not independent surveyors, but a contractor (one that is poorly reviewed at that). We are concerned that we will receive a sales person prospecting for work and commission, rather than the advice of an independent surveyor, which will likely suggest unnecessary works and potentially hold us to ransom.
We therefore suggest that **** employ a PCA registered independent surveyor to carry out the survey. We understand that the costs of employing such a surveyor would be around £200, and as a gesture of goodwill, and to ensure a fair and accurate survey, we would be more than happy to cover this cost ourselves."

So its not just the fact that there might be dmap. it the attitude and the patronising way they write. basically saying weve done something stupid and completely rejecting our choice of surveyor. naughty us.

If you don't know, you don't know. That's not your fault, but your vendor does know and so they're recommending the correct course of action at their own cost.

That email is perfectly reasonable and polite. You're choosing to read something that it doesn't say.

davidwood681

OP, do yourself a favour. Admit you were wrong and apologise for the way you've acted.

The sellers sound like the type of people we'd all want to buy off.

You sound like the type of people we'd all like to avoid.

bigisi

Think I'd be dumping such an awkward buyer if it were me. They're only going to be further trouble down the line if quibbling over this.

SG27

Bacon_Sandwich wrote: »

OK I've dug out what they said in email to the EA.
"While we acknowledge the requirement for a damp & timber survey, and are happy to accommodate, we have concerns regarding the company that **** have employed to carry out the survey. Having spoken the firm in question, and taking the liberty of researching them on the internet, we think we have valid reason to object to their employment on this occasion. Our concerns stem from the fact that they are not independent surveyors, but a contractor (one that is poorly reviewed at that). We are concerned that we will receive a sales person prospecting for work and commission, rather than the advice of an independent surveyor, which will likely suggest unnecessary works and potentially hold us to ransom.
We therefore suggest that **** employ a PCA registered independent surveyor to carry out the survey. We understand that the costs of employing such a surveyor would be around £200, and as a gesture of goodwill, and to ensure a fair and accurate survey, we would be more than happy to cover this cost ourselves."

So its not just the fact that there might be dmap. it the attitude and the patronising way they write. basically saying weve done something stupid and completely rejecting our choice of surveyor. naughty us.

I couldnt have worded that email better myself personally. You have done something stupid and potentially very costly for both yourselves and the vendors.

Take theirs and everyone heres advice and employ an independent surveyor. Its in both your interests.


Here is what your damp proofing company will recommemd:

Inject damp proof course to entire ground floor, hack off internal plaster up to hight of 1m and replaster. Cost £5000

Here is what a independent surveyor could say on the same house:

High mositure reading to some internal walls caused by inadequate ventilation, unblock blocked up air bricks.

Cost £10

armchaireconomist

Sounds like the damp proofing company you want to send round are salesman interested in selling you really expensive work that doesn't really need done, and the vendor (rightly so) is anticipating you coming back with this and demand a reduced price.


As it was built 100+ years ago it's certain to have "high readings" - is it damp though? Different question entirely.


Not sure what you're annoyed about. Vendors are offering to help pay and secure you a more accurate survey.

busbybuilders

Nice to see everyone dishing out the correct advice, but it seems your shouting at the OP.
it's the house buying system that's at fault here and primarily with RICS and the good old Banks again. The time honoured "old boy network".
For those lucky enough to not need a mortgage then ignoring the survey is easy.You can do what you like.
If you need to borrow your almost screwed. The bank will insist on a waste of time RICS survey and they in turn will refer the non existent damp readings from their !!!!!! little damp meter to the useless Property Care Association (PCA).
Until RICS learn to survey properly without a bloody damp meter this scenario will never end.
Sadly Gordon Kent from the Society for the Protection of Ancient Building's still insists rising damp exists and perpetuates the ongoing saga. Shout at RICS, PCA, SPAB, and the Council of Mortgage Lenders, now UK Finance if you want it to change.