Survey question

Ian_875

Morning everyone

We've just got the keys to our new house, a 1960s semi, 2 days ago

Before purcahse we had a homebuyers survery, which stated:

The roof structure is of traditional timber construction, comprising
trusses, common rafters, ties and ridge board. Condition rating 2.

The main roof space was accessed through a hatch in the landing ceiling
using the installed aluminium loft ladder. The loft has been fully boarded,
which provided access.

The structural timbers appear to be in good order with no evidence of any
distress noted.

The bituminous felt underlay is in satisfactory order.

Plastic sheeting has been fixed to the underside of the rafters and we
recommend this is removed to prevent condensation forming on the sheeting
during cold weather.

The thermal insulation in the loft is approximately 100mm thick below the
boards only and should be increased to the current standard of 270mm to
improve the energy efficiency of the property.

Ventilation within the roof space is satisfactory. This should continue to be
maintained to prevent the risk of condensation leading to timber decay.

Now, having moved in we noticed a shaft of light coming in through the roof, which was noticeable straight away. We've had a roofer out and he says it needs a new roof to the tune of £3k. Apparently he could do a repair but couldn't guarantee it.

Where do we stand here? Do I have any recourse? Who would I complain to?

Any help appreciated, it's been a stressful few days!!

LandyAndy

Can't really tell without seeing it but pre-war houses were generally built without anything under the tiles and their roofs were fine.

A new roof sounds like BS to me. Is there any sign of water getting in?

I'd be a. waiting until it rained and then watching for water ingress and b. getting a second and third opinion.

I suppose the plastic sheeting could have been to redirect a leak but that seems a strange thing to do compared with solving any problem.

You can't complain to anyone. If roof repairs are required then it's up to you to get them done.

SmashedAvacado

Step 1 - ask your surveyor to comment / come back and take a look and identify what has changed

Davesnave

You were reasonably lucky to get the surveyor into the loft for a HB survey!

On the day in question there might have been no sunlight to shine through either. You got an assessment based on what the surveyor could see at the time, with the knowledge that the house is around 50-60 years old. It sounds about right.

Now, surprise-surprise, you send one roofer up there and he finds work, though exactly what it is remains unclear. One doesn't get a new roof for £3k. The scaffolding will cost up to half of that.

Are the roof coverings tiles or slates, and are they serviceable? My tiles of similar age were. Concrete tiles should last 100 years.

It may be that you'll want to re-felt and batten in the fullness of time, but meanwhile, do as in the post above and then, (perhaps) get quotes for a repair and a general condition assessment from at least two other roofers.

Ian_875

Thanks everyone

First step is going to be getting a few second and third opinions. I guess it's all a learning curve - the joys of being a FTB!

I'll get in touch with some firms today and get them out for assessments/quotes and take it from there

davidmcn

Basic question - does it leak?

Ian_875

davidmcn wrote: »

Basic question - does it leak?

Nope. To be honest, in my inexperienced opinion it looks fine. Old, but fine

No sign of damp in the loft at all, and it wasn't draughty.

Davesnave

Ian_875 wrote: »

No sign of damp in the loft at all, and it wasn't draughty.

If you have good loft insulation, (as yet you don't have the recommended 270mm) then it will be better if there is plenty of ventilation in the loft space.

Albala

As per Smashed's post above, get the surveyor back to explain. I did that once, and the surveyor was able to reassure me that the cracks he hadn't mentioned, but which in raking light could be seen when you looked at the wallpaper, were merely loose plaster and not structural (which was true, and which was why he hadn't mentioned them).