Should solicitor check for asbestos?

davidmcn

foch wrote: »

I'd assume I pay big money to solicitors to do all possible checks for me

Obviously they don't do all possible checks about everything. And nor can they start reeling off an infinite list of the things they're not checking. But presumably they told you during the process what they were doing, and none of that would have included asbestos.

foch wrote: »

The survey said no asbestos.

Ok, so if the surveyor was as (unusually) unequivocal as that, why are you not pursuing them, rather than looking to the solicitor for failing to do something which solicitors don't do?

babyblade41

:doh::eek: sometimes words fail me

Housebuy12345

People are being very rude on this thread.

AnotherJoe

Let's get back to basics.
OP, your question is "should solicitor check for asbestos" and the answer is a clear "no". End of.
That's the job of the survey.
Your survey said there was none (which along with another poster I find unusual it being so unequivocal are you sure about that ?
I would expect a survey to say that none was found but further checks are recommended on artex and heating systems or words to that effect. Surveys are not normally so definitive.
Double check the survey wording and then take it up with the surveyor. It does seem strange why you thought it was the job of solicitor when you had a surveyor looking for it and the survey said there was none. I presume you wouldn't expect the solicitor to repeat the surveyors work on every other aspect such as damp, structural issues and the like, so why this one aspect ?

Davesnave

foch wrote: »

In the home report it did say the asbestos check was outside the scope of the survey but in the seller survey they said "no". I want to sell this flat in the future and I'm concerned the value of the flat has just dropped since I now know there's asbestos and will have to to say about that in the survey when selling. What do I do?

The seller survey is most probably similar to the questions before contract carried out in England & Wales. You cannot rely on the answers given, as sellers aren't experts and they often make mistakes.


If you want to sell the flat in the future, it will still have been built in the '60s, so anyone who knows about asbestos will assume it has some somewhere, whether it has or not. Any property built before the year 2000 is likely to have some somewhere, so finding small amounts of asbestos in the Artex isn't something that would be likely to reduce the value or become a negotiating lever. Millions of houses have it.

Davesnave

foch wrote: »

In the home report it did say the asbestos check was outside the scope of the survey...

foch wrote: »

The survey said no asbestos..

These are not the same. I'm confused.

Did you have a survey in addition to the Home Report?

AnotherJoe

in an example home survey I've just looked at, the relevant question is
"Are you aware of the existence of asbestos in your property?"
An answer of "no" to that is not the same as saying there is no asbestos.

OP, when you sell if removal proves impractical your answer to a similar questionnaire in future would be "like most flats of this age the heating flues (or whatever it is that has asbestos) contain asbestos"
And of course if you did remove it, then rather than just putting "no" which as you've discovered is a worthless answer, you'll be able to put "no, the heating system had it removed in 2020"

Albala

da_rule wrote: »

We all understand what you're saying.

You're looking for someone to blame because you, having visited the property and having read the survey reports, did not ask questions about asbestos.

That's most unfair if the survey didn't say there was any. Why can't people here explain things without being a patronising ****?
Many of those of us who are older do know about asbestos (though not all of us, which is fine, the widespread use of asbestos in pre-1960s house building is not exactly taught to everyone at school) but it hasn't been used in a domestic setting since before some posters here would have been born.

M_Python

Posters have explained why it's not the solicitor's job to check for asbestos but the OP is having none of it hence some further replies have had to be a bit more 'forceful' in getting the point across ..... nothing wrong with that!

Exodi

I think there has been some confusion as to what the 'survey' you speak of is;

With you being based in Scotland and me in England, I can't comment on how your process may differ.

1) A seller would typically fill out a property information form (called a TA6 here) in which they state the various details of the property to the best of their knowledge - is it here they've stated 'No' to being asked about the presence of asbestos?

2) You/your lender/both conduct a survey to physically inspect the property. As has been mentioned above, I'd also find it unlikely a surveyor has said that the property unequivocally does not have asbestos - most surveys are plastered with 'However, if you have any concerns you should instruct a specialist to undertake an inspection.'

If the seller has filled out the property information form incorrectly, you'd be hard pressed to prove they were aware of the asbestos. If the surveyor did indeed state as a matter of fact there wasn't asbestos, you may have some recourse.

EDIT:

Davesnave wrote: »

foch wrote:

In the home report it did say the asbestos check was outside the scope of the survey...

foch wrote:

The survey said no asbestos..

These are not the same. I'm confused.

Did you have a survey in addition to the Home Report?

Exactly the confusion I reference! It seems the OP is mixing together the property information form and the survey.