Seller didn’t disclose bat roost in loft

Nick_C

HampshireH wrote: »

I have dealt with flats on an estate of social housing. The faeces were not a problem but the urine used to run down the internal walls and causes issues (obviously). People moved out as they couldn't tolerate it. They also reported associated pests and being bitten

Some social housing estates are like that! JK

AdrianC

gengastars wrote: »

But by the size of the pile of guano, and the amount of cheeping (?) I could hear in the loft I suspect there might be a lot of them up there.

Are you sure it's just bats, and there's not birds up there, too?

And the smell was overwhelming. Like the smell of a hamster cage but amplified. Hit us in the face when we opened the front door and got worse as we went upstairs.

So, umm, how did you not notice at the earlier viewings?

Skiddaw1

AdrianC wrote: »

Are you sure it's just bats, and there's not birds up there, too?


So, umm, how did you not notice at the earlier viewings?

The OP said the offer was accepted in March (before the bats returned to their summer roost).

Smodlet

Slinky wrote: »

Somebody has to say it, the vendor is a bit batty - too many bats in her belfry.

Bats have more rights than people? That is batty. I read the gov.uk site and noted the "Bat Helpline"; presumably one sends up a bat signal...? (Someone was always going to do that one, too)

OP, thank you for this cautionary tale. We had our roof lining products renewed a couple of months ago and am I glad!? They found a bird's nest and a bees' nest (both abandoned) which we were expecting. Thanks the gods they didn't find any bats! :eek:

AdrianC

Smodlet wrote: »

Bats have more rights than people? That is batty.

You're not allowed to kill people or destroy their homes, either...

The big difference is that people aren't an endangered species.

Smodlet

AdrianC wrote: »

You're not allowed to kill people or destroy their homes, either...

The big difference is that people aren't an endangered species.

There is a whole debate in there on which I feel you and I would never reach agreement, AdrianC.

Bats/whatever are fine, imho, up to and including the point where they invade our homes, just like people. I understand the bats were there first but to me, in that situation, they are just another kind of pest and it should not be illegal to remove them, humanely and alive if possible.

To put things into perspective, I have (probably) saved the lives of 3 bees and one snail in my time though I sure ain't no Buddhist. Fleas and ticks, on the other hand, are fair game.

AdrianC

Smodlet wrote: »

There is a whole debate in there on which I feel you and I would never reach agreement, AdrianC.

Maybe, maybe not.

I don't think "Humans aren't an endangered species" is really something that can be debated...

As for bats, though, the legislation protecting them is not exactly recent. It goes back decades.
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1981/69

Smodlet

The debate would certainly not be about humans not being an endangered species; that is not what I meant. Decent people being an endangered species... I feel homo sapiens is endangered due to the decline into the subspecies (rapidly becoming a species) of homo chaviens but that is by the by.

We were talking about bats. The law is the law; I am not in any way a law breaker. I just happen to disagree on this and many other points of it. That does not mean I would not or do not abide by it and all other laws. It does mean I think it should be reviewed but admit I have not read the bits of the links about how to deal with bat infestations.

I would certainly never buy a property without having someone have a long, hard look in the loft and at the roof. Were any evidence of bats/birds/bees/any other unwanted guests discovered, I would either deal with them or walk away, were I not allowed to proceed as I see fit.

We agree on cats; we don't agree on bats. Such is life.