Damp in homebuyers survey, owner not letting us conduct damp review

DannyTemple

We are in the process of buying a house that has recently been extended, we believe by the owner's (who is a builder) firm. He was landlord, and has now extended and renovated before selling.

The homebuyer's survey was in the main fine. The majority of damp tests showed nothing. One test that did show damp was on the inside wall of the downstairs cloakroom, it also showed flaking of the wall. This wall was previously an external wall but is now enclosed by the extended kitchen. The survey suggested we get a damp proof expert in to look at this, because as well as this, they found 'springiness' and a slope in the laminate flooring in the area, suggesting a possible leak, so to also look under the floor.

When the estate agent told the owner that we wanted to do a damp review, the owner has said that the damp is caused by salt in the old brickwork and will go away if left. How likely is this? The owner also does not want us to do the review as he wanted the sale to move swiftly, however we would only be carrying this out while the solicitors are doing the searches/deeds work anyway, so this isn't holding anything up. Is his position understandable or are we right to be annnoyed?

PasturesNew

You are right to be annoyed. It's a hiccup.

I'd say it could go either way.
Salt in old brickwork is often found... but it's now enclosed so might work itself out. He might've bodged something/trying to hide it.

The seller is being ridiculous for not enabling a potential buyer to investigate. Speak to the estate agent, see if they can talk some sense into him.

It's possible if you don't buy it, everybody would have the same issue.
It's possible if you don't buy it, there'll be a queue of buyers chomping at the bit to rip his arm off.

DannyTemple

Thanks for your reply, the house was on for nearly 3 months before our offer was accepted, so don't think the latter will be the case. When laminate flooring gets lifted, does it tend to get easily put back again as though you wouldn't know, or can you tell? Wondering if this is his issue?

Doozergirl

It's not ideal, but it's common to have a bit of damp on inside walls.

Sometimes small rooms like internal cupboards are poorly ventilated and attract condensation.

If this was an outside wall before, then it could well be residual damp left from a previous issue when the wall was outside. Being inside now, you could assume it's not getting wet anymore.

There's also the possibility that residual damp in the ground is being driven up through internal walls. Again, common in older houses where new damp proof membranes and concrete floors have been installed next to it. Our modern methods do clash with older houses.

My disdain for chemical damp proofing companies and the quality and understanding of what they actually do is well documented on this board. I wouldn't be employing any of those offering

Have a look at the Heritage House website to get informed about damp and, if you do have a survey, only employ someone who does not sell damp proofing treatments. The cost of rectifying an issue and the work involved is almost always less than the cost of chemical rubbish that doesn't genuinely work and never addresses the actual source. It's like the proverbial sticking plaster. You have to stop the problem, not patch over it.

Go and have an actual look at what's there and how bad it is, in reality. What can you see, what can you smell, is it wet to the touch? Is the laminate new?

ACG

Was the valuation ok for lending purposes?
If not - then you have no option other than to try a different lender which will take 2 weeks to go through.

If so - then you have 3 options:
1) Accept it for what it is on the basis that you might have a costly job to sort out in the not so distant future.
2) Back out, the whole point of having these surveys is to check for issues. If you are going to ignore them, then you may as well have saved the money and gone for the basic val.
3) Renegotiate on the basis that you have no idea whether or not you will have a costly bill in the future, so you are hedging your bets.

Doozergirl

Laminate doesn't go back down easily, no, not usually. Yes, it would be part of the issue.

I'd have a serious problem with a conman surveying my house too, in honesty, because I already known the result will be the whole 'smash plaster off to 1 metre, inject chemical DPC and waterproof render' without even looking for a source and establishing what the actual issue is! I would, however, be more than prepared to meet a buyer to talk about it.

ACG

I agree about who you have going out to do the report, but I do think there needs to be a check carried out.

The person doing the home buyers report has not mentioned it in the hope of getting further business, they have done it because there is a reason - that could be backside covering, but it could just as easily be that there is an actual issue.

Someone buying a house to renovate and sell on is unlikely to be doing the best job possible. There will be likely be cutbacks and short cuts taken. Builders/developers/damp proof people - there is not a massive difference in them as a whole. Decent, reliable and trustworthy tradesmen are hard to find.

Doozergirl

ACG wrote: »

I agree about who you have going out to do the report, but I do think there needs to be a check carried out.

The person doing the home buyers report has not mentioned it in the hope of getting further business, they have done it because there is a reason - that could be backside covering, but it could just as easily be that there is an actual issue.

Someone buying a house to renovate and sell on is unlikely to be doing the best job possible. There will be likely be cutbacks and short cuts taken. Builders/developers/damp proof people - there is not a massive difference in them as a whole. Decent, reliable and trustworthy tradesmen are hard to find.

First lesson in a series on 'How to Insult Doozergirl'.

1. Tell a builder/developer who understands damp better than nearly anyone here that her job is the same as the people she's trying to help posters to avoid.

I don't seem to find it very hard to find decent, reliable and trustworthy trades at all. Recommendation is key. If we're going to generalise then I'd say that most people who don't find those reliable people are trying to save money in the wrong places. I get asked about cash to avoid VAT more than I care to mention. The tradespeople I know all just want to do a good job and get paid for it.

Back to the evidence of damp. There will be something to look at, but it's unlikely to be the 'costly job' you describe. I'd already made a lengthy post pointing the OP in the direction of a website that will help them and telling them to employ someone who doesn't sell damp proofing treatments. I also specifically said I wouldn't have a conman in my house, not that it doesn't need to be checked. I even asked questions to help with what to look for.

I also dislike the profuse referral to surveyors as 'backside covering' on this board. They're pointing out potential issues to be investigated - that's what people employ them for. Somehow everyone refers to everything as 'backside covering' when the report arrives. My specific problem with surveyors and damp is that they believe the injected DPC rubbish too. The key is simply to find the source and stop it, not patch it.

I had a client employ one to help me find the source of damp once. He was useless. He recommend an injected DPC, but there were three injected DPCs in just the one wall already. Using his little 'damp meter', I managed to track the damp problem on the ground floor up the house to a problem with the chimney.

DannyTemple

Thanks for this Dooergirl. I read the website and it does seem that rising damp in general is scaremongering. However, you mention that residual damp in the ground could be being driven up which seems at odds with what the heritage website says? Sorry if I'm being thick.

The laminate is new (less than nine months I think), would that suggest that it needs more time to settle?

I've got to admit that since I wrote my original post, the sloping, bouncy laminate floor is giving me more concern than the slightly flaky damp in the cloakroom. The skirting laid was also noted to follow this profile, is this the correct way to do it?

DannyTemple

Another piece of info: The layer of the house was a concrete slab with suspended timber.

ACG

Doozergirl wrote: »

First lesson in a series on 'How to Insult Doozergirl'.

1. Tell a builder/developer who understands damp better than nearly anyone here that her job is the same as the people she's trying to help posters to avoid.

I don't seem to find it very hard to find decent, reliable and trustworthy trades at all. Recommendation is key. If we're going to generalise then I'd say that most people who don't find those reliable people are trying to save money in the wrong places. I get asked about cash to avoid VAT more than I care to mention. The tradespeople I know all just want to do a good job and get paid for it.

Back to the evidence of damp. There will be something to look at, but it's unlikely to be the 'costly job' you describe. I'd already made a lengthy post pointing the OP in the direction of a website that will help them and telling them to employ someone who doesn't sell damp proofing treatments. I also specifically said I wouldn't have a conman in my house, not that it doesn't need to be checked. I even asked questions to help with what to look for.

I also dislike the profuse referral to surveyors as 'backside covering' on this board. They're pointing out potential issues to be investigated - that's what people employ them for. Somehow everyone refers to everything as 'backside covering' when the report arrives. My specific problem with surveyors and damp is that they believe the injected DPC rubbish too. The key is simply to find the source and stop it, not patch it.

I had a client employ one to help me find the source of damp once. He was useless. He recommend an injected DPC, but there were three injected DPCs in just the one wall already. Using his little 'damp meter', I managed to track the damp problem on the ground floor up the house to a problem with the chimney.

I think you misread my post. When I said not a massive difference, I did not mean job wise, I meant more that many developers and builders will be lazy, cut corners and try to charge as much as they can for a poor service. Compare that to dodgy "damp specialists" and there is very little difference.

I am not saying all developers or damp specialists are like that, but having renovated a few properties in the past and been on building sites since I was 16 (step dad was a joiner) I am not going off stories I have read on the internet. I have even asked for jobs to be done in a particular way and been told cheaper ways to do the job - which are typically cheaper for a reason.

I am sure you know more than most and I do not doubt you know more than me about this, but at the same time I am not a layman either.

As for the surveyors, there is definitely an element of backside covering on a lot of reports. I am not saying this is happening in this case, it may be, it may not be. The point I am making is that if no checks are allowed, you have to wonder why? Is it because they do not want the laminate pulling up or is there another reason. If it is the laminate, then what checks can be done.