RICS Building Survey - Factually Incorrect/Missed Problem

thias

We've recently purchased a property originally built in the 1800s. It has three chimney stacks.
Since completing on the purchase we've discovered the chimney breast below one of the chimney stacks has been removed and the stack is not being supported. 
We now need to either support or remove the problematic stack.
As part of the purchase process we had a RICS Building Survey carried out. 
The report clearly states "There are three chimney stacks" and "The chimney breasts remain". - do we have any comeback on the survey company? Do we stand a chance going through one of the "independent" complaints ombudsman? If we had known about the problem, or the potential for it to be a problem, sooner, we would have factored that into our offer.
Thanks!

princeofpounds

This is one of those rare instances where, yes, you probably do. It's something that surveys are supposed to check, although it's something that's remarkably easy to miss if you aren't thinking about it. I sold a property once and the surveyor didn't even notice the absence of visible support on the ground floor. Pretty sure it had a boxed-in steel support, but didn't have any documentation to prove it because.... my own surveyor missed it too!

maxsteam

The next step might be to write a polite letter to the surveyor pointing out the issues. It's likely that the surveyor will have insurance if there is liability and will want to be involved at an early stage rather than after any remedial work has been completed. It's also possible that there will be differing opinions. Either way, I feel that you should invite the surveyor's input.

NewCottageOwner

Long time lurker and first time poster as I had this exact issue too. RICS L3 building survey missed the unsupported chimney stack, even though surveyor had accessed the loft and seen the lack of chimney breast...

My understanding is you have to go to the surveyor first with the complaint to give them chance to rectify the issue as RICS membership requires them to have a complaints procedure. If a satisfactory outcome can't be reached, you can then go to the independent ombudsman.

I went direct, prepared for surveyor to argue the case, but happily they agreed to fund the required work to remove the chimney stack and make good the roof! Seemed keen to settle without having to go through their insurers etc. So definitely worth pursuing. 

Section62

Before diving into the complaints process it would be worth taking a step back and checking the facts.

thias said:

We've recently purchased a property originally built in the 1800s. It has three chimney stacks.
Since completing on the purchase we've discovered the chimney breast below one of the chimney stacks has been removed and the stack is not being supported. 

If the stack is not being supported then why hasn't it fallen down (yet)?

Is it possible the person noticing the 'missing' chimney breast is misunderstanding how the structure of the building works?

thias said:

We now need to either support or remove the problematic stack.

Who is saying this, and how have they arrived at that conclusion?  Is it possible they are wrong? (see previous point)

thias said:

The report clearly states "There are three chimney stacks" and "The chimney breasts remain". - do we have any comeback on the survey company?

It says "The chimney breasts remain" it doesn't say "The three chimney breasts remain". In the context of the report could "The chimney breasts remain" refer to a number less than three - for example "The chimney breasts in the [living room] remain"?

lincroft1710

NewCottageOwner said:

I went direct, prepared for surveyor to argue the case, but happily they agreed to fund the required work to remove the chimney stack and make good the roof! Seemed keen to settle without having to go through their insurers etc. 

Surveyors' insurance costs can be quite astronomic and will increase each year as the more properties surveyed, the more chance of a claim. It was obviously financially beneficial to settle the matter themselves rather than claim off their insurers..

An RICS qualified former colleague used to do occasional surveys, but stopped this line of work as the insurance cost made it non profitable.

princeofpounds

Section62 said:

Before diving into the complaints process it would be worth taking a step back and checking the facts.

thias said:

We've recently purchased a property originally built in the 1800s. It has three chimney stacks.
Since completing on the purchase we've discovered the chimney breast below one of the chimney stacks has been removed and the stack is not being supported. 

If the stack is not being supported then why hasn't it fallen down (yet)?

Is it possible the person noticing the 'missing' chimney breast is misunderstanding how the structure of the building works?

thias said:

We now need to either support or remove the problematic stack.

Who is saying this, and how have they arrived at that conclusion?  Is it possible they are wrong? (see previous point)

thias said:

The report clearly states "There are three chimney stacks" and "The chimney breasts remain". - do we have any comeback on the survey company?

It says "The chimney breasts remain" it doesn't say "The three chimney breasts remain". In the context of the report could "The chimney breasts remain" refer to a number less than three - for example "The chimney breasts in the [living room] remain"?

Whilst such slightly tortuous misinterpretations are possible, I suspect the OP is right in their basic assessment of the situation.

Regarding supporting the chimney breast - there is a good chance that it is being supported, but at the least it will require investigation works - peeling back some of the ceiling and/or wall to see how the construction was modified when the lower part of the breast was removed. Chimney breasts will often not fall straight down when a large part of them is removed, but it is not safe if done properly. It can cause movement in the building or partial collapse, sometimes many years after the original event.

The surveyor should not have reassured that the 'chimney breasts remain', if in fact, they do not. And yes, assuming that statement applies to all three.

davidmcn

lincroft1710 said:

NewCottageOwner said:

I went direct, prepared for surveyor to argue the case, but happily they agreed to fund the required work to remove the chimney stack and make good the roof! Seemed keen to settle without having to go through their insurers etc. 

Surveyors' insurance costs can be quite astronomic and will increase each year as the more properties surveyed, the more chance of a claim. It was obviously financially beneficial to settle the matter themselves rather than claim off their insurers..

In any event the excesses tend to be pretty high - your surveyor / solicitor etc is always going to be paying a large chunk of any claim out of their own pocket.

Section62

princeofpounds said:

Whilst such slightly tortuous misinterpretations are possible, I suspect the OP is right in their basic assessment of the situation.

Possibly so.  But that would be guesswork based on possibly other guesswork.  Hence my comments/questions aimed at unpicking the uncertainty so the OP can be properly advised, rather than relying on possibly wrong assumptions. Confirmation bias is best avoided where possible, especially where legal considerations could be a factor.

princeofpounds said:

Regarding supporting the chimney breast - there is a good chance that it is being supported, but at the least it will require investigation works - peeling back some of the ceiling and/or wall to see how the construction was modified when the lower part of the breast was removed. Chimney breasts will often not fall straight down when a large part of them is removed, but it is not safe if done properly. It can cause movement in the building or partial collapse, sometimes many years after the original event.

Hence the question about how this has come to light. The situation would be very different if the OP is employing an expert to advise on, say, further modifications to the house, compared to a situation in which a non-expert has noticed a 'missing' chimney.

The starting point in all this is surely to establish whether or not a chimney breast ever existed in the location it is believed to be missing from?

princeofpounds said:

The surveyor should not have reassured that the 'chimney breasts remain', if in fact, they do not. And yes, assuming that statement applies to all three.

Agreed. But only the OP has the full report and knows the context of the comment. Without understanding the context, none of us are any wiser.

maisie_cat

I have 3 chimneys and no chimney breasts, the chimney structure is in the walls, is it possible that one of yours is the same?

thias

Section62 said:

Before diving into the complaints process it would be worth taking a step back and checking the facts.

thias said:

We've recently purchased a property originally built in the 1800s. It has three chimney stacks.
Since completing on the purchase we've discovered the chimney breast below one of the chimney stacks has been removed and the stack is not being supported. 

If the stack is not being supported then why hasn't it fallen down (yet)?

Is it possible the person noticing the 'missing' chimney breast is misunderstanding how the structure of the building works?

thias said:

We now need to either support or remove the problematic stack.

Who is saying this, and how have they arrived at that conclusion?  Is it possible they are wrong? (see previous point)

thias said:

The report clearly states "There are three chimney stacks" and "The chimney breasts remain". - do we have any comeback on the survey company?

It says "The chimney breasts remain" it doesn't say "The three chimney breasts remain". In the context of the report could "The chimney breasts remain" refer to a number less than three - for example "The chimney breasts in the [living room] remain"?

All good questions, I should have provided more context in my initial post.
We're extending the property, so have "professionals" onsite.
Our builder came to the house on Tuesday and initially flagged this as being a potential problem, he also suggested the stack had a slight lien on it, but it is slight and I certainly wouldn't have noticed it without him mentioning it.
The loft space isn't accessible by a hatch so I cut a whole in the ceiling on Wednesday and sent him the images of the stack from the roof void and he confirmed the lack of support.
Our architect was also at the house today who confirmed the same.
Next step will be a structural engineer, but that's where the additional costs start, that we didn't budget for.