(pics) Neighbours wall is bulging? And other Q's?? - Grade II listed terrace

htcclub

I am wanting to make an offer on a really good grade 2 listed top floor flat. The block is really well maintained and has roughly £10,000 in the sinking fund. The roof was done recently. Not sure about the electrics. Floors did had slopes in places. It lies in a flood zone two area. Windows not on the listing hence PVC. Ceiling beams appeared to have been encased in plaster. Thoughts on all this?

Big issue is that the neighbourring Terrace could possibly have have a bulge in their wall. Is this visible in the picture or am I making this up?

Section62

htcclub said:

Windows not on the listing hence PVC.

The listing will often detail some of the most important features, but it is important to appreciate that the whole building and its curtilage is 'listed'.

If the windows were uPVC at the time of the listing then they are now listed uPVC windows.  If they weren't uPVC at the time of the listing then unless LB consent was granted someone might have made unlawful changes - and you should get this clarified before proceeding with the purchase.

Likewise, was the roofing work done in consultation with the council's LB/Conservation officer?

htcclub said:

Big issue is that the neighbourring Terrace could possibly have have a bulge in their wall. Is this visible in the picture or am I making this up?

Are you talking about the chimney?  If so, it doesn't look straight, but there's no way of telling whether that was the way it was built, or if there's been subsequent movement.

It's also not absolutely clear from the pictures whether the chimney belongs to the building on the left or the right, or is shared. The brickwork appears to match the building on the right, and I'm assuming from your top floor/uPVC comment that the flat you are looking at is in the building on the left - but it would help if you could confirm that is correct.


The conclusion I'd draw from the pictures alone is the building on the left was built first, and the one on the right built later - but because it is lower than the one on the left the chimney had to go all the way up above the gable wall of the left one.

In which case, there has to be a suspicion that the chimney hasn't been properly tied into the (pre-existing) gable wall of the building on the left, and if so, this could potentially be the root cause of the apparent 'bulge'.

Jeepers_Creepers

Section62 said:

The conclusion I'd draw from the pictures alone is the building on the left was built first, and the one on the right built later - but because it is lower than the one on the left the chimney had to go all the way up above the gable wall of the left one.

In which case, there has to be a suspicion that the chimney hasn't been properly tied into the (pre-existing) gable wall of the building on the left, and if so, this could potentially be the root cause of the apparent 'bulge'.

In which case, if it falls down it doesn't matter. (You know what I mean...)

Cakeguts

What is the insulation in the flat like? Will it be easy to heat without costing a small fortune in the middle of winter?

Mac_70_

htcclub said:

I am wanting to make an offer on a really good grade 2 listed top floor flat. The block is really well maintained and has roughly £10,000 in the sinking fund. The roof was done recently. Not sure about the electrics. Floors did had slopes in places. It lies in a flood zone two area. Windows not on the listing hence PVC. Ceiling beams appeared to have been encased in plaster. Thoughts on all this?

Big issue is that the neighbourring Terrace could possibly have have a bulge in their wall. Is this visible in the picture or am I making this up?

From that picture, the brick in the chimney looks a lot newer than that of the house it's supposed to be tied into, which also from that picture doesn't look like a hard tie in. Definitely worth getting it checked out. 

Jeepers_Creepers

Hmm, it has 4 pots, so I guess must be shared :-(

I was hoping it was solely for the building from whence it exits, so (theoretically) not the OP's problem.

Mac_70_

Dummy pots? I don't know it's only a photo. I do know it needs checked out.

Section62

Jeepers_Creepers said:

Hmm, it has 4 pots, so I guess must be shared :-(

That could be accounted for by two reception rooms on the ground floor and two bedrooms on the first floor of the smaller building - but there's no way to be sure just from the pictures.

Jeepers_Creepers said:

I was hoping it was solely for the building from whence it exits, so (theoretically) not the OP's problem.

Even if it isn't shared, the problem for the OP could potentially be the extent to which the chimney is tied in.

- Tied in properly and it is unlikely to cause significant structural problems.

- Not tied in at all then if it collapses it will fall cleanly away.

- Partially tied in then it could take part of the larger building's gable wall down with it.

htcclub

Section62 said:

If the windows were uPVC at the time of the listing then they are now listed uPVC windows.  If they weren't uPVC at the time of the listing then unless LB consent was granted someone might have made unlawful changes - and you should get this clarified before proceeding with the purchase.

Likewise, was the roofing work done in consultation with the council's LB/Conservation officer?

Are you talking about the chimney?  If so, it doesn't look straight, but there's no way of telling whether that was the way it was built, or if there's been subsequent movement.

... I'm assuming from your top floor/uPVC comment that the flat you are looking at is in the building on the left - but it would help if you could confirm that is correct.

Yes sorry the flat I am interested in is the one to the left of the townhouse with the chimney issue.
Thanks, yes I will look to get the details of when the dormers etc. where added relative to the listing date.

Cakeguts said:

What is the insulation in the flat like? Will it be easy to heat without costing a small fortune in the middle of winter?

Thanks, the eaves had insulation boards, not sure about the flat roof of the dormer, will check.


Thanks all for the comments, interesting to know how these structural oddities can actually come about. All in all a structural survey (of some sort) would be something I would need to do I suppose

Actually now, the flood risk of this house is concerning me most (designated as low risk or flood zone 2 on the gov website and 40m from a river) There was a flood in 1998, the road had flooding to some extent (I found pictures of the road while flooded, seemed severe enough, bearing in mind there is an LG level) I am a bit weary about resale value (given how climate change is a popular theme) and insurance premiums. And, why not just live somewhere less risky. It's a low risk event, but probably not worth the additional anxiety!

robatwork

Looks like a lovely road. Your top floor flat should be safe from flooding unless the whole of the UK is underwater. 

htcclub

robatwork said:

Looks like a lovely road. Your top floor flat should be safe from flooding unless the whole of the UK is underwater. 

Well I would be liable for damage to the outside and the structure I suppose, jointly with the other leaseholders. I guess internally the lower ground flat is that owners responsibility if it flooded.

I suppose the question is what am I liable to pay if the LG and G flats did flood