Over-the-top surveyor destroyed our house sale

canaldumidi

ClockworkTV said:

canaldumidi said:

Your buyer paid for a detailed survey and was entitiled to receive one, which he did.

A survey is not simply there to identify serious faults, it is there to describe the property in detail and give the client/buyer a full descriptiono the property.

What the buyer chooses to do next is up to the buyer.

My house is 150 years old and when I bought it also had a lengthy and full report. I used this to comprise 3 'to do' lists:

* jobs to do when I moved in - many very small and easy almost insignificant improvements, but which I would not have done had they not been suggested in the report

* jobs for the 1st year or so

* longer term jobs, both routine maintenance (which as a newbie I would not have known about) and improvement projects.

Don't blame the surveyor. Blame the buyer.

As for suing for libel, it's impossible to comment unless you tell us what was written that was inaccurate.

I blame the surveyor when he is innaccurate and alarmist. For instance he said 'the windows need refurbishing' - not true - we did this when we moved in - one window only has some putty coming away but that's it. The way he worded it sounds like most of the windows require work which is just not true and he put it as a 'sigificant' issue.

On the face of it that does sound questionable. In an 80 page report I would expect the specific problem window to be specified and the others to be described as in good condition. But it really is hard to comment without seeing the report.

But anyway unfortunately not much you can do.

ClockworkTV

canaldumidi said:

Your buyer paid for a detailed survey and was entitiled to receive one, which he did.

A survey is not simply there to identify serious faults, it is there to describe the property in detail and give the client/buyer a full descriptiono the property.

What the buyer chooses to do next is up to the buyer.

My house is 150 years old and when I bought it also had a lengthy and full report. I used this to comprise 3 'to do' lists:

* jobs to do when I moved in - many very small and easy almost insignificant improvements, but which I would not have done had they not been suggested in the report

* jobs for the 1st year or so

* longer term jobs, both routine maintenance (which as a newbie I would not have known about) and improvement projects.

Don't blame the surveyor. Blame the buyer.

As for suing for libel, it's impossible to comment unless you tell us what was written that was inaccurate.

I repeat : I blame the surveyor when he is innaccurate and alarmist. For instance he said 'the windows need refurbishing' - not true - we did this when we moved in - one window only has some putty coming away but that's it. The way he worded it sounds like most of the windows require work which is just not true and he put it as a 'sigificant' issue.
But yes I agree the buyer is inexperienced.

youth_leader

I understand your anger, I had a magnificent 1847 grade II listed and the buyer's surveyor had no appreciation of the magnificence of the build.  He even suggested every ceiling needed to be replaced. As he left he whispered in my ear 'your water tank has a leak' which really worried me - plumber said it was like the drip off a teacup and the joint was good for another ten years, another £200 I shouldn't have had to spend.  I hope you get a cash buyer who loves the house for what it is, sadly the 'one' for me didn't turn up.

brasso

Do you have a copy of the report? If so, think of it as very valuable information you can use. You can fix some of the small, visible things. If there are major issues highlighted you can prepare your potential buyers when they come round, and try to downplay anything major that the surveyor pointed out (as long as that's justified -- it would be wrong to misrepresent something that needs serious attention).. 

A 300-y-o house is going to have plenty of faults, and I'd hope that a buyer would commission a survey in the full expectation that there would be a long list of cautions. If your first buyer walked off in horror it sounds like they had a very naive approach to the survey. Sorry if I'm try to teach my granny to suck eggs here but with an old house I'd definitely be trying to sell the place by majoring on that aspect, including some interesting historical info as (presumably) that's part of the attraction to a potential buyer. Ideally you want them to be enthusiastic about the place regardless of what a survey will highlight.

Jumblebumble

ClockworkTV said:

We're selling our property (some parts 300 years old) which we bought several years ago and did a lot of refurbishment on. It took a while to get a buyer. Everything was going well until the buyer's surveyor came to do a 'structural' survey (normal for old buildings). His report was so over the top basically trashing our house (80 pages long! - about a page for every two square metres!). It seemed to be an excercise in covering his back and found fault with all sorts of things that were not really significant (cheap to fix) or we had actually fixed or just plain wrong. Our buyers freaked out and pulled out of the sale without even any discussion. There's nothing actually seriously there to stop a purchase, the house is solid but the way he listed stuff it sounded awful. Our 'structural survey' when we bought the house was only 30 pages long and that was before we did any work on it! I'm furious and there's no come back - you can sue your own surveyor but what do you do when the buyer's surveyor basically libels your house?

I can envisage another thread entitled 
Very thorough surveyor stopped us buying a house full of unexpected problems

youth_leader

PS I moved to a 90 year old bungalow and Storm Arwen blew the flat roof off.  I drove past my old house and it's still intact, balls and all.  Built to last.

ClockworkTV

Exactly! Thanks for the comment - I got the impression he doesn't like old buildings and picked on every little thing as if it is a new build - eg he suggested making the loft hatch bigger in his list of 'signicant work'. Totally pointless!
PS This one is grade II listed too.

GDB2222

canaldumidi said:

As for suing for libel, it's impossible to comment unless you tell us what was written that was inaccurate.

You'd be making legal history! To be fair to the OP, I think he/she was speaking figuratively when mentioning libel. 

Brie

We complained to the bank who sent someone to conduct a valuation survey for my MiL's property when we were selling a few years back.  The survey said the flat was in poor condition for a new build block of flats.  I get that it wasn't in great shape but it was a converted Victorian vicarage.  The new build block of flats was next door and they had used the wrong address in their report.  Didn't get anything for the complaint, basically a shrug of shoulders and we put the place back on the market.

theartfullodger

ClockworkTV said:

...

I repeat : I blame the surveyor when he is innaccurate and alarmist. For instance he said 'the windows need refurbishing' - not true - we did this when we moved in - one window only has some putty coming away but that's it. ....

So you agree some refurbishment is required (to the failing putty).

Ignoring my comment, just because you think no refurbishment is required for windows doesn;t mean everyone else has to agree with you.  Strangely, people have different views of the same reality.

Best regards, hope things get better.