Homebuyer Report Lots Of three's

A_Random_Man

Hi, I have recently had a offer accepted on a 1900's terraced house, I have done a home buyer report which has come up with numerous two's and three and it's making think I might pull out. I was wondering if someone could have a look at their comments and let me know what they think, thanks:

1. Chimney Stacks 

The property has a chimney built in stone.

Repairs are needed to the stones to the stack as they are weathered.

The unused flues should be capped and ventilated to prevent water penetration and internal condensation.

The mortar pointing to the stack is weathered. Some localised repointing is required to reduce further deterioration and structural problems arising.

The mortar bedding to the pots is probably loose and needs replacing.

The rear stack is leaning out of plumb. This is not excessive at present, but it may become worse with the passage of time and you should budget for the cost of eventual reconstruction.

Chimneys in a property of this age are unlikely to contain a damp-proof course and there is a risk of rain penetration. To reduce this risk the chimney stack must be well maintained.

2. Main Walls

The walls are of solid stone construction. There is no evidence of a damp proof course in the walls.

I recorded high damp meter readings to the ground floor walls. This appears to have been caused by the lack of an effective damp-proof course. Further investigation by a member of the Property Care Association or similar is required to determine the extent of the dampness and the cost of remedial works. There is also a risk of associated decay in adjacent timbers and you should ensure that these are also inspected.

Some stones are weathered and damaged and localised repairs are required.

The mortar pointing is heavily recessed, badly weathered and in poor condition. Re- pointing is required.

There is some cracking to the walls. This movement appears longstanding and there are no indications to suggest further movement will occur.

The foundations in a property of this age will not be as deep as in a modern building and this increases the risk of structural movement. To reduce the risk of future problems you should regularly check, drains and pipes to ensure there are no blockages or leaks. Trees and shrubs should be pruned regularly to reduce water uptake, and any new planting should take place away from the property.

There is evidence of repointing to the walls which may be concealing past movement. I saw no evidence to suggest an ongoing problem but your Legal Adviser should make further formal enquiries in relation to these repairs.

3. Porches

There is evidence of dampness to the porch and improvements are necessary if you intend to adopt this space for regular use. Further investigation and repair is needed by a member of the Property Care Association.

The roof flashing has been repaired with self adhesive tape. This can only be regarded as a temporary repair and a more permanent repair will be required.

There is cracking between the porch and the main building. This is typical of minor differential movement occurring between separate structures after construction. This movement is old and the risk of more extensive movement is unlikely.

The glazing in the porch has misted; this cannot be repaired and the affected panes need to be replaced.

4. Roof Structure 

The main roof is made up with timber rafters and purlins. The main roof is lined with a modern breathable underlay. The main roof space is insulated above and between the ceiling joists.

The main roof covering has been replaced with heavier tiles. The roof structure has not been strengthened and improvements are now needed. Recovering the roof would have required Building Regulation approval and your Legal Adviser should confirm that local authority approval was sought and granted.

The right hand party wall is incomplete. It should be built up and sealed to the underside of the roof covering.

There is excessive moisture within the roof because of a lack of ventilation. This heightens the risk of decay to the timbers and repairs/improvements are needed.

Improvements are needed to the ventilation within the roof space to prevent condensation problems from developing.

In properties of this age the timbers are at risk of wood boring beetle (commonly known as woodworm). I found no evidence of this but many timbers were hidden from view and it is possible that infestation is present in those concealed areas.

These are the main issues, if someone could have a look at these for me I'd be greatly appreciated.

FreeBear

Do you know what type of stone has been used in the construction ?

It could be that the stone is naturally resistant to ingress of moisture (or rising damp) - Slate & flint are two such examples. If it is a naturally porous stone, there might be a thin layer of slate at the base of the wall that the surveyor missed. If the exterior ground levels have bridged the DPC, this would account for much of the high readings. I wouldn't call on any PCA affiliated surveror salesman as they will only be interested in flogging expensive and ultimately worthless treatments. You need a surveyor familiar with old/historic properties that has no links with a damp treatment company.

Woodworm likes damp timber. The little blighters spend most of their life hidden away inside timber, and the only time you see evidence of an infestation is when they leave. Fresh frass (a very fine sawdust) around the exit holes would be an indicator. The fact that your surveyor hasn't seen any fresh holes would suggest that woodworm is not present.

If you do go ahead with this purchase, when it comes to repointing, make sure to use a pure lime mortar (no cement). It retains a little but of flexibility and won't trap damp in the walls like a cement mortar would.

youth_leader

I'm surprised he's mentioned a PCA surveyor so often. It still annoys me to think of the completely useless damp/timber survey I paid £300 for my buyer as a gesture of 'good will'. 

Personally I'd have an independent damp/timber specialist report based on your survey.  Hope you can find one that understands heritage buildings.

kerpoo

It sounds not atypical of a house of that age. I suppose the bigger question is how much work/maintenance are you happy carrying out initially and then on an ongoing basis? And what is your attitude to risk? Old houses need tlc, especially if they've not had any for a while. But they also need slightly different treatment to the more modern solutions (damp being a perfect example) and therefore takes a bit more research -  else you risk falling foul of the one size fits all solution that can make things worse i an old house. SPAB is a good place to find info.

Having said all of the above I have to admit that I'm in the 'if it's not fallen down by now then it's probably ok' camp - so obviously take into consideration your own financial situation and attitude to risk.

I agree that lack of evidence of woodworm is a good sign! The roof covering is probably the area that I would be most focused on - heavier tiles are often used for replacement but if the roof isn't strengthened then it can cause issues. May be worth getting a roofing contractor to have a look to give you an idea of cost - bearing in mind that they'll be wearing a sales hat as well!

AlexMac

Don't walk away.  Everything you mention seems consistent with what you'd expect in a 120-year old stone house.   I assume that you want  the character of a period property, or you'd have bought a bland new-build box (which will possibly be less well built than the old one!). I've owned five properties dating from the mid 1800's to the late Victorian era  over the years, and I almost regret that we now have a 1980's house; although it's nice to have vertical internal walls when hanging kitchen units.  In one place I had to cut a triangular slice off the sides and backs of the wall-cupboards; removing a couple of inches at the top to get the fronts true!

Do a bit of googling and you'll find lots of advice about old buildings; including the need to avoid ineffectual (or damaging) modern remedies such as "so-called damp-proofing"  For example, look at

https://www.heritage-house.org/damp-and-condensation/managing-damp-in-old-buildings.html
and 
https://www.spab.org.uk/sites/default/files/Control_of_Dampness_0.pdf

It's completely obvious that a 1900 stone house will have no damp course and shallow foundations; that's how they were built.
Yes, it would help to do the pointing and mortar repairs, cap and ventilate chimneys, replace the flashing where the porch roof meets the external wall, and maybe even ventilate the roof space, but these are all really minor and relatively inexpensive items.

The fact that one party wall in the loft isn't built right up to the roof is also not untypical; we own a top-floor 1960's council flat where the upper party wall was absent.  It was built with a single open loft linking three adjacent flats!  We simply errected a stud partition wall with plaster-board on our side for a few quid; partly to improve fire protection (fire could otherwise potentially leap more quickly from one property to the next) but also cos we didn't want the little toe rag who lived next door going  across via "his" loft trap and down into ours!

The misted porch glass (presumably blown double-glazing panes?) is purely cosmetic. Other identified problems all seem to be "potential" ones.  Yes, keep an eye on the chimney, but if after 100-odd years the lean is "not excessive" the surveyor seems to be scare mongering by implying it could tumble.

It's good that the roof has been re-covered, presumably with tiles to replace the original slates, and yes if these are a lot heavier, the timbers supporting them could bow or sag, or at worst, the roof's weight could push the walls outwards at the top.. but have they? Any major movement would probably be obvious from outside.  Is the roof ridge line still level, or does it dip?  Are the walls reasonably vertical?  And how long ago was the roof re-covered?  If several years ago, any movement would by now be visible, although it wouldn't hurt to get a carpenter to bung in a few strengthening timbers.  Have adjacent properties had similar tiles to replace slate? And Building Control? Really?  When I replaced the roof on two Victorian properties it didn't even occur to me to ask the Council Surveyor... maybe I should have?  And a few vents in the loft or roof won't cost the earth, if  the new roofing,  roof membrane and insulation have made the house warmer and the roof space colder, as is likely

The good news is what the surveyor didn't find; there's no instability, movement, damp or timber rot or decay.  Yeah, there might be... one day... and as regards woodworm; one builder I know used to joke that "common furniture beetles" seemed so commonly found that he reckoned most surveys went equipped with a pocket-ful of them?  Your bloke must have forgot his.   The roof, gutters and downpipes are obviously not leaking (pop by next time it rains heavily to see?) and presumably the boiler, plumbing and electrics are in reasonable shape or he'd have made a similar 4r5e-covering remark. 

If you do buy it, heat it and ventilate it well.  More damp in old buildings is caused by condensation than by leaks, rain-water penetration and so-called "rising" damp

I wish you many happy years if you do buy; don't spend too many sleepless nights fretting about the drains either; no-one else does

A_Random_Man

Thanks for everyone's responses It's been greatly appreciated, can I clarify how urgent are these repairs based on their comments (i.e is this something that can be done in a couple of years) and would buying a dehumidifier help. I do have around £1k in an emergency funds and another £10,500 in general savings along with my deposit but some of those funds will be spent on white goods new bed etc. The roof looks fine on the picture from what I can see. 

FreeBear

One thought re damp on the ground floor...

If the original floor has been ripped out and replaced with concrete, this often pushes damp into the walls. Fixing this can be expensive and disruptive. The low cost fix that I have heard of is to cut out a strip of concrete ~300mm from the walls and fill it with limecrete. You shouldn't fit lino or tiles over this strip of limecrete as it provides a path for any trapped damp to evaporate through rather than going into the walls.

A more extreme solution is to remove all the concrete and either put a limecrete floor in or a suspended timber.

deeboy12

The roof is the one area that would worry me and I'd want the first few bullet points in this section checked out.

Regarding damp, your surveyor doesn't seem to know much about it (and him waving a useless 'damp meter' around tells you nothing). It does need looking into, but I don't think he understands period property and you definitely don't want a charlatan from the PCA (as he suggests) coming in and trying to sell you chemical damp proofing through a free survey. If you go ahead with this, make sure you get an INDEPENDENT damp expert.

Honestly I don't think this survey is terrible for a 1900 house (some of this stuff I've just had on my own purchase) but you would need to be happy you can budget for maintenance (as with any house you buy) over time.