My surveyors have gone into receivership

tweek_2

Pinklady wrote: »

Don't take this the wrong way, I don't want to cause any offence but didn't you notice this at the time when you received the results of the survey?

I was only able to visit the property once before buying as I was living in Manchester, buying a property in London. The survey results arrived 2 weeks after my only viewing of the property. The only mistake I spotted at the time was the "Detached" reference, and decided that it must have been a typing error. With regards to the damp, this had been painted over by the vendor so I didn't see it when I viewed.

I phoned the RICS and they were absolutely useless. They advised me to seek "legal advice" without giving any hint about what sort of legal advice this may be. Habitus's phone lines no longer work so I'm a bit unsure about how I'm going to find out who the insurer is.

MissMoneypenny

tweek wrote: »

I phoned the RICS and they were absolutely useless. They advised me to seek "legal advice" without giving any hint about what sort of legal advice this may be. Habitus's phone lines no longer work so I'm a bit unsure about how I'm going to find out who the insurer is.

Have you got contents insurance with legal cover? If so, this might cover you for a specialist solicitor, with you just paying your excess on your policy.

poppy10_2

tweek wrote: »

I was only able to visit the property once before buying as I was living in Manchester, buying a property in London. The survey results arrived 2 weeks after my only viewing of the property. The only mistake I spotted at the time was the "Detached" reference, and decided that it must have been a typing error.

I guess you don't have a leg to stand on then, you should have noticed the glaring errors at the time.

marybishop

Tweek - as Habitus franchised out to surveying practices/independent surveyors your redress should be with whichever surveyor carried out the survey and his/her insurers. Is there any indication on the report as to who actually did the survey or is it only Habitus' name that appears on the report?

o.stjohn

I think to give yourself a firmer foundation (no pun intended) it would be worth instructing a local Building Surveyor to investigate and report on the problem. You will then know the extent of the problem and be in a better position to discuss any ommissions with the Habitus or the Surveyor who carried out the original inspection. It could be that the damp has appeared after the original inspection (causes can be pipe leaks or condensation) so it would be better to be armed with accurate, unemotional information before going back to the Surveyor.

Oliver

bathgatebuyer

tweek wrote: »

I phoned the RICS and they were absolutely useless.

As a member, I can confirm that they are indeed, 100% useless, and I have the pleasure of paying £500 a year membership for the pleasure of their uselessness!

Would agree with the one of the other posters that you seek a report from an independent surveyor, but definitely make sure those issues are raised in writing via a formal complaint to the RICS. No member of the public should be faced with a report where such fundamentals (i.e. 'detached' while actually terraced) are incorrect. The RICS has a disciplinary board which should deal with professional competence issues like this. Ultimately this could lead to the Member's expulsion which effectively prevents them from practising in future - the threat of that should definitely be wielded over them. Any surveyor is obliged to follow up a natural trail of suspicion when it comes to possible defects and if the signs of the damp was 'glaring', then there's no contest as to whether they should have spotted this or not.

And despite some of the other comments on here, you relied on a professional's report and it sounds as if it was inadequate and unprofessional in preparation - the number of times you viewed the property does not matter. You paid for a professional and by the sounds of it, the service you got fell way short.

zorba123

I also fell victim to Habitus Surveyors. My survey seemed pretty good but 3 days after moving in, my "recently installed boiler" broke down. It was apparently about 20 years old and I had to get a completely new one to the tune of thousands.
Because the survey was so forthright in claiming the boiler was recently fitted I believed I had a claim for compensation, I have submitted my letter of complaint and since heard they are in liquidation.
The RICS are useless. In fact the whole surveying industry is a shameful money spinner, a blight on the property market and the government. If I knew what I knew now I wouldn't have wasted my money on a homebuyers.

chappers

zorba123 wrote: »

I also fell victim to Habitus Surveyors. My survey seemed pretty good but 3 days after moving in, my "recently installed boiler" broke down. It was apparently about 20 years old and I had to get a completely new one to the tune of thousands.
Because the survey was so forthright in claiming the boiler was recently fitted I believed I had a claim for compensation, I have submitted my letter of complaint and since heard they are in liquidation.
The RICS are useless. In fact the whole surveying industry is a shameful money spinner, a blight on the property market and the government. If I knew what I knew now I wouldn't have wasted my money on a homebuyers.

How right you are, I bet there is some wriggle out clause in the survey. Something along the lines of "this report is only the opinion of the surveyor at the time in question and information contained within should not be used for........blah blah blah and is not an indication of....Blah blah blah"

vivatifosi

Hi tweek

I have recently settled out of court with my surveyor (not Habitus) after receiving a below par survey on my house. My surveyor was still in business, but I've noted down what I had to do in order to get compensation as some of it may still be relevant to you (eg what you can expect to get).

My survey failed to pick up several thousands of pounds worth of problems, some of which were mind blowing in the extent to which they were ignored. The baseline used to determine compensation was 'diminution of value', which in the cases I read back through broadly equated to between 30-50% of the cost to put right (this isn't how it is worked out, that is done on the difference in value had the faults been found, it is however roughly what people can expect to get).

In order to get compensation, I had to pay to have a second survey to challenge the first, this cost another £350. I was also advised by Which Legal?, a service of the Consumers' Association as I didn't want to go to the expense of engaging a solicitor. They advised me what to write, when and to whom.

Two other avenues that I was advised to follow up with and would have done so had I not been successful, were the RICS scheme (didn't seem particularly helpful when I tried so just went after the firm); plus my bank who had put me in touch with the firm. In the event that you used your bank's recommended surveyor I would definitely be going after them if they recommended a firm that went bust!

Sorry your case is so complex. Good luck in getting something back.

benood

poppy10 wrote: »

I guess you don't have a leg to stand on then, you should have noticed the glaring errors at the time.

That's helpful. So if I'm a dodgy surveyor all I need to do to avoid liability is make a couple of big errors in the survey, err? :rolleyes:

OP have you thought of contacting your original solicitor for some prelimiary advice, I would have hoped he/she would point you in the right direction at no charge.