Survey results - rewiring and new boiler and heating system required

Section62

Albermarle said:

However, the survey states that the heating system, pipes, and hot water tank are 40 years old and need replacing ASAP, the boiler is over 20 years old and needs replacing ASAP, and that the entire house needs rewiring and a new consumer unit needs to be installed ASAP.

As already said the forum has lots of threads along a similar theme.

However it is unusual for a surveyor to make such specific comments about the heating and electrical systems.

Usually they make some more general remarks and advise you to have them checked.

How did they know the hot water tank was over 40 years old for example ? Also I do not think it is normal to replace heating pipework, just because it is over a certain age.

The one exception I can think of to that is where the installation was done in the 1970's using the nasty thin-wall low-grade copper pipe (due to a copper shortage IIRC).  By now it is well past its expected lifespan and can start leaking even in optimal conditions (and if buried in concrete/mortar it is a mini-disaster waiting to happen).

pjs493

Section62 said:

pjs493 said:

...In any case, the surveyor has said they are dangerous and need replacing ASAP and I don't want to put my children at risk by ignoring a professional report...

The forum member in the thread below has a much older boiler and was told - by a heating professional - that their boiler could "explode" due to a fault and they needed a new boiler.  Another professional fitted a simple part and their boiler then worked fine.

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6509931/oil-fired-central-heating-thermostat-may-not-be-working/p1

The first priority of (true) professionals giving advice is to cover their own backside by leaning towards the worst possible case.  Professionals who do installation/maintenance work tend to lean towards the option which generates the most profit for them.  Getting good professional advice is getting harder and harder.

So long as the boiler is inspected and maintained by someone qualified to do the job the risks should be negligible.  Rather than a like-for-like boiler replacement you may want to consider a heat pump, or if the property is large and rural maybe some form of biomass system.

Either way, if the existing boiler is safe and functional then you can't expect the vendor to pay for your chosen replacement.  By all means ask, but be aware they may decide you are a 'difficult' buyer and pull out of the sale if you start a full-on renegotiation of the agreed price.

pjs493 said:

Wasps, unlike bees, do not return to nests each year. The nest is historic. The removal will be about £100 so will be easy to do at the same time as upgrading the insulation which I plan to do short term anyway. I also plan to board out the loft for added storage.

Don't forget to obtain listed building consent first.

Also be aware the 'loft' was probably just a roof void originally, and the structure was 'designed' just to provide basic support to the roof covering and the ceiling of the room below.  To convert the loft for storage (even for just a few light boxes) is likely to require additional structure, which with a listed building will not be cheap.  It might be more economic to provide the storage in an outbuilding, although that would also need LB consent if there is nothing suitable in place already.

Regarding your points about heat source pumps, biomass, etc these won’t be possibly due to the listed nature of the building. 

Thanks for the advice regarding loft potentially not being suitable for light boxes if Christmas decs, etc. I’ll obviously get it assessed for suitability by a builder first. I’m also aware of the need for listed consent but I know others in the same conversion have boarded out lofts so it seems it’s possible. (It’s a large Georgian Manor House converted into separate units). 

pjs493

Albermarle said:

However, the survey states that the heating system, pipes, and hot water tank are 40 years old and need replacing ASAP, the boiler is over 20 years old and needs replacing ASAP, and that the entire house needs rewiring and a new consumer unit needs to be installed ASAP.

As already said the forum has lots of threads along a similar theme.

However it is unusual for a surveyor to make such specific comments about the heating and electrical systems.

Usually they make some more general remarks and advise you to have them checked.

How did they know the hot water tank was over 40 years old for example ? Also I do not think it is normal to replace heating pipework, just because it is over a certain age.

There is evidence of lead pipes meaning they aren’t safe so they need to come out. The water tank has been damaged and has a hairline crack in it. The boiler doesn’t work and the electrics are dangerous rather than just not being up to modern code. 

Attached photos within the report show obvious signs of this including the old style plug sockets alongside more modern ones which suggests the vendor has had more sockets added since they bought the house in the 80s, but a good number of old sockets remain. There is also no breaker to trip in the event of an overload or power surge. So it’s definitely a safety hazard. 

BarelySentientAI

pjs493 said:

Attached photos within the report show obvious signs of this including the old style plug sockets alongside more modern ones which suggests the vendor has had more sockets added since they bought the house in the 80s, but a good number of old sockets remain. There is also no breaker to trip in the event of an overload or power surge. So it’s definitely a safety hazard. 

There is no breaker?  You mean there's a fuse instead?  If so, that is what blows in an overload.  Tens, if not hundreds of thousands of houses in the country still have that system and it works completely fine.

And a circuit breaker will not trip on a power surge anyway - not that the term "power surge" actually means anything.

Old does not directly mean safety hazard.

I don't think I've ever seen a general surveyor say "this needs re-wiring ASAP".  They almost exclusively say something like "the electrical installation is unlikely to be compliant with the current regulations and I recommend an electrician be instructed to inspect the system further".

From what you've said, old sockets and an old consumer unit were clearly visible when you viewed.  Your offer should then have been accounting for the fact you would need to do electrical works.  Price negotiation based on things you clearly should have already known rubs a lot of people the wrong way.

pjs493

BarelySentientAI said:

pjs493 said:

Attached photos within the report show obvious signs of this including the old style plug sockets alongside more modern ones which suggests the vendor has had more sockets added since they bought the house in the 80s, but a good number of old sockets remain. There is also no breaker to trip in the event of an overload or power surge. So it’s definitely a safety hazard. 

There is no breaker?  You mean there's a fuse instead?  If so, that is what blows in an overload.  Tens, if not hundreds of thousands of houses in the country still have that system and it works completely fine.

And a circuit breaker will not trip on a power surge anyway - not that the term "power surge" actually means anything.

Old does not directly mean safety hazard.

I don't think I've ever seen a general surveyor say "this needs re-wiring ASAP".  They almost exclusively say something like "the electrical installation is unlikely to be compliant with the current regulations and I recommend an electrician be instructed to inspect the system further".

From what you've said, old sockets and an old consumer unit were clearly visible when you viewed.  Your offer should then have been accounting for the fact you would need to do electrical works.  Price negotiation based on things you clearly should have already known rubs a lot of people the wrong way.

The report clearly states that it is dangerous and needs replacing. I’m not sure why this is being deliberated when I’ve already stated what the report says. I didn’t see the consumer unit when I visited the property because it was at the back of a cupboard full of stuff. I didn’t see the old plugs either because they were behind pieces of furniture. The plugs I did see were of modern style. There was clearly enough for the surveyor to deem it dangerous from what he saw and wrote in the report. 

Of course it recommends having an electrician examine it, but he’s experienced enough to see something that is clearly unsafe and in his words ‘dangerous’. He mentioned modern requirements and that a house of its age wouldn’t be expected to meet those requirements due to its age, but he uses the word dangerous several times and suggests the electrics are not used until issues are rectified by an electrician because the pose a ‘serious safety hazard and fire risk’. He accepts that the electrics wouldn’t be up to modern code, but that what he found posed a significant danger. 

Section62

pjs493 said:

Regarding your points about heat source pumps, biomass, etc these won’t be possibly due to the listed nature of the building.

The listing won't preclude changing to alternative heating, you'd just need a suitable proposal and get LB consent (if required).  With gas/oil being phased out we will all need to adapt, and that is something conservation/planning officers are aware of and will need to take a pragmatic view over.

pjs493 said:

Thanks for the advice regarding loft potentially not being suitable for light boxes if Christmas decs, etc. I’ll obviously get it assessed for suitability by a builder first.

You need to speak to a structural engineer rather than a builder.  All but a very few builders won't be (professionally) qualified to assess structural capacity - many will just tell you not to worry and take your cash to do the work.

pjs493 said:

I’m also aware of the need for listed consent but I know others in the same conversion have boarded out lofts so it seems it’s possible. (It’s a large Georgian Manor House converted into separate units).

From a planning point of view many things are possible with consent (e.g. see above regarding the boiler situation).  From a practical perspective it depends how much work needs doing to enable the floor to be boarded safely, and whether there are features in the loft space the conservation officer considers may be harmed by boarding.

It is possible the other properties in the conversion have had the boarding done without consent and/or without taking advice from a structural engineer. TBH, the risk (e.g. from the ceiling collapsing) to you and your children of converting the loft for storage without a professional structural engineer's advice is likely to be significantly greater than the risks posed by the heating and electrical systems.  So long as you have appropriate fire/smoke alarms installed you should have sufficient warning to be able to evacuate the building safely - there are no practical alarm systems (for a domestic setting) available to warn of imminent structural collapse.

Something else I should have mentioned in my previous post is that with any old building there is the potential for bats to be present in the roof space - the council may ask you to do a bat survey before making changes such as adding insulation or boarding in the loft.  Disturbing a place used by bats for shelter or protection is a criminal offence.

Albermarle

Thanks for the advice regarding loft potentially not being suitable for light boxes if Christmas decs, etc. I’ll obviously get it assessed for suitability by a builder first.

You need to speak to a structural engineer rather than a builder.  All but a very few builders won't be (professionally) qualified to assess structural capacity - many will just tell you not to worry and take your cash to do the work.

I must admit I was a bit surprised by this issue coming up. Every house I have had, including my parents, I have been up in the loft/attic and walked on the joists without a second thought ( and stored things up there). Never caused a problem. 
Have I just been lucky ?

Section62

pjs493 said:

The report clearly states that it is dangerous and needs replacing. I’m not sure why this is being deliberated when I’ve already stated what the report says.

It is because some of the people on this forum have seen dozens, perhaps hundreds, of surveys - in some cases in a professional capacity - and know that the phrasing being used isn't the kind that surveyors normally use.

Surveyors aren't usually qualified to carry out electrical safety inspections, which is why they would normally recommend getting a report done by a professional with suitable qualifications.  The things they have highlighted (e.g. lack of 'trip' and old-style sockets) don't - by themselves - make an installation dangerous.  E.g. old-style (BS546 round-pin) sockets can still be purchased and installed in specific cases.  You wouldn't expect a surveyor to know whether an individual BS546 socket was installed in accordance with the regulations - it would need inspection and testing o verify this.

So it follows that a surveyor looking at (say) a BS546 socket and saying "That's dangerous" is not necessarily doing so from a position of professional competence.

pjs493

Section62 said:

pjs493 said:

Regarding your points about heat source pumps, biomass, etc these won’t be possibly due to the listed nature of the building.

The listing won't preclude changing to alternative heating, you'd just need a suitable proposal and get LB consent (if required).  With gas/oil being phased out we will all need to adapt, and that is something conservation/planning officers are aware of and will need to take a pragmatic view over.

pjs493 said:

Thanks for the advice regarding loft potentially not being suitable for light boxes if Christmas decs, etc. I’ll obviously get it assessed for suitability by a builder first.

You need to speak to a structural engineer rather than a builder.  All but a very few builders won't be (professionally) qualified to assess structural capacity - many will just tell you not to worry and take your cash to do the work.

pjs493 said:

I’m also aware of the need for listed consent but I know others in the same conversion have boarded out lofts so it seems it’s possible. (It’s a large Georgian Manor House converted into separate units).

From a planning point of view many things are possible with consent (e.g. see above regarding the boiler situation).  From a practical perspective it depends how much work needs doing to enable the floor to be boarded safely, and whether there are features in the loft space the conservation officer considers may be harmed by boarding.

It is possible the other properties in the conversion have had the boarding done without consent and/or without taking advice from a structural engineer. TBH, the risk (e.g. from the ceiling collapsing) to you and your children of converting the loft for storage without a professional structural engineer's advice is likely to be significantly greater than the risks posed by the heating and electrical systems.  So long as you have appropriate fire/smoke alarms installed you should have sufficient warning to be able to evacuate the building safely - there are no practical alarm systems (for a domestic setting) available to warn of imminent structural collapse.

Something else I should have mentioned in my previous post is that with any old building there is the potential for bats to be present in the roof space - the council may ask you to do a bat survey before making changes such as adding insulation or boarding in the loft.  Disturbing a place used by bats for shelter or protection is a criminal offence.

Thanks for your helpful points. Agreed on the structural engineer rather than builder, that’s what I was thinking but posted that late at night. I have a family friend who is a civil engineer and has offered to board out the loft (having just done their own) so that was who I had in mind to check it out for me and do the work. There are no features that conservation would be interested in in the loft because the roof had collapsed in before the building was refurbished for occupation, so no original features remain up there. It’s all smoke and mirrors to make it look original. 

The lease and listed status does prevent any changes to add heat pumps etc that can be visible so potentially something underground would be approved, but I expect that would be more expensive than a new gas boiler. I don’t think I’d qualify for any government schemes, but can’t be sure. 

Fortunately, no sign of bats as I am aware of the difficulties when bats are involved having experienced this in the past. 

As an aside regarding alarms, the survey did note that the smoke and carbon monoxide alarms had been removed and batteries taken out so obviously suggested that they (or new ones) be installed. The suggestion was actually that ideally a system connected to mains electricity be installed, but again, recognising that battery operated alarms would suffice. 

pjs493

Albermarle said:

Thanks for the advice regarding loft potentially not being suitable for light boxes if Christmas decs, etc. I’ll obviously get it assessed for suitability by a builder first.

You need to speak to a structural engineer rather than a builder.  All but a very few builders won't be (professionally) qualified to assess structural capacity - many will just tell you not to worry and take your cash to do the work.

I must admit I was a bit surprised by this issue coming up. Every house I have had, including my parents, I have been up in the loft/attic and walked on the joists without a second thought ( and stored things up there). Never caused a problem. 
Have I just been lucky ?

My in-laws have a Victorian house that has never been boarded out and they’ve got all sorts of stuff up there. My husband stuck his head up last summer for something and told them that they needed to sort it out because they’ve got boxes balanced between joists with no boards at all. He had strong words with his dad who was being really nonchalant about it.