Level 3 Survey - Help with responses from Vendor

PennysIntoPounds

You did the right thing getting the report as otherwise you'd be in the wrong if there was a major issue when you hadn't bothered to have anyone look at the place. Surveyors reports are rather a swindle, but that's the name of the property game unfortunately!

I'm not an expert at all but from my experience I agree with others that there's nothing too alarming there, all homes have their own little ways and issues and that's just part of being a property owner. If you're happy with the place in general then pay to get a specialist in to check or sort the electrics and vermin risks

All surveyors reports are a combination of the most tiresome jobsworths and the most tedious drama queens, use the report to help you trust your instinct about if anything is awry, don't let it give you worries that don't actually exist in lived reality.

Wishing you lots of happiness in your new home

anselld

jonnydeppiwish! said:

anselld said:

I am with the vendor with the exception of 16.  Earth bonding of the electrical supply is required regardless of the incoming supply material.  This is to ensure that the internal water system cannot become live in the event of an electrical fault.  Given that is the case there is presumably no current EICR in place so you may wish to instruct an electrician to inspect.  If earth bonding is the only thing missing it will not be expensive.

But that’s at current regs - it’s best practice but doesn’t mean it’s unsafe now. New builds will need work a year after being signed off due to the continued changes in Regs

Earth bonding of the water has been in place for many years and the vendor’s response to this question is simply incorrect.  In this case it is more than just evolution of the regs.

jonnydeppiwish!

anselld said:

jonnydeppiwish! said:

anselld said:

I am with the vendor with the exception of 16.  Earth bonding of the electrical supply is required regardless of the incoming supply material.  This is to ensure that the internal water system cannot become live in the event of an electrical fault.  Given that is the case there is presumably no current EICR in place so you may wish to instruct an electrician to inspect.  If earth bonding is the only thing missing it will not be expensive.

But that’s at current regs - it’s best practice but doesn’t mean it’s unsafe now. New builds will need work a year after being signed off due to the continued changes in Regs

Earth bonding of the water has been in place for many years and the vendor’s response to this question is simply incorrect.  In this case it is more than just evolution of the regs.

Really? Why would you earth a plastic pipe?

anselld

jonnydeppiwish! said:

anselld said:

jonnydeppiwish! said:

anselld said:

I am with the vendor with the exception of 16.  Earth bonding of the electrical supply is required regardless of the incoming supply material.  This is to ensure that the internal water system cannot become live in the event of an electrical fault.  Given that is the case there is presumably no current EICR in place so you may wish to instruct an electrician to inspect.  If earth bonding is the only thing missing it will not be expensive.

But that’s at current regs - it’s best practice but doesn’t mean it’s unsafe now. New builds will need work a year after being signed off due to the continued changes in Regs

Earth bonding of the water has been in place for many years and the vendor’s response to this question is simply incorrect.  In this case it is more than just evolution of the regs.

Really? Why would you earth a plastic pipe?

As I said previously, it is the house system which is earthed, not the incoming pipe.  The incoming pipe normally comes to a stopc*ck and the system is then earthed shortly downstream from there.  The incoming pipe material is irrelevant.

Badboi

anselld said:

jonnydeppiwish! said:

anselld said:

I am with the vendor with the exception of 16.  Earth bonding of the electrical supply is required regardless of the incoming supply material.  This is to ensure that the internal water system cannot become live in the event of an electrical fault.  Given that is the case there is presumably no current EICR in place so you may wish to instruct an electrician to inspect.  If earth bonding is the only thing missing it will not be expensive.

But that’s at current regs - it’s best practice but doesn’t mean it’s unsafe now. New builds will need work a year after being signed off due to the continued changes in Regs

Earth bonding of the water has been in place for many years and the vendor’s response to this question is simply incorrect.  In this case it is more than just evolution of the regs.

The vendors response is correct- no earth bonding to the plastic pipe, but present where required - ie the metal work

Albermarle

OP- The survey has done two things for you.

Firstly it has reassured you that there are no major faults- cracking, structural walls compromised- roof falling apart etc.
Secondly - You have a list of some jobs that might need looking at someday.

11mee

Thanks for all your responses. It’s a learning process as this is my first experience of Level 3 Survey . Most grateful 

poseidon1

An interesting thread on the current system that puts the onus on the  prospective buyer ( at their own cost)  to establish the condition of the home with inconclusive outcomes.

Contrast this with the Scottish system where seller supplies the report  (at their cost ) for all prospective buyers.

Per thread below English parliament opening consultation to finally introduce the same system here (took them long enough!).

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81680897#Comment_81680897

For our OP, such seller supplied report might not leave him/her any wiser, but at least they have not had to outlay the intial cost. That said, for buyers  generally interested in a number of properties,  such reports maybe helpful in weeding out the total non starters. 

eddddy

11mee said:

Chief_of_Staffy said:

This is exactly why I'd never pay for a RICS survey. There's nothing there that I'd look twice at. What a waste of money.

That’s it £800 down the drain . I thought I was doling the right thing.

I wouldn't say it's a waste of money.

You paid a surveyor to check for problems with the house, and in simple terms, the the surveyor is saying they found no significant problems. (I'd have thought you should be pleased. Would you have been happier if they had found some significant problems?)


I guess it's a bit like saying paying for buildings insurance is a waste of money - if you never have to make a claim.

 

sheramber

poseidon1 said:

An interesting thread on the current system that puts the onus on the  prospective buyer ( at their own cost)  to establish the condition of the home with inconclusive outcomes.

Contrast this with the Scottish system where seller supplies the report  (at their cost ) for all prospective buyers.

Per thread below English parliament opening consultation to finally introduce the same system here (took them long enough!).

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81680897#Comment_81680897

For our OP, such seller supplied report might not leave him/her any wiser, but at least they have not had to outlay the intial cost. That said, for buyers  generally interested in a number of properties,  such reports maybe helpful in weeding out the total non starters. 

A Homr Information Report report was introduced in England in 2004 Housing Act but not fully operating until 2009.
It was suspended was suspended in 2012

https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/RP10-69/RP10-69.pdf