valuation report - help and advice plse

first_time_buyer_X

I am in the process of buying my first house and was recommended by the IFA to only get a valuation report done by the nationwide at a cost of £260. I am buying a mid terrace house on a bit of a slope probably built around 1900 for £87500. Anyway the valuation report finally arrived..a bit more brief than i was expecting with not a great deal of information on it other than the surveyor says that the property is mortgagable and worth the price i am paying. However on the question of whether the property had ever suffered from subsidence/movement or landslip the surveyor ticked yes and then went on to say that the "movement is long-standing in nature and the risk of further movement is acceptable". he/she has not specified what evidence there is for movement or where it is in the house. on looking at the house on the three times i have been round it i have not seen any noticeable cracks or obvious signs of any movement.

My question is... is this a standard answer when dealing with old terrace houses...the house has been there over a 100 years and not tippled down the hillside yet...do they have some degree of movement or should i be worried? i think i am probably panicking unnecessarily. Also i am now wondering whether to get a more detailed survey done and maybe get a structural engineer round to take a look at the house or at least pay for a homebuyers survey to at least get a bit more info altho this is just more money. i was gonna get a roofer friend of my dads to check out the roof for me separately so that won't cost me too much. Any advice would be welcome.

thanks

ukmike

Just a standard reply,every house ever built has movement of some sort.Usual covering themselves.

Rabiddog_2

I am buying a mid terrace house on a bit of a slope probably built around 1900 for £87500

Wow. if it cost that much back then it must be worth Tens of Millions now..
When I bought my place years ago I had a look at a basement flat which was dingy and unappealling and was next door to both a taxi garage and a railway line, and on a busy main road. I got a full structural survey done and it said it was suffering from "Bomb damage", thats in 1988 so this was from the 2ww!. Boy am I glad i didn't buy that flat, really tho I think it was a coded way of saying steer clear!

Anne3333

Hi First time Buyer!
Most properties have historical movement and this can be caused simply by one dry summer drought. Do not be unduly worried, the surveyor has given his professional opinion that it is long standing and hasn't suggested that you get independent advice. Inside, properties can be covered up by pollyfilla and new wallpaper so concentrate on the outside. If it is brick built, you would clearly see signs of cracking, get your dad to have a better look when he is up the ladder. Otherwise don't be afraid to hang out the windows to have a good look...just make sure someone is holding your legs!!! Also have a good look around the base of the property, where the building meets the ground.
It is easy for me to say dont worry, but I dont think it suggests any major problems. The surveyor is just mentioning the fact that there HAS been some movement in the past, but given the age of the house you would expect a few wrinkles! Also just make sure your solicitor checks for the usual things with regard to the land eg. no past mining etc
Try not to worry, when I bought my first property I didn't sleep for weeks, so I do understand!
I wish you every happiness in your first home, come back and let us know how you got on!

Hectors_House

I hope it's not the house I just looked at (Carlton, Nottingham - a mid-terrace, 2 bed). :eek:

My survey came back with similar with a recommendation to get the place checked for damp and get the roof looked at. So we went ahead and paid for further surveying and it turned out the roof needed replacing entirely, and the place need a new damp course, with evidence rising damp and woodworm....minimum spend £13,000.

We backed out when the buyer told us they expected us to negotiate how much they would have to pay towards it! :rotfl:

It was on a steep-ish hill and the whole row were built approx 100 years ago according to our survey. And there were signs of settlement but it was long-standing.

With a house of that age, and especially a mid-terrace I'd pay special attention to the roof and the chimney stacks. The one we looked at had the bricks crumbling under a surface of render!

Despite this disappointment we're still looking at this age of house because they have so much character in contrast to newer houses..and the rooms are bigger.

clutton_2

thisis a very standard clause which surveyors use - if they have not recommended a structural survey - then i would not worry about it. Many many terraced houses "slipped" a bit - then stopped slipping and never slipped again - especially in mining areas.

Mitsouko

We had exactly the same thing happen to us a few weeks ago. Although the 'movement' in the past is in reality probably going to be no problem (surveyor is just covering their own back) you may find it harder to get insurance. All insurers (I think) ask the question has there ever been any signs of structural movement and/or subsidence and you have to tell them the truth otherwise it invalidates the insurance. In our case the insurers (connected to the mortgage lenders) did agree to insure the house without increasing the premiums, but only after seeing a copy of the valuation report, which was a bit of a pain. It might make it difficult to shop around for buildings insurance each year, which we all like to do as good moneysavers!

We pulled out in the end, although to be honest this was not the main reason.

I should get your builder mate to look at it, and also test out getting buildings insurance quotes.