A
Anonymous
Guest
Hi All,
Paul.
Paul.
plasticpigeon
Member
- Messages
- 2,462
- Location
- Birmingham
Hello
I'm glad you have found this site, and hopefully people here wil be able to share their experiences and help you along the way. Your house is very picturesque, very pretty.
I have just read your blog, and the surveyor and mortgage process is pretty standard. I bought a very humble edwardian terrace and it sounds like my "survey" could have been exactly the same as yours just with a different address at the top. The mortgage company also kept back a retainer until I had got innapropriate and damaging work done. I just paid the retainer as cash and never did the stupid work. Like you there was lots of important stuff to do that the surveyor didn't spot. I really think the process which includes unqualified salespeople acting as experts is organised fraud. Thankfully your conservation officer was able to warn you. Many (perhaps most) unlisted houses are ruined after the buying process becuase of this nonsense. A number of my friends have proudly displayed their cement rendered walls to combat damp when the real reason is gutters or ground levels. They don't listen to me and think I'm daft.
I have read your first blog entry and I have to ask, why you plan on replacing so much. Do the roofs really need to be completely re roofed or can they be repaired? Why do the window frames doors and door frames need to be replaced? Certainly the windows in your picture look nice. I appreciate they are probably not original to the house, and if your CO had suggested something more appropriate then fair enough. However the windows in my house look like they were in much worse condition than yours are and I have repaired them all so please don't underestimate what can be repaired. If door frames are rotten at the bottom, new wood can be joined to old to replace the rot. It is far easier, cheaper and less destructive than total replacement. I can understand why you would want to replace the front door, and of course I haven't a clue what your house is like inside, but one piece of advice, that I think everyone on this forum agrees about is to take ones time, as ones opinions can change once one has lived in a place for a while, and often the grand plans at the beginning of a restporation process get reined in as owners start to work with the house rather than against it. It would be lovely to see your restoration progress, I hope you can get something useful from this forum, there are some real experts here, and lots of people with invaluable experience. Gareth Hughes for example who answered your other post, is a conservation officer and conservation architect. I believe he has worked on some very prestigious projects but he never blows his own trumpet.
I'm glad you have found this site, and hopefully people here wil be able to share their experiences and help you along the way. Your house is very picturesque, very pretty.
I have just read your blog, and the surveyor and mortgage process is pretty standard. I bought a very humble edwardian terrace and it sounds like my "survey" could have been exactly the same as yours just with a different address at the top. The mortgage company also kept back a retainer until I had got innapropriate and damaging work done. I just paid the retainer as cash and never did the stupid work. Like you there was lots of important stuff to do that the surveyor didn't spot. I really think the process which includes unqualified salespeople acting as experts is organised fraud. Thankfully your conservation officer was able to warn you. Many (perhaps most) unlisted houses are ruined after the buying process becuase of this nonsense. A number of my friends have proudly displayed their cement rendered walls to combat damp when the real reason is gutters or ground levels. They don't listen to me and think I'm daft.
I have read your first blog entry and I have to ask, why you plan on replacing so much. Do the roofs really need to be completely re roofed or can they be repaired? Why do the window frames doors and door frames need to be replaced? Certainly the windows in your picture look nice. I appreciate they are probably not original to the house, and if your CO had suggested something more appropriate then fair enough. However the windows in my house look like they were in much worse condition than yours are and I have repaired them all so please don't underestimate what can be repaired. If door frames are rotten at the bottom, new wood can be joined to old to replace the rot. It is far easier, cheaper and less destructive than total replacement. I can understand why you would want to replace the front door, and of course I haven't a clue what your house is like inside, but one piece of advice, that I think everyone on this forum agrees about is to take ones time, as ones opinions can change once one has lived in a place for a while, and often the grand plans at the beginning of a restporation process get reined in as owners start to work with the house rather than against it. It would be lovely to see your restoration progress, I hope you can get something useful from this forum, there are some real experts here, and lots of people with invaluable experience. Gareth Hughes for example who answered your other post, is a conservation officer and conservation architect. I believe he has worked on some very prestigious projects but he never blows his own trumpet.
A
Anonymous
Guest
Hi There,
thanks for the welcome and thanks for visiting my Blog (fame at last !!
)
To clarify, and perhaps I need to make it a bit more clear in the blog, I completely agree with you and I am following the tried and trusted mantra of repair rather than replace.
So for the roofs they are a strip repair and relay, reusing the existing tiles and only filling in with second hand / reclaimed where necessary. The reason for the strip of the main roof which you're right doesn't look too bad, is to add some breathable insulation so I can use the attic as my home office / movie room and to then repair some of the slipped / missing tiles.
The windows and frames will be repaired for the most part and we're only really looking at replacing the back door as we need to put a cat flap in it.
The only window that will need replacing is the attic window which while it is the youngest window in the house, because it's made from softwood it has completely gone.
Thanks again for the feedback and comments, rest assured we're taking our time on the project.
thanks for the welcome and thanks for visiting my Blog (fame at last !!
)To clarify, and perhaps I need to make it a bit more clear in the blog, I completely agree with you and I am following the tried and trusted mantra of repair rather than replace.
So for the roofs they are a strip repair and relay, reusing the existing tiles and only filling in with second hand / reclaimed where necessary. The reason for the strip of the main roof which you're right doesn't look too bad, is to add some breathable insulation so I can use the attic as my home office / movie room and to then repair some of the slipped / missing tiles.
The windows and frames will be repaired for the most part and we're only really looking at replacing the back door as we need to put a cat flap in it.
The only window that will need replacing is the attic window which while it is the youngest window in the house, because it's made from softwood it has completely gone.
Thanks again for the feedback and comments, rest assured we're taking our time on the project.
MatthewC
Member
- Messages
- 1,733
- Location
- Central/South England
+1plasticpigeon said:
Start with the roof and work downwards on gutters, downpipes and drains. Then think "what really needs doing first?" Possibly electrics and plumbing as they get hidden under the floor so become difficult after you move in; ditto a large amount of plastering is awful once you are living there. I personally like that chimney and would keep it.
BTW, you can add the URL for your blog to your profile as your website; when someone clicks on the white rectangle where it says "Contact" on the right side of your posts, a blue circle appears which says "website". In theory you can also add it to your posts as a signature but I can't seem to make that visible!
Matthew
(now find my blog...!)
A
Anonymous
Guest
Hi, well thanks for the advice, much appreciated.
Trouble is that the rear chimney is failing and requires a rebuild in any case as it's in pretty poor condition. The question then is, if that's the case then why not just remove it.
Conservation have said (verbally) that they have no issues with us taking it down to the roof line, so I think on balance that's what we decided would be best.
Had it not needed a rebuild then we probably would have left it.
I've added my blog url to my profile and to my signature, I'll see if it works now !
Paul.
Trouble is that the rear chimney is failing and requires a rebuild in any case as it's in pretty poor condition. The question then is, if that's the case then why not just remove it.
Conservation have said (verbally) that they have no issues with us taking it down to the roof line, so I think on balance that's what we decided would be best.
Had it not needed a rebuild then we probably would have left it.
I've added my blog url to my profile and to my signature, I'll see if it works now !
Paul.
Hello cre8toruk, nice blog, thanks for sharing your project. Sorry to hear about your experience with your survey. I'd like to make a few points with a view to helping others that may seek information around having a survey undertaken.
The first point to make is that the surveyor or their firm ought to invoice for their work following submitting their report. In this way, the client can ensure they are happy with the report before remitting against it. I have for example politely complained to a survey firm, outlining my reasons clearly and suggested a discount, to which they replied to go one further and suggest I don't pay a fee at all.
Secondly in this day and age, surveyors will limit what they put in writing for fear of legal recourse; personally I don't believe this should be universally met with contempt; it is simply a byproduct of the world we now live in. As a result it is quite normal for a survey report to be littered with wording such as 'probably', 'likely', 'may be' and so on. And for areas that may for example approach the realm of geology or structural engineering matters for example, I think it is quite OK for a report to indicate the surveyor's professional limits and/or that further specialist assistance may be required.
There is the separate matter of RICS apparently teaching that when encountering damp, surveyors may wish to to refer clients to a damp and timber specialist company - I don't know this as fact but do know that several firms such as Heritage House and other corners of the surveying industry are trying to change this, which involves lobbying the banks to alter their practices - probably not that easy, but while lenders demand a Property Care Association / C.S.R.T qualified surveyor, the sub industry is probably going nowhere soon, which is sad news; especially for those of us interested in purchasing historic buildings.
I've had two surveys undertaken within the past 18 months on two different grade II listed buildings. The first was undertaken by a gentleman local to the area of the property and specialising in historic structures. His fee was £650 and his report was pretty good, although he did suggest some remedial action with which I disagreed with, for example he suggested if finding the ground floor boards were laid on bare earth to consider laying a concrete floor. The second report on a different property and undertaken by a different surveyor entailed a different experience. The fee was £1,100 + VAT, VAT applicable because the surveyor was from a firm that was VAT registered, so fine with me and this in itself did not put me off at all. I received a sample survey, a schedule of availability, turn around times and an invitation from the surveyor to send him any information, including pictures if I wished, that we would like him to particularly focus on. He also asked if we could pop down to meet him in the PM the day of his visit so he could personally talk us through his findings and suggestions. The benefit of this is that firstly you know immediately whether there is anything gravely wrong with the property rather than needing to wait for the report, it also allows the chance to have a casual chat with ideas that the surveyor would not put in writing, e.g. around the likelihood of obtaining permission for extending and it also means that problems with multiple potential solutions can be talked through casually.
When I received his report I was impressed by the general information leading up to his report, and to find sub totals of estimated costs per many of his report items, along with a graph showing the number of years such work is likely to be required within. So in that sense, the survey document is a kind of blueprint for the work that awaits us in the event we buy the property. He also said we are welcome to contact him at any time for advice and clarification on any aspect of the report. Pretty nice going!
So that's my experience with surveys, limited to just two but just to throw this out there for the forum's interest. In summary, my experience is that you get what you pay for, and like cre8toruk, I too found that there are potential pitfalls. cre8toruk I just hope that your experience this time doesn't put you off in the future - surveys can be really great.
The first point to make is that the surveyor or their firm ought to invoice for their work following submitting their report. In this way, the client can ensure they are happy with the report before remitting against it. I have for example politely complained to a survey firm, outlining my reasons clearly and suggested a discount, to which they replied to go one further and suggest I don't pay a fee at all.
Secondly in this day and age, surveyors will limit what they put in writing for fear of legal recourse; personally I don't believe this should be universally met with contempt; it is simply a byproduct of the world we now live in. As a result it is quite normal for a survey report to be littered with wording such as 'probably', 'likely', 'may be' and so on. And for areas that may for example approach the realm of geology or structural engineering matters for example, I think it is quite OK for a report to indicate the surveyor's professional limits and/or that further specialist assistance may be required.
There is the separate matter of RICS apparently teaching that when encountering damp, surveyors may wish to to refer clients to a damp and timber specialist company - I don't know this as fact but do know that several firms such as Heritage House and other corners of the surveying industry are trying to change this, which involves lobbying the banks to alter their practices - probably not that easy, but while lenders demand a Property Care Association / C.S.R.T qualified surveyor, the sub industry is probably going nowhere soon, which is sad news; especially for those of us interested in purchasing historic buildings.
I've had two surveys undertaken within the past 18 months on two different grade II listed buildings. The first was undertaken by a gentleman local to the area of the property and specialising in historic structures. His fee was £650 and his report was pretty good, although he did suggest some remedial action with which I disagreed with, for example he suggested if finding the ground floor boards were laid on bare earth to consider laying a concrete floor. The second report on a different property and undertaken by a different surveyor entailed a different experience. The fee was £1,100 + VAT, VAT applicable because the surveyor was from a firm that was VAT registered, so fine with me and this in itself did not put me off at all. I received a sample survey, a schedule of availability, turn around times and an invitation from the surveyor to send him any information, including pictures if I wished, that we would like him to particularly focus on. He also asked if we could pop down to meet him in the PM the day of his visit so he could personally talk us through his findings and suggestions. The benefit of this is that firstly you know immediately whether there is anything gravely wrong with the property rather than needing to wait for the report, it also allows the chance to have a casual chat with ideas that the surveyor would not put in writing, e.g. around the likelihood of obtaining permission for extending and it also means that problems with multiple potential solutions can be talked through casually.
When I received his report I was impressed by the general information leading up to his report, and to find sub totals of estimated costs per many of his report items, along with a graph showing the number of years such work is likely to be required within. So in that sense, the survey document is a kind of blueprint for the work that awaits us in the event we buy the property. He also said we are welcome to contact him at any time for advice and clarification on any aspect of the report. Pretty nice going!
So that's my experience with surveys, limited to just two but just to throw this out there for the forum's interest. In summary, my experience is that you get what you pay for, and like cre8toruk, I too found that there are potential pitfalls. cre8toruk I just hope that your experience this time doesn't put you off in the future - surveys can be really great.
A
Anonymous
Guest
Hi Momo,
that's really great info and thanks for reading the blog (ongoing!).
I was told repeatedly I think after I got my survey that I hadn't paid enough, but my argument is that £700 is a lot of money to me and what is it that I'm actually paying for ?
I thought I was paying for the expertise of the surveyor to identify the issues, the causes and the possible solutions to those. With hindsight I might have paid quite a lot more and almost certainly got a what I was expecting, but if you're a member of the public, how will you ever know that unless you're stung ? I could complain to the company in question but the survey I got was vague not 100% wrong and I think there's enough wiggle room for the surveyor to argue that they've delivered what I paid for. Since there's no terms of reference I've no idea what to complain about.
As I mentioned this is / was my first old house purchase so the first time I've paid for a full structural survey (Building survey as they're called now), so I wasn't sure what to expect.
To be fair to the surveyor the report did say (with regard to damp issues) that I should get a specialist timber & damp company, experienced with this type of building to come and err survey the house, so his caveat was in place, however has anyone come across a listed building qualified damp & timber specialist that doesn't want to inject the walls with chemicals ? Heritage House I suppose (and I did consider them) and possibly Damp Detectives ? But when you've already spent what is for us a lot of money and there's no guarantee that anything I do subsequently will be any better, it's very difficult to justify spending the money again.
For me it's a bit like taking your car to the garage and saying "please fix whatever is wrong with it" ?
TBH it's not just surveyors / damp & timber specialists where there is an issue in the industry. It's really a question of vested interests / conflict of interests. That's why you need an independent qualified person to give you the information, I thought that was the point of a survey.
I've said to my roofer, "does my roof really need stripping and relaying or could you not just straighten a few tiles and fill in the missing ones..." does he say "yes of course and you know that £10k you were going to spend, well it's now only £500.00" no of course he doesn't... how do I actually know if he's telling the truth or not, I have to trust what the he and surveyor said on the subject but more the surveyor because he has / should have no vested interest.
Trouble is this is shark infested waters and I'm not able to determine which sharks are friendly and which aren't and there are more sharks in the water when it comes to old houses than new ones, so I think the answer is to get smart, do the research and know what you're talking about, as much as possible. This is why this site is so great.
I like the sound of your more expensive survey and that sounds like exactly what I would expect. I also agree with you that you should only pay for a survey once you've received it.
I don't quite agree about surveyors trying to cover themselves, as I know a company who likes taking surveyors to court (has two cases going to the high court imminently) because the surveyors in question didn't include items in their reports that they should have done which in the end cost their clients thousands.
I'd prefer them to be over cautious than not mention something and it is RICS regulation that a surveyor has to state that they are qualified to do the survey they've been commissioned to do.
I'm not put off getting a full structural survey in particular but will be a bit more choosy and specific with the surveyor I choose next time (if there is a next time).
Paul.
that's really great info and thanks for reading the blog (ongoing!).
I was told repeatedly I think after I got my survey that I hadn't paid enough, but my argument is that £700 is a lot of money to me and what is it that I'm actually paying for ?
I thought I was paying for the expertise of the surveyor to identify the issues, the causes and the possible solutions to those. With hindsight I might have paid quite a lot more and almost certainly got a what I was expecting, but if you're a member of the public, how will you ever know that unless you're stung ? I could complain to the company in question but the survey I got was vague not 100% wrong and I think there's enough wiggle room for the surveyor to argue that they've delivered what I paid for. Since there's no terms of reference I've no idea what to complain about.
As I mentioned this is / was my first old house purchase so the first time I've paid for a full structural survey (Building survey as they're called now), so I wasn't sure what to expect.
To be fair to the surveyor the report did say (with regard to damp issues) that I should get a specialist timber & damp company, experienced with this type of building to come and err survey the house, so his caveat was in place, however has anyone come across a listed building qualified damp & timber specialist that doesn't want to inject the walls with chemicals ? Heritage House I suppose (and I did consider them) and possibly Damp Detectives ? But when you've already spent what is for us a lot of money and there's no guarantee that anything I do subsequently will be any better, it's very difficult to justify spending the money again.
For me it's a bit like taking your car to the garage and saying "please fix whatever is wrong with it" ?
TBH it's not just surveyors / damp & timber specialists where there is an issue in the industry. It's really a question of vested interests / conflict of interests. That's why you need an independent qualified person to give you the information, I thought that was the point of a survey.
I've said to my roofer, "does my roof really need stripping and relaying or could you not just straighten a few tiles and fill in the missing ones..." does he say "yes of course and you know that £10k you were going to spend, well it's now only £500.00" no of course he doesn't... how do I actually know if he's telling the truth or not, I have to trust what the he and surveyor said on the subject but more the surveyor because he has / should have no vested interest.
Trouble is this is shark infested waters and I'm not able to determine which sharks are friendly and which aren't and there are more sharks in the water when it comes to old houses than new ones, so I think the answer is to get smart, do the research and know what you're talking about, as much as possible. This is why this site is so great.
I like the sound of your more expensive survey and that sounds like exactly what I would expect. I also agree with you that you should only pay for a survey once you've received it.
I don't quite agree about surveyors trying to cover themselves, as I know a company who likes taking surveyors to court (has two cases going to the high court imminently) because the surveyors in question didn't include items in their reports that they should have done which in the end cost their clients thousands.
I'd prefer them to be over cautious than not mention something and it is RICS regulation that a surveyor has to state that they are qualified to do the survey they've been commissioned to do.
I'm not put off getting a full structural survey in particular but will be a bit more choosy and specific with the surveyor I choose next time (if there is a next time).
Paul.
Hi Paul,
I think you answered your own question in recognising the value of forums such as this - with a surveyor I would always wish for a personal recommendation from people whose opinion I trust. But as you say, the process of buying a house sometimes doesn't allow for the necessary time to do that.
I have also had x2 damp and timber surveys done by Heritage House. It's a very different type of survey that may involve a carbide meter, as well as low tech methods of checking the state of timbers, i.e. using a rigger's knife. In summary it delves much deeper that a building survey on the specific topic of damp and the state of the timber. In my experience it's more hands on and as a result throws up matters the building survey might not have picked up on. You will also end up with a lovely and wonderful report that is a blueprint of a different kind, and one that should complement the building survey. They are not cheap surveys to have undertaken, but in my opinion worth their weight and then some.
Surveys are expensive and quickly accrue scary sum totals, but for me, looking at it proportionate to the cost of the purchase it is in fact not that much and I have in the past used a survey to negotiate significant amounts off, so they can become 'subsidised' or 'free'.
The other aspect you raised which you also answered is that I feel buying an old house really entails an unwritten rule that it becomes your new hobby - kind of comes with the job of being it's guardian. In this was and guided by wonderful resources like this forum, I think one can become in tune with the building, understand readily what to do and how to do it, and sometimes perhaps to anticipate problems.
Anyway Inwish you the best of luck with your project!
Best,
Momo
I think you answered your own question in recognising the value of forums such as this - with a surveyor I would always wish for a personal recommendation from people whose opinion I trust. But as you say, the process of buying a house sometimes doesn't allow for the necessary time to do that.
I have also had x2 damp and timber surveys done by Heritage House. It's a very different type of survey that may involve a carbide meter, as well as low tech methods of checking the state of timbers, i.e. using a rigger's knife. In summary it delves much deeper that a building survey on the specific topic of damp and the state of the timber. In my experience it's more hands on and as a result throws up matters the building survey might not have picked up on. You will also end up with a lovely and wonderful report that is a blueprint of a different kind, and one that should complement the building survey. They are not cheap surveys to have undertaken, but in my opinion worth their weight and then some.
Surveys are expensive and quickly accrue scary sum totals, but for me, looking at it proportionate to the cost of the purchase it is in fact not that much and I have in the past used a survey to negotiate significant amounts off, so they can become 'subsidised' or 'free'.
The other aspect you raised which you also answered is that I feel buying an old house really entails an unwritten rule that it becomes your new hobby - kind of comes with the job of being it's guardian. In this was and guided by wonderful resources like this forum, I think one can become in tune with the building, understand readily what to do and how to do it, and sometimes perhaps to anticipate problems.
Anyway Inwish you the best of luck with your project!
Best,
Momo
TheRoost
Member
- Messages
- 208
- Location
- Trafford, South Manchester
Hi and welcome, lovely looking house
Yes the survey/mortgage process is awful. The good thing is that you didn't have those recommended chemical damp proofing treatments done - A lot of people will do as they need that mortgage retainer, and don't know that those treatments are bad news.
A crucial thing we learnt before buying our Victorian place, is never to take out a survey through the mortgage lender, always commission one independently and keep the findings to yourself (which is what you have done). Our lenders basic valuation report came back clean with no defects that would 'affect mortgage lending or future resale', yet the more detailed building survey that we took out ourselves found some damp in a kitchen wall, which the surveyor thought it may of been caused by a leaky tumble drier, but insisted that it would need to be looked at by a 'damp expert company'. I'm convinced that if we'd of took the easy option of booking a survey through the lender, we would of been forced into a retainer until squirty chemicals were applied, or of had to back out of the purchase. Needless to say by the time we had moved in, the wall had dried out perfectly after a couple of weeks without the dodgy tumble drier.
Andy
Yes the survey/mortgage process is awful. The good thing is that you didn't have those recommended chemical damp proofing treatments done - A lot of people will do as they need that mortgage retainer, and don't know that those treatments are bad news.
A crucial thing we learnt before buying our Victorian place, is never to take out a survey through the mortgage lender, always commission one independently and keep the findings to yourself (which is what you have done). Our lenders basic valuation report came back clean with no defects that would 'affect mortgage lending or future resale', yet the more detailed building survey that we took out ourselves found some damp in a kitchen wall, which the surveyor thought it may of been caused by a leaky tumble drier, but insisted that it would need to be looked at by a 'damp expert company'. I'm convinced that if we'd of took the easy option of booking a survey through the lender, we would of been forced into a retainer until squirty chemicals were applied, or of had to back out of the purchase. Needless to say by the time we had moved in, the wall had dried out perfectly after a couple of weeks without the dodgy tumble drier.
Andy
Flyfisher
Member
- Messages
- 10,201
- Location
- Norfolk, UK
A mortgage lender's valuation survey is really only intended to satisfy the lender that, in the case of default, they can repossess the property and sell it quickly (=quickly) to get their money back and cover all their costs. They are not really interested in the condition of the property beyond this objective. Thus, their level of interest will depend on the loan to value ratio; borrow a little and they may only do a 'drive by' survey, borrow a lot and they will want a lot more detail and may even insist on immediate remedial works before releasing all of the loan. In short, they are primarily looking after their own interests and not those of the purchaser or the well-being of the property, except where it would affect its market value.
A
Anonymous
Guest
Yes... this I know, I paid for my own survey in addition to the Mortgage valuation survey (waste of time)...in fact when I refused to do the whole chemical damp proofing thing that their surveyor told them that I should get done because a. it's an old listed house with solid walls and chemical damp proofing damages them and b. that would be illegal and would cost me thousands to put right, oh and a criminal record , they told me to get my solicitor to write to them stating that the building was a listed building !! I mean they're lending me a 6 figure sum of money and they don't know it's listed ????! So yeah they're really interested in looking after their risk aren't they
MatthewC
Member
- Messages
- 1,733
- Location
- Central/South England
Absolutely. As FF says, a mortgage survey is only for the benefit of the lenders. When I lived for a few years in a posh Thames-side flat (1990 built), it was a "drive-by survey" (!!!) which was fair enough as the place was maintained meticulously.cre8toruk said:
A few years previously, I had a survey done on an old house I wanted to buy, and the surveyor was absolutely useless - his report only really said what I had told him or "no access to roof space" etc, and then he valued it (post refurbishment) at some stupidly low price which meant that I couldn't get a big enough loan to buy it and restore it. I cringe now at what was done by the eventual purchasers, who started with a few lorry loads of concrete...
kreyszig said:
Gosh, me too......why would you want to remove it?
At our last (non-listed, Georgian thatched) house - on the Wiltshire side of the Wilts/Dorset border - we had an amazing tall, leaning chimney on an outbuilding. It served no function whatsoever, but added heaps of character to an otherwise non-descript part of the property
Mims x
Flyfisher
Member
- Messages
- 10,201
- Location
- Norfolk, UK
Agreed. Such things DO have a function - to show how things used to be, which is surely a major point about period properties. Perhaps the whole point?
We have a fireplace and chimney in our garage. Completely pointless these days but I'm not about to remove it or block it up, though it is missing a chimney pot that I think should be replaced one day. It's on the list.
We have a fireplace and chimney in our garage. Completely pointless these days but I'm not about to remove it or block it up, though it is missing a chimney pot that I think should be replaced one day. It's on the list.
Feltwell
Member
- Messages
- 6,377
- Location
- Shropshire, England
Flyfisher said:Agreed. Such things DO have a function - to show how things used to be, which is surely a major point about period properties. Perhaps the whole point?
We have a fireplace and chimney in our garage. Completely pointless these days but I'm not about to remove it or block it up, though it is missing a chimney pot that I think should be replaced one day. It's on the list.
Ohh, I don't know. I can see that being quite appealing in winter if you use it as a workshop! A good place for the offcuts to be chucked if you're doing woodwork.....
A
Anonymous
Guest
Well yes I agree, however the chimney is falling down, letting in water and will need to be demolished in any case.
I could pay to have it rebuilt but since it's a. redundant b. not part of the original (18th Century) house and c. going to be very expensive to have rebuilt I have to sensibly determine if it's something that needs to be done and if I can afford to have it done right now.
We are only talking about the stack that extends above the kitchen roof, so the plan is to take this down and cover the remaining void with the relayed roof, so I can retain the option to have the stack rebuilt at a later point.
I am also having the main chimney rebuilt, the roofs relayed (reusing the original tiles), the cast iron guttering repaired / replaced, the windows, frames and doors repaired, not to mention the plumbing, electrics, drains and so on and so on done...my budget of £40 - £50k has very quickly been used up and that's before we discover any of the other horror stories from the "repairs" that somehow have been "permitted" on this listed building.
That said I've asked the builder for a quote to rebuild the chimney, if it's not too much then I may have it done.
On a separate note has anyone else had ant problems this weekend ? Just wondering if it's that day of the year when they all appear all at once... They seem to be sprouting out of my living room window frame which is rotten, sigh
Paul.
I could pay to have it rebuilt but since it's a. redundant b. not part of the original (18th Century) house and c. going to be very expensive to have rebuilt I have to sensibly determine if it's something that needs to be done and if I can afford to have it done right now.
We are only talking about the stack that extends above the kitchen roof, so the plan is to take this down and cover the remaining void with the relayed roof, so I can retain the option to have the stack rebuilt at a later point.
I am also having the main chimney rebuilt, the roofs relayed (reusing the original tiles), the cast iron guttering repaired / replaced, the windows, frames and doors repaired, not to mention the plumbing, electrics, drains and so on and so on done...my budget of £40 - £50k has very quickly been used up and that's before we discover any of the other horror stories from the "repairs" that somehow have been "permitted" on this listed building.
That said I've asked the builder for a quote to rebuild the chimney, if it's not too much then I may have it done.
On a separate note has anyone else had ant problems this weekend ? Just wondering if it's that day of the year when they all appear all at once... They seem to be sprouting out of my living room window frame which is rotten, sigh
Paul.