Survey outcome - advice please! :)

[sidehaas]

Hi all,
We have just had a Homebuyer Report done on the house we are hoping to buy. It is a 1910 Edwardian Terrace in Derby, a large 3 bed with 3 chimney breasts and the usual sort of layout. Apart from the usual gas & electric tests which need doing, and a number of half-expected non-urgent items, it came up with the 'urgent' items I've copied below (although the mortgage valuation has been approved regardless).

Can anyone tell me how common these sorts of things are in a house like this? We've never bought an old house before. Is this to be expected with most of them, or have we picked a duffer? And does anyone have advice on solving the sorts of problems identified, or know how much a detailed investigation should cost?

Many thanks!
Simon

Main walls: The external walls contain an engineering brick damp-proof course. Damp was found internally caused by failure of the damp-proof course and further investigations are needed.
Internal walls & partitions: We recorded high damp meter readings in ground floor walls principally to the kitchen and rear living room floors caused by failure of the damp proof course therefore, more detailed investigations are necessary.
Floors: There are signs of wood-boring insect infestation in floor timbers. It is possible that timbers have been treated against such infestation. Guarantees may be available and your legal adviser should check this with the present owner and if they are valid and transferable, see Section I. Woodworm may also be present in hidden areas. Further investigations are required and these should be concluded before exchange of contracts.
Cellar: There is evidence of wood-boring insect infestation in the floor timbers. It is possible that timbers have been treated against such attack. Your legal adviser
should check with the current owner for the existence and validity of any guarantees in respect of this treatment and we refer you to Section I. As the insect
attack could still be active and as any further enquiries could take some time, a specialist report on the infestation should be obtained now. In this way, any possible costs for further treatment will be known before purchase. Further investigations are required and these should be concluded before exchange of contracts.

 

[Feltwell]

Hi Simon, and welcome.

That all sounds pretty standard for a 1910 house to me! Homebuyer's reports aren't great, and it may be worth you just getting a valuation survey done as well and not showing that Homebuyer's report to the mortgage company otherwise they may put retentions on - although you said they've already approved the valuation? We had a full structural survey here by a surveyor who was specifically qualified to report on older buildings - that highlighted several factors that the mortgage company may have put a retention on for and insisted on some very unwise work to be done. So we also had a mortgage valuation survey done, which confirmed only that the house is basically sound and is worth what we paid for it, to give to the mortgage company.

On your report:-

Damp - loads, and loads, and loads of old posts on this on here if you search. Pretty much every old house suffers from damp at some point and I would offer money that your engineering brick DPC is just fine, they do not suddenly fail. Injected damp proof courses are very, very rarely needed but are often done, and can cause much more damage than any good they do. Sorting out damp is a process of elimination, looking at all likely causes - are the rainwater goods in good condition, are the outside ground levels too high, is earth or a pathway bridging the DPC externally, has someone rendered over the DPC or otherwise bridged it in any way, has the house been rendered externally and if so what with and is it cracked in any way. Lots on here about the use of lime rather than cement for both external brick pointing or rendering and internal plastering as well.

Damp meters are notoriously unreliable. Are there actually visible signs of damp on the internal walls, does the house smell damp? Has it been empty and unheated recently? Do the current owners like drying washing on airers or radiators with the windows shut?

You mention floors - have they had original suspended timber floors replaced with concrete ones? It's quite common and can, but not always, cause problems with pushing damp into the walls. Absolute worst case is the floor has to come up and be replaced with a suspended timber floor again, but there are other options and they may not be causing any problems anyway.

"Signs of wood-boring insect infestation" - I've yet to see any house of that age that hasn't got that! It *can* be serious, but is rarely so. The term they are using is a catch all to cover their backsides, if you call the surveyor he may tell you verbally what it actually is (although I notice you do say "woodworm" in that paragraph). Usually (but not always) it's common furniture beetle, aka "woodworm". Spraying is very rarely required, they don't like dry timber so sort out any damp and the problem goes away. It may well have been treated in the past anyway (the seller's solicitor may hold the paperwork for this). Again loads of old posts on here about this.

If your mortgage company saw the above they may insist that you get a chemical DPC injected and the house sprayed for woodworm before they will release all the mortgage funds to you, both of which are highly likely to be a waste of money.

None of what you've said would put me off the house if it was right in other ways. To put it another way - there aren't many Victorian or Edwardian houses where a surveyor couldn't find evidence of damp or furniture beetle. Now look at how many Victorian and Edwardian houses we have left in this country!

 

[middi]

I agree with Feltwell's comments.

I wonder what the same surveyor's report would be on a 400 year old timber frame building --- ( DEMOLISH !!!!!.

Middi

 

[Jellyfire]

Hi Simon, our survey was similarly worrying, but a phone call to the surveyor put my mind at rest. By nature a surveyor will always mention every possible problem they discover on the survey, but an off the record phone call will probably get you a much more honest evaluation of the house, and whether there are any genuinely serious issues with the problems he's discovered, or more likely there isn't anything that should worry you too much

 

[Flyfisher]

Also, remember that the mortgage company is only interested in the house as collateral for the loan and doesn't really care about its condition unless it puts their loan at risk. Thus, they would probably be quite careful about a 95% loan (if such things exist anymore) but for a 25% loan they probably wouldn't care if the house was about to collapse because they'd still get their money back by selling the building site.

That may not be much direct help, but it's always good to think about the motivation of the various people and organisations involved in a property sale. For example, I'm sure you can imagine the inherent dangers of a 'free' damp survey by a company selling remedial work. An independent survey by a suitable specialist may cost a bit more but the results and advice should be untainted by any other considerations.

 

[jocelyn plummer]

Welcome!

You have got some sound advice there. With an older building The golden rule is 'don't part with your money for expensive treatments until you have looked at all ways of easy preventative treatments' i.e look for broken tiles,rainwater goods, exterior paintwork, etc. repair, repair, repair. Lots of nasties will eventually disappear.
Best of luck.

 

[Andrew Bodenham]

Hello, Simon,

What Feltwell said, basically.

Damp - amazing how they can deduce that a brick dpc has failed just by finding a 'high' meter reading. Ask for a calibration certificate for their meter. These people know nothing about older properties, he said, generalising vigorously. On the basis of a similar report a previous owner of our house paid for an injected damp-course. Our house has rubble limestone walls with huge voids - they could pump silicone into it for a week and not achieve anything. And the 'damp-proofing' companies are happy to do it, even though they know it's a complete waste of money. So take such 'conclusions' with a big pinch of salt. If you're really interested in the condition of the house then you could ask a RICS conservation accredited surveyor or a conservation accredited architect to look at specific areas of interest - people who really understand how traditionally built properties function.

 

[Keithj]

Yes to all the above.

Our (Tudor) house had an injected DPC, which failed to do anything. When we had the remedial works done, we removed the pathetic little sausages of whatever the DPC placcy was. 'Twas a waste of money.

I'm not quite so cynical about the calibration of damp meters. They are usually accurate within 50%. The problem is that while they will tell you the relative sogginess of various bits of wall, they can't tell you the cause. If you get a very high reading, then investigate! It may be a leaky gutter or a missing bit of roof (relatively easy to fix) or it may be terminal rot. We had both. My damp meter now gives consistently boring low readings everywhere except under the kitchen sink.

 

[FamilyWiggs]

I'm not quite so cynical about the calibration of damp meters. They are usually accurate within 50%.

That's quite a margin of error! :shock: Imagine if the petrol pumps or shop scales were calibrated to that level of accuracy!

Oh I see.... it was irony. Wasn't it? :wink:

 

[Flyfisher]

Yes to all the above.

Our (Tudor) house had an injected DPC, which failed to do anything. When we had the remedial works done, we removed the pathetic little sausages of whatever the DPC placcy was. 'Twas a waste of money.

I'm not quite so cynical about the calibration of damp meters. They are usually accurate within 50%. The problem is that while they will tell you the relative sogginess of various bits of wall, they can't tell you the cause. If you get a very high reading, then investigate! It may be a leaky gutter or a missing bit of roof (relatively easy to fix) or it may be terminal rot. We had both. My damp meter now gives consistently boring low readings everywhere except under the kitchen sink.

 

[Flyfisher]

I'm not quite so cynical about the calibration of damp meters. They are usually accurate within 50%. The problem is that while they will tell you the relative sogginess of various bits of wall, they can't tell you the cause.

My understanding is that they don't directly measure 'damp' at all, they actually measure electrical conductivity. While this may be related to the amount of water in the wall it is also highly dependent upon the constitution of the wall, the level of salts etc. I presume this accounts for the 50% 'accuracy'.

It would be interesting to know the reading when the meter probes are dipped into pure de-ionised water. :wink:

 

[andrew gayton]

As above. A bone-dry wall with a surface deposit of salts will read as damp. the ONLY true way to establish moisture content is to take core sample and lab test.

 

[MdB]

Agreed, a core sample test is the only reliable way, however I believe you can get a hand held gadget which will test your sample.

 

[sidehaas]

Thanks all, you've set my mind at rest a bit.
The homebuyer report was commissioned on our behalf by the mortgage company, but they are only sent the valuation part, no the whole report, and in the valuation part the surveyor simply stated that there was nothing that should prevent the property be resalable at the purchase price in future given normal market conditions (and didn't mention the damp at all), ie for the mortgage company's purposes it was ok. They won't see the full report which we have now received.

I'm not sure whether I need to get a specialist in quickly to check the house over for us before exchange in case the woodworm is still active, and maybe to see if they can determine the cause of damp, or whether I could just leave this until later. How much should such an inspection cost?

Many thanks again
Simon

 

[FamilyWiggs]

Simon, search on here for woodworm - many many threads.

In fact almost as many threads on worm and damp as there are snakeoil salesmen out there who can worry you into expensive (and nasty chemical-based) "cures", which in many cases are unwarranted or ineffective.

 

[Feltwell]

I'm not sure whether I need to get a specialist in quickly to check the house over for us before exchange in case the woodworm is still active, and maybe to see if they can determine the cause of damp, or whether I could just leave this until later. How much should such an inspection cost?

Simon, if the house is dry the woodworm won't survive even if they are active now. There are a few places where spraying can be warranted - my cellar, for instance, is damp likely nearly all cellars are and has some active woodworm in the steps. Those I will spray at some point as the cellar will never be dry and the woodworm is active - I've seen "frass" (like fine wood dust) next to the steps where the little beasties are chomping their way out. Elsewhere I have evidence of old woodworm but the house is dry now and there's no sign they are active any more. Ask your seller's solicitor if they have any woodworm treatment documentation, there's a good chance the house has been sprayed in the past anyway.

If you want to get a specialist in then don't whatever you do take up a "free survey" offer - they are just salesmen out to sell you the need for an injected DPC or woodworm spraying from their company. Get an independent surveyor in, but critically one who knows about older buildings, many don't - RICS conservation accredited as Andrew mentions above sounds good. If they mention things like injected DPC, stripping back internal walls to 1m high and applying waterproof render or plaster to "cure" your damp then they don't understand old buildings. As to cost - you'd need to call and explain what you want, as you only want specifics looking at and not a full survey.

http://www.ricsfirms.com/

Alternatively, for what you want, does anyone on here know of any suitable builders in that area?

 

[AMc]

I would use the survey as a reason to visit the house again and do a proper "under the bonnet" look around rather than the "showroom" visits most people do.
Take a good look at the areas that are under discussion and form your own opinion on how wet/dry/damaged/decayed they are.
If the vendor can't provide proof that the damage has been treated then you can use this as a discussion point to perhaps reduce the price by the cost of spraying (a few hundred but almost certainly unnecessary) or remedial works to deal with the moisture if there is any (depends what's wrong).
I suspect seeing it with your own eyes you'll be less concerned and not having a retention from the lender leaves you to make your own decision.

 

[Flyfisher]

I agree with the above posts. The mortgage company only wants to see the valuation results because they're not really interested in the actual condition of the property, only its resale value. The fact that they are happy to lend you money is pretty much irrelevant to your concerns.

I would pay for an independent survey by a specialist in old properties (as I did for our house) but instruct the surveyor to concentrate on your specific concerns. This will minimise the survey cost and a good surveyor should be sensitive to such things.

Also, as AMc rightly pointed out, the survey results might be the basis for negotiating the final purchase price to take account of any urgent remedial works identified.

 

[vicky whitworth]

My view as a non-technical person is that if you love the house buy it. Every old house I have bought has always had a survey that said 'damp' and 'woodworm' and, do you know what, no one's died because of it and the woodworm have not eaten the whole house overnight (like my dad told me they would ) Old houses are damp and wormy. Both are maneagable but if you are a control freak old houses are hard to control.

 

[sidehaas]

Thanks again everyone.

I've spoken to the surveyor on the phone tonight. The damp is in a small area of wall low down at the join between the external dining room (rear lounge) wall and kitchen wall - its the classic victorian/edwardian layout. He has said it is only a small area at the moment but should be treated to prevent it getting worse. He says these sort of brick DPCs can fail becasue water comes up through the mortar, but also said it could have been bridged eg by internal plaster (he says solid floors like the one in the kitchen, which has been covered with wood, do not always have any damp proofing). There is also a lean-to which has been built against the outside of these walls and I wondered if soem aspect of the construction of that could have bridged the original DPC. He said that is possible. But basically he didn't seem to know. HE did say that he didn't think a DPC on the scale required would cost much anyway. I am therefore tempted to forget about this until we haev moved, gradualyl pursue various options for trying to get rid of the source, and try an injected DPC down the line if all else fails. Does that sound sensible?

The woodworm is in a separate place, in the corner of the cellar, effectively in the front lounge's floor. He says it is in-extensive at the moment, but he says there was some dust around so if not active now, it has at least been active in the last couple of years. He thinks if it hasn't been sprayed we should get it sprayed ourselves - I'm going to get our solicitor to check this and for any existing guarantees. He did however say that it would be extremely difficult to find a house like this without this small level of woodworm - says he used to live on the same street and has been in a number of them. If there is no guarantee though, in the short term we are quite short of cash so it would help to leave a specialist survey (and possibly spray) until a later date. For a short survey and small area of woodworm spraying in a damp edwardian cellar, are we talking a couple of hundred quid or could we be talking thousands? If the former it isn't going to make any difference to the purchase so I'm tempted to leave it for a few months to a year until we are more stable financially. Again, is this a bad idea or foes it sound sensible?

Cheers!
Simon