Surveys and Surveyors

[Stephen]

Get ready for a bit of a rant!

Our telly has just packed up and to replace it with only a mid range TV will cost c. £800. I know others who have spent several £x,000s on TVs. The last full service I had on my car ost over £500.
My point?
Why are people then complaining about spending £1,200 on a survey?

Many of you are quite prepared to part with similar sums of money for things that are no-where near as important. When taken back to an houry rate the survey is not a particularly costly thing.

Yes there are good and bad in the world of surveying, but in whatever profession happens to be yours cannot the same be said?

I have posted before on surveys, how to find a decent surveyor, etc and I suggest that those wanting to know more should do a search and find those posts.

There are good surveyors around who will adapt and tailor their report to your specific requirements, who will let you join them on site, who do not report every obvious silly thing, but who concentrate on the main issues.

Yes, you are correct that surveying is not rocket science and to an extent you may be able to find many of the main issues for yourself. However, could you really be able to fully understand all forms and causes of cracking, identify all possible foms of timber decay and causes of damp, etc, etc.? Not all surveyors can, of course, but the point is that a good surveyor is worth the money. What you are paying for should also be experience of having looked at a wide range of properties day in day out.

Those who often report a bad experience are those who did not do any real research into the surveyor they were using, perhaps even used the one recommended by the mortgage lender or estate agent.

I deal with quite a few negligence claims against surveyors and whilst many are justified there are quite a few that are not. Sometimes the problems complained about are such that no-one could have identified within the scope of a pre-purchase survey. There are limitations on what a surveyor can reasonably do. If you undertake your own inspection the same is of course true.

A survey is not another form of insurance. When you are unwell do you go to the doctor thinking - if I don't get better I can sue? No, of course not. Your primary purpose is to find out what is wrong (if anything). The same should be true of a survey. The primary purpose is to find out if there is anything wrong that need concern you and needs to be taken into account in the purchase price, or considered for future attention.

The other issue is whether what a surveyor tells you will make any difference. Everyone has a different level of expectation and different levels of what they will accept. I have had some clients who would only have been put off by major structural movement (rot and infetation was not a concern to them as it was stuff they could deal with), others ran a mile at the merest mention of woodworm.

If we took the same view of other proessions and trades imagine what it would be like ...
I don't need to buy a shirt I can get a pattern and sew it up mysef. I don't need a car mechanic - a quick read of Haynes will do me. I don't need that computer geek - I can read the latest Dummies book and fix my computer.
Etc, etc.

When you break it down to the simplest form nothing is too difficult to DIY.

What you have to ask yourself is - is it worth it and do I have the time and experience/skill to do the same level of job?

With surveys it comes back to finding a decent surveyor first. I return to where I started - read my other posts on this.

End of rant.

A fed up surveyor.

 

[Moo]

Absolutely right, Stephen.
And the same could be said for tradesmen, but people seem more aware that there are good and bad, and that there are ways of finding the good ones (recommendation being the best, as I will testify re. finding a good plumber - thanks, Joss).

 

[Mark]

/counter rant mode on

I think that one of the issues is that surveys are an infrequent event and as such getting decent feedback about the quality of the result is difficult.

I can walk into any high street and see the quality of the TV's on offer. I can get the 3 or 5 year warranty. I can read reviews in magazines and web sites.

Most people get their cars serviced at least once a year. I can easily get feedback on the quality of a garage from people I know. Because garages depend on regular trade the duff ones usually fail.

The surveys I have had done have been pretty useless. Obvious boiler plate extracts recommending further work by damp and timber companies and factual inaccuracies.

It isnt that easy for the ordinary person to choose a decent surveyor. And when so many surveyors seem to quickly wander around and write a meaningless report it isnt so odd that people baulk at spending a significant amount on something which they dont know how good it is going to be. And hourly rates ? Well an hour or two walking round talking into a dictaphone which is then typed up by (I presume) an ordinary secretary doesnt look like such great value.

Now if RICS had some sort of grading system or assessment system so that I could get some sort of indication as to how good a surveyor is or what their specialist knowledge is and had that information easily available....

But if the qualification is an minimum level and no further differentiation then you are selling a commodity service - but not at commodity prices.
I know there are good surveyors - but as in any industry there are also poor/mediocre ones.

How many people get kicked out of RICS or struck off ? How bad do they need to be for that to happen?
What QA is done ?


And if £800 = middling TV and an ordinary service on your car = £500 you arent doing too badly from £1200 surveys.


/ steps away from blue touch paper and waves matches /

 

[Mark]

I suppose that if the general perception of the public is that surveys represent poor value and are of very limited use, then that is an issue for the industry to take up.

Dont complain about how others see your industry - only the practitioners can improve their image. The industry needs to show that they are offering a worthwhile service.


And it is a sort of insurance.
Risk is about two things - the chance of something happening and the consequences of it happening.

People will make a judgement about how likely a survey is to be useful, the possible cost of correcting any fault and the cost of the survey. As long as so many reports just contain lists of further specialists to be consulted and statements of the obvious then the balance isnt looking good.

 

[biffvernon]

Another counter rant from one who has never paid (and would never pay) anything like £800 for a telly or £500 for a car service. I did once pay a surveyor, or at least a structural engineer, £300 for a report on a specific problem and the advice he gave was probably worth his hire. £1200 would buy from me the best part of a fortnight's hard labour (and maybe a little skill) in my workshop, so it's quite hard for me to see what makes £1200 for a morning's work by a surveyor such great value. Of course surveyors are not the only profession whose pay rates are ridiculous.

 

[Nemesis]

I have to say I've neve paid for a 'real' survey either - only the basic sort which allowed a mortgage. I reckoned I knew what needed doing and was pretty accurate about that. I do recall the original survey on this house said that pointing needed doing in some places - he meant the original lime needed covering with cement like half the house is. The recommendations for a damp survey from an 'expert' brought a whole raft of problems with the mortage company!

While I am sure that there are excellent surveyors and not so excellent, recent experiences of a friend in buying a (listed) house, selling it a few years' later and buying another have been interesting as far as surveys go.

There seems not to be a great deal of consistency in what some look for and others don't, and certain items (I've mentioned her unkitemarked windows elsewhere which held up the sale) seemed simply weird.

Other things too - the recommendation to get a structural engineers report on some apparent movement which looked very historic and on which the surveyor was unable or unwilling to express an opinion.

In her house the surveyor tested the shower, in the one she's buying not a mention of plumbing.

 

[skier-hughes]

I suppose that if the general perception of the public is that surveys represent poor value and are of very limited use, then that is an issue for the industry to take up.

Is it the "GENERAL PUBLIC's" opinion, or just "PERIOD PROPERTY" forum users perception that surveys are poor value.

I should imagine the genral public are more than happy with the surveys they have done on their houses, but here we tend to have a bit more knowledge and are talking about specific property types which require a certain amount of skill to survey.

I tend to agree wiht the OP, find the "right" surveyor and he should be worth his money.

Graham

 

[Mark]

General Public.

As an example, friends of ours bought a house in this village last year. Unknowingly they chose the same surveyor that had done the survey for the last owners three years before (1960s bungalow btw).

On receiving the survey they tried to reduce the price because of some issues raised in the survey. The vendor laughed at them. Because the issues raised had been dealt with already. when they then compared the survey just received with the one three years ago - almost identical - despite the fact that a fair bit of work had been done in the interim.

They got the survey fee refunded. But were they happy ? No. Did they feel that the survey was value ? :lol: :lol: :lol:


I would also say that it isnt just about us choosing the surveyor - when we come to sell we are at the mercy of whoever carries out a survey on our property. Who then says rising damp, woodworm, etc,etc. I know that one wall in our house has been injected for damp at least 5 times (and it was very damp still) 'traditional' remedy (ground levels/render removed) has sorted it. But how much did all that injecting/replastering cost ? The digging and render removal must have cost me the price of a cutting disc.

 

[skier-hughes]

Which is exactly the point Stephen is making, get the RIGHT suveyor.

Perhaps we need a what to ask sticky for when you appoint a surveyor.

1. Have you surveyed this house before?
2. If you found damp, what would be your recommended course of action?

 

[JohnB]

After the experience that I had when buying my current bungalow, as related in the "Survey on 15thC house" topic, I'm very wary of surveyors. It ended up costing me a lot of money unnecessarily and didn't do my health much good because of the knock-on effects. I've now agreed the sale of this place and am having a final look the one in my "Should I Buy This House" topic (http://periodpropertyshop.co.uk/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=7940&highlight=) tomorrow before deciding whether I make an offer.

I've looked through Taunton Yellow Pages and there is one advert in the Surveyors - Building section for a "Historical & Listed Building Specialist", but the other adverts don't suggest any knowledge of old buildings, use of lime plasters etc. I'm waiting to be called back, so have no idea of the cost yet, but I suppose they could be more expensive than other surveyors. I specifically want to do a pretty serious eco-renovation and don't want anything to do with a surveyor who doesn't understand oldish (late Victorian I think) houses and low-impact sustainable building. I'm a member of Ecos Trust (formerly Somerset Trust for Sustainable Development), but they can't suggest anyone.

I'm not really that bothered about being able to sue the surveyor if he gets it wrong (although it would be nice to be able to if necessary), I just want good advice on what problems there are, from someone who knows what he's talking about and understands what I want to do. Any suggestions on the best thing to do, or even someone who would do it?

 

[Mark]

have you looked at http://www.aecb.net/ ?

 

[skier-hughes]

Ask SPAB, they gave me some help with this.

 

[Flyfisher]

Dont complain about how others see your industry - only the practitioners can improve their image. The industry needs to show that they are offering a worthwhile service.

I agree. I paid just over £2000 for a structural survey. It took one person a full day (8am to 6pm non-stop, own tea and sandwiches). It seemed very thorough, but wasn't entirely conclusive about the necessary remedial work. Perhaps I shouldn't have expected anything more, but it's a lot of money for one day plus some secretarial services for typing the report.

And it is a sort of insurance.
Risk is about two things - the chance of something happening and the consequences of it happening.

Again, I agree. What other reason is there to pay for a survey before splashing out a large sum of money on a property?

I don't mean insurance in the 'fire insurance' sense, I mean insurance in the sense of protecting yourself from a bad financial decision because of factors you are not personally qualified to judge (and if you are then you don't need the survey as 'insurance').

If the survey is fine, then you can rest assured that the property is probably worth the price you're paying. That peace of mind is worth something to most people, i.e. the survey "insurance" premium.

If the survey reveals loads of faults, then you can negotiate a fairer price to cover the repairs or walk away, but at least you go into the deal fully informed. Again that knowledge is worth paying for.

If the surveyor turns out to be incompetent and misses serious faults then their professional indemity insurance give you a measure of protection. Again, most people find this reassuring.

It's insurance alright, no other word for it.

 

[biffvernon]

I have to say I've neve paid for a 'real' survey either - only the basic sort which allowed a mortgage.

Oh yes, I had one of those when I switched mortgages a few years ago. The bloke counted the bedrooms (not too tricky as there's only three) then went outside and measured round the house (with me as unpaid assistant to hold the end of the tape). That's all. I guess he spotted that the house was worth about ten times the mortgage, but he could have done that without getting out of his car. The bank charged £300. Mad.

 

[Flyfisher]

My parents have just sold their house. The buyer's mortgage company sent a surveyor around. Apparently, he spent about 2.5 hours most of which were taken up with quite detailed floor plans showing the location of beds, sofas and the like.

When my mother asked why he was drawing things in such detail he replied that it was to ensure there was no comeback on him if any problems were subsequently discovered behind the furniture that he couldn't (wouldn't?) move and therefore could not give an opinion about.

I think Biff's right - most 'mortgage valuation' surveys could be done simply by driving past the property. After all, it was a good enough method for council tax band valuations wasn't it? Mad indeed.

 

[Penners]

I'm up on my hobby-horse again.

The price of anything is what people are prepared to pay for it. Surveyors earn more than toilet cleaners, because society values them more highly. Rock stars earn more than surveyors for the same reason.

It's a fact of life that society doesn't always (ever?) take into account the degree of actual skill, qualification, talent, training, knowledge, intelligence, responsibility.... and so on, in valuing a product or service.

It's all down to the law of supply and demand.

I can entirely understand your frustration, Stephen, but I hope that your rant at least made you feel a bit better. 'Cos the situation ain't gonna change, I'm afraid.

 

[Nemesis]

We had a surveyor (for the buyer) turn up with a saw and he was about to saw up our (polished and exposed) floorboards to check the floor voids when we stopped him...

 

[NT]

Dear Stephen

There seems to be a fair problem with how the public sees surveyors and surveys. The fact that the great majority of buyers don't choose to have any survey reinforces this point of view.

But far from being just a problem, this is a golden opportunity for you. Do you wish to identify why there are probelms, and what can be done to improve the situation? Or do you take the view its entirely the public's fault, and theres nothing you can do about it?


NT

 

[sidd]

I'm sure surveys can be useful for people who aren't themselves very clued-up about building, but my experience was that I'm very glad I didn't have one.

The house went to sealed bids after about 50 families had been round in a week, and I made an offer not subject to survey. We weren't the top offer, but got it anyway partly because that was a message that I was not going to haggle later.

I fully expect there to be one or two nasty surprises while I am doing it up. The sort of surprises that even the best surveyor wouldn't have picked up and the sort you expect from any old house.

Oh yes. And I have an insurance policy... the previous owners have moved next door!

 

[pianoredwood73]

Obviously an emotive subject (re: survey on 15thC house rants!). All I can say is that yes, after lots of calls the guy I spoke to is the only one I could find who will consider even driving past a 15thC house, and he will only do the full monty because of its age, not because there are any obvious concerns (via me or the agent) prior to his visit.

Of course anything is only worth what someone's prepared to pay. We've all been in situations where we feel like the only decent member of our industry and it's maddening. I have no doubt that for many people peace of mind is well worth £1200 - plus VAT, remember. However, as self-employed piano restorer and piano teacher, it would take us ages to earn that kind of money, never mind for less than a day's work, and yet we're well used to BMW drivers sniping that we're ripping them off for labour at £100 per day and pricey parts on an expensive piano when they clearly earn shed loads for the same day's work and think nothing of paying a plumber up to £200 a day for arguably far less skilled work. And our telly was £300 wedding present 8 yrs ago and is still fine despite being untrendy and no way would we ever have enough spare to chuck money around on any industry. It winds us up but that's the supply and demand thing in action, nothing we can do about it.

Fundamentally it's about each individual's confidence in their experience and given the limitations of anyone who's not taking walls down or drilling deep into beams, we're deciding that we'll take the risk on board without bleating if anything does come up unexpectedly. For what it's worth, we're not fussed either about suing anyone after the event, it's just about getting reliable info so we're as informed as possible.

Anyway, counter counter rant (?!) over. Just wanted to clarify a few things.

Sarah