Are Home Reports in Scotland working for you?

I think it’s worth investigating exactly who is providing Home Reports in Scotland. I believe there is one large company that operates under the guise of many different names, dominating the scene.

Last year I sold my house in Glasgow. I had a home report done by surveyors recommended by the estate agent I was using, Slater Hogg. It cost over £700 and contained misinformation about by house, saying that it has been divided into 3 flats, which it never had been. This resulted in me having to get a letter of comfort from the City Council . The surveyors absolve themselves of responsibility for anything in their survey by demanding a letter of comfort. When the council surveyor came out they said there had been no need for a letter of comfort and that a qualified surveyor would be expected to know this. The purchaser had their own survey done anyway so obviously didn’t trust the home report. I think the home report is institutionalised easy money for surveyors who are not prepared to accept responsibility for anything for fear of being sued. The surveyor who came to my house said as much. I made complaints to all the bodies suggested to me, including writing to Which but there does not seem to be any independent regulatory body that was prepared to pass an opinion on my complaint. The ombudsman passed me to the chartered surveyor Institute who passed me back to the ombudsman. It’s a very bad system that adds unnecessary cost to the house selling process and offers no protection to the buyer.

I have been looking at the documents required under Scottish law. Provided they are filled in competently and honestly, the Single Survey form [completed by a surveyor] and the Property Questionnaire [done by the seller] seem to me to be superior in scope, detail and usefulness to a buyer at the preliminary stage than the equivalent documents supplied in England & Wales. The Property Questionnaire asks some very pertinent questions and I would strongly advocate its universal introduction; it doesn’t even have to be mandatory – buyers could decide whether they wanted to ask any or all of the questions and it would be difficult for the seller to resist. I share Anna Taylor’s concerns over the value of the Single Survey element of the Scottish Home Report since so much depends on the conscientiousness and diligence of the surveyor which, possibly, are in some sort of ratio to the amount paid. What Rosebud said about a possible monopoly in the production of Home Reports is also worrying and could occur across the UK if the other countries adopted the Scottish system without some regulation.

Four years ago we purchased an old stone built cottage which had been extended into the roof and generally refurbished just over 10 years previously. Being from an architectural background, I should have been more savez. But this was my first experience of the Home Report. Essentially it was a valuation report based on a visual inspection by a surveyor. It did not provide any real depth to the
survey. There was no requirement to validate any certification over work carried out. That, at least, was dealt with through the solicitors. The fixed wiring test which I instructed picked up on some matters which, while not critical, could have been influential in the decision to buy or not. Also, I later learned that much of the improvement work carried out had been courtesy of a previous occupant who perhaps lacked the skill for some of the work. An older property most definitely requires greater scrutiny than the HR provides. A guide it is but no more than that.

I have a house in Scotland built in 2000 that I would dearly like to sell. But the market was very difficult when I first put it on the market 3 years ago, and after 6 months I decided to rent it instead. The Home Report needed to put the property on the market had cost £770, and is only valid for 6 months. I’ve had two tenants leave so far, and under pre-HR circumstances I could have taken the opportunity to try and sell the house at each tenant change. But the market is still difficult, so it is likely that I could be wasting another £770 every time I try to sell. I can’t put it back on the market until I am confident the market has fully recovered and that it will sell.

And the Home Report survey is just a record of the blindingly obvious. Anything difficult is left uncovered. Even the loft space, which is accessed by a proper pull down loft ladder, has floorboarding over the main areas and has lighting installed, was not inspected. So far as I could understand the reason was that the surveyor was not allowed to enter any loft, a somewhat fundamental restriction on someone whose job it is to inspect houses.

I bought and sold in Edinburgh last year. As a buyer I found home reports really useful in filtering out properties that I couldn’t afford to touch with a barge pole, but which without them I might have considered. The home report on the property I bought flagged up several repairs that needed doing, but the sellers provided evidence that they had been fixed before the deal was finalised. As a seller, I used a surveyor recommended by my solicitor, and I got to approve the text before it was finalised, so I could correct any errors. It cost about £500 which I felt was reasonable.

Having recently sole and bought and used home reports I do not think they are worth the paper they are written on.

You get the same increase in the green band by using the corect light bulbs as paying out for extra insulation.

No proper check is done on roofs etc – just a quick look with binoculars.

Many of the people doing the reports are linked to estate agents, and value accordingly then the mortgage companies insist on another survey as they don’t believe them.

Terrible problems are glossed over.

All the reports say, for example on flooring, is – carpets covered floor so would suggest further checks should be made if the condition is suspect.

One house we viewed we knew the window cleaners refused to clean some of the windows as they were so rotten they were worried the glass would fall out – nothing appeared on the home report to reflect this.

they should also only become compulsory when you have a potential buyer. It costs a fortune just to get your house to market. At one time you could put a few adverts in to ‘test the market’ home report costs have made this impossible.

I bought a house in Perthshire last year and for me the whole process was fairly shambolic from estate agents who couldn’t be bothered to raise a finger for the buyers to a conveyancing system which is so outdated and expensive it was way beyond a joke.

I think the home report sysyem is basically a good one as it can give a potential buyer a lot of information up front and the documents supplied are very useful. There are downsides- it is very expensive for the seller and it has to be renewed quite regularly- not good in a slow market. But the biggest downside is the surveyors report. This is very expensive, appears to be done almost always by the same company and is so variable and lacking in useful information as to be almost useless.

The one for my new house failed to mention the work done to prevent subsidence though it was clear to some builders I had round.The inspection of roofs,walls and floors is non-existent- no carpets or insulation are taken up. No tests are done for dampness or to the water,drainage,gas or electrical systems- it appears to be a visual inspection only- hardly a survey which is supposed to avoid the need of a full structural survey by each potential buyer. This report needs to be beefed up to provide a full surveyors report for the buyer without incurring excessive costs for the seller- in other words, more competition.

Indeed, the whole housing market is ripe for a shakeup. Estate agents are not helping their clients by refusing to provide even basic information for buyers usually through laziness or lack of knowledge. The conveyancing system should be simplified so that information on every house is collated into one document stored by the local council and produced in simple English. This would mean that solicitors searches would become a thing of the past and their fees reduced from the ludicrous £1800 I had to pay for information which should only have to take an hour or two to find. It would also mean for example that I would not have to find out I would be living on a private road long after I had made an offer which was my experience.

Reading comments added since my previous submission, I feel that the Home Report has distracted us from how we would have approached things in the past.
Then there were different levels of survey starting with the basic valuation. For an older property where there might be issues we would have sought an in- depth survey. It would be more professional. The HR may have its place but we have to take the lead – and should be advised by solicitors so – to arrange such. The trouble is that we have no choice but to spend that money on the HR and then incur further costs. I wonder how costs then compare with now.

Home reports aren’t worth much more than the paper they are written on. I recently bought a flat and for example there was no mention in the home report of gas leaks, although it was later found that there were about half a dozen. (An eejit working for the seller’s solicitor even shouted in an email to my solicitor, “THERE ARE NO GAS LEAKS” after my husband and I insisted several times that a strong smell of gas that hit us every time we entered the property. Would you credit it???)

While house hunting home reports gave us a rough idea of the general state of the properties, lots of work to do, a wee bit of work to do, a coat of paint will do. We steered clear of the “lots of work to do” because they weren’t for us. The flat we eventually bought was described roughly correctly, but there is huge room for improvement because we had a few surprises. In Scotland you have five working days to discover those surprises and request for anything to get fixed by the seller, but after the five days you’re on your own. Unless you buy properties frequently, which most of us don’t, you’re going to get caught. We did get caught, nothing major fortunately.

Not the most useful things, in conclusion.

Bought a property in Scotland last year, was worried about the system in Scotland, but everyone said it is better and quicker!! The property had NO home report, agents said as the property was “uninhabitable” non was needed, so had to get my own done, just an excuse not to supply a report in my view, but nothing could be done about it!! even trading standards could not help!!

Final offers system was a fiasco, agreed completion date of March ended up being July, and the solicitors who quoted me £750, were useless, when they said half way through they may have to charge more and I sacked them they TOOK £7000.00 fees from my property purchase funds held in “protected client bank account” reported to SLCC in April 2013 still awaiting outcome nearly a year later!!

They are the worst thing ever to happen to Scotlands property market. People believe that the Surveyors valuation is the maximum amout you can pay so never offer any more, it’s only one persons opinion. The effect of this is that properties are not finding their true market price. Recently I sold my flat in Kirkcaldy, it had a great location, high spec features and bespoke fittings. I knew the value of the property and that it was worth more than the Survey stated and sold it for more just to prove the point to the Estate Agents who we’re constantly arguing with me about the price. They said I should be realistic and take what ever I was offered. The flat had sold within one week for a few thousand over the valuation report. I could have sold it for more but we we’re in a hurry to sell. A few years later the tables we’re turned. I became the buyer of a house in Kirkcaldy, a great house in one if the most prestigious areas of town. The house was in my opinion extremely undervalued and we bid the full asking price or the Home Buyers Valuation and got it. I would have been willing to pay 10 to 20 percent more for the property had there been a closing date situation, which was often the case a few years back. The property had many interested buyers and we bought it without even viewing it because it was so much of a bargain. All ended well for us thankfully but the Home Buyer Survey needs to be abolished or the Estate Agents need to let the potential buyers know that it is only one persons opinion from someone who often even lives in a different town/city. Pay what you want, sell for the amount you want, this is called a free market and property will find its own value depending in affordability/ supply and demand, ie normal market pressures.

The Single Survey was supposed to eliminate the outrageously expensive and harrassing process of having to pay for multiple surveys. It has been a total failure in this aim. My son bought a house last year,and relied…..very unwisely as it turned out on what he thought was a proper survey that would at the very least enable him to avoid the worst pitfalls in the housebuying process.The survey was provided by a firm called Shepherds. They stand by their survey…..so I shall simply outline what happened after the purchase was completed…..and anyone can then judge for themselves how helpful that survey was to him. A month after he and his young family moved in,they noticed mould and dampness in an upstairs bedroom. They thought it might be due to house not having been well heated. Four months later,they saw water running down an internal wall….went up to the loft to investigate,and found a pool of water covering the entire floor. They called in the surveyor who had done the Report. His response was that they couldnt expect him to know that the roof was in such a bad state,since IT WAS NOT RAINING WHEN HE DID THE SURVEY. A complaint to the Scottish Government about the abysmally low level of expertise employed for this Home Report…was met with advice to seek redress through the system they had set up with the Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors…whereby that body would investigate one of its members itself….and if they concluded that their surveyor member was a diligent chap…and we persisted in objecting to a blatantly sloppy piece of surveying….then we couldtake it to the Ombudsman.We noted that the Ombudsman Service,from all accounts was generally useless in these situations….because there are so many get out clauses and caveats in the Home Report that it is not worth the paper it is written on. My son is a hardworking young man without the means to pay for the reroofing job which must now be done….after a temporary repair costing seven hundred pounds.The bill will be at least five thousand pounds.Then,a month ago, the whole plumbing system in the house gave up…..and the bill for this repair will be another few thousand. MY ADVICE TO ANYONE CONSIDERING BUYING A HOUSE IN SCOTLAND IS THIS….UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES PLACE ANY FAITH AT ALL IN THE SCOTTISH GOVERNMENTS SINGLE SURVEY. The legislation underpinning is is so biased in favour of the massively profitable surveying business in Scotland that,in reality,YOU HAVE NO REDRESS AT ALL WHEN YOU FALL VICTIM TO A SLOPPY SINGLE SURVEY REPORT. Call in a civil engineer and pay twice….even three times the fee you would have paid for that useless piece of paper……and get yourself some REAL information on the state of the property you intend to buy.It may very well work out THOUSANDS OF POUNDS CHEAPER than relying on the brainchild of an unholy alliance between the Scottish Government and RICS.Also,I have to say that I found the Scottish Government just as good at spinning,dodging the real issue,and lying in their teeth as any other . They should be ashamed of this useless and misleading piece of legislation….and no doubt many who have had similar experiences will know who they favour…..NOT the young,inexperienced person buying a house ….but the usual sharks in the housing market. Single Survey be damned.NOTHING CHANGED WITH THAT LEGISLATION…..EXCEPT OUR OPINION OF THE SCOTTISH GOVERNMENT

I am currently trying to purchase a house in East Lothian
And it seems that the home report company’s are pricing property’s high to get the business.
Prices are back up to and higher than in 2006.

All the Home report dose is keep the surveyors in a job.

The home reports are nothing more than an easy way of raising tax by the Scottish ‘Government’.
From a sellers point of view would you be happy if you had to take a car to a garage before you sold it and have them write an extortionately overpriced report saying not very much and then tell you the price one individual thinks its worth which is more or less what you have to market it at ?
From a buyers point of view would you really trust it, a survey which is the price of a full one but is in effect only a casual and quick glance over.
The home is a families greatest asset and the market should decide what it sells for not some pampered and privileged surveyor who only cares about his cut of the hefty fee charged.
Its no wonder that there is a feeling of hatred building up for the politicians who dont listen to the people.

I had a home report made up 1st September 2014, property on market end of Sept. Offer made on property 10th April 2015 and accepted. 3 weeks ago I had a call from solicitor buyers bank want a type 1 survey done on my property the Home Report is only seven months old at this time, I presumed that the Home Report was valid for up to two years? On the back of my Home Report in very small writing they advise to have it updated every 12 weeks. Surveyor came and did a type 1 survey, we have still not had a copy (and we are supposed to be paying for this). Solicitor telephoned to advise that they think the survey was below our Home Report no indication was given as to how much below price we had. Our adverts now say under offer. So how do I stand about this, are the buyers still to buy, will other potential buyers be put off looking as its under offer, I could be losing potential buyers. Where do I stand please help and answer my questions Thank you for reading.
Pat

We are due to move into our dream home in Dundee next week but the last two months have been a total nightmare, due to the surveyor who produced the initial home report. We put in an offer based on the value in the original home report, offer was accepted and we were delighted. Then the surveyor sent a transcript of that report to our mortgage company and CHANGED the value to £20,000 less than his original value, and introducing a £20,000 retention due to an old boundary wall that is bowing………..he said he would be willing to change the value back to the original if we got a structural engineer in to look at the wall. £350 later, we had the engineer in who said it just needed re-pointing. The surveyor then changed back to the original value but our mortgage company , by this time were jittery and told us on Monday that they weren’t prepared to lend us the full amount (as they had already agreed in principal!). In addition, there are 2 parking spaces that belong to the house, or it was stated in the original home report that they were, we have just found out today, a week before, that in fact they belong to the local council. Now we have one week till moving in and no time to get the the house re-surveyed so we can make another offer (as it is worth less without private parking)………..their solicitor appears to have withheld this information until the last minute so we are now backed into a corner. I feel we have been royally shafted by the surveyor, he has caused so many problems and unnecessary stress. I want to find out it if is legal for a surveyor to change the value in a home report after it has been produced. I called RICS and they said they couldn’t help me, I can’t seem to find anyone who will tell me where we stand legally. We are relocating from Aberdeen to Dundee so have had to set up new nursery for my little one amongst other things…………..I am just livid at how these people have so much power and seem to protect each other. It is useful reading other people’s stories and to see that mostly things turned out ok once in their new homes, it’s hard to keep positive and not worry about what problems might be lurking in the new house, this whole process seems to have been doomed and has clouded what should be such an exciting time for a young family. Rant over, I feel a wee bit better………

I have been helping out a friends daughter and partner who have bought privately, an ex council house in Aberdeen. In over 40 years in the electrical industry I have never witnessed anything as bad as the electrics in their new home. Nowhere in the home reports does it ask about DIY that had been done – despite a total of 39 switch sockets being visible through the house. This should have set off alarm bells with any competent experienced property Surveyor and saved them a probably £3-4K for a full rewire of the house.

We bought a house 3 years ago. We relied only on the home report. Nearly all of the problems that were identified after we moved in were missed by the surveyor (serious water penetration on all 3 chimneys, requiring one to be taken down and re-built; plus lots of serious ‘hidden’ water penetration (i.e. internal ceilings falling down after living there for a few months) and damage to internal walls that were temporarily covered with foil paper to achieve a sale.). This has cost us £20k to date. And we expect that replacing damaged internal walls to amount to another £10k this year.
In sum, we found the home report to be fully bogus. In fact, when the same surveyor had to come back to our house 2 years later because we were moving our mortgage (to re-value) he apologised and explained that he can’t see these things when there is furniture in a house. Hopeless.

My son and partner bought a property in Scotland recently. The decision to buy was based partly on a top graded, (1) Home Report. ( No major work required). Within weeks, water was found leaking into the attic and advice sought from independent roofing specialists who all graded the property as a ‘3’. ( Major work required immediately). An entire new roof was required.
The seller had stated on the Home Report that no major work had been done, turns out he had recently bodged the job himself.( Neighbour willing to act as witness). The original report, a ‘1’ time expired and was renewed six months later. It was identical and re- dated.
The surveyor had inspected the roof with binoculars. Photos of the roof taken by my son when the problem surfaced clearly show shoddy work yet this was from the same location the surveyor used his binoculars and yet failed to spot the problems.
To add insult to injury, the surveyors now admit the workmanship is lacking but suggest this job could have been carried out AFTER their original survey. They accept no responsibility.
This is in the hands of a solicitor but the HR appears to be not worth the paper it is written on.

As someone who has burned by a dishonest seller not disclosing issues in their PIF major issues including damp mould wet rot and leaking roof ( three in fact) I think the reintroduction of these should be compulsory in UK. Estate agents do not care about buyers and wull do the whole smoke and mirrors routine no better than bankers or traffic wardens

Bit of a long and ranty one.
I’m a first time buyer and looked at a house for the first time recently. I’ve a progressive illness so am not in a position to borrow more. Like everyone I need enough information to know I can afford to repair my house and that I can resell in future. If I had to move for more accessible housing and can’t resell, then I can’t live in my home, or buy another, or move into social housing. I was glad about HRs because if I had to pay for lots of surveys then I can’t afford to buy an accessible house. After viewing one house I don’t see HRs in this way.

The Home report flagged up minor roof repairs and damp in the walls beneath grading both a 2. That didn’t scare me off from having a look but knew it needs checked at 2nd view by my builder friend.
Surveyor writes twice in the report that the roof is otherwise fine, but then tucked away in the inspection procedures and “general remarks” is that he didn’t enter the attic and inspect the roof timbers. This despite knowing there is significant long term damp from the leaking roof. It seems bizarre that a house with a visible roof problem and internal damp beneath can be surveyed or even valued without inspection of roof timbers. How is he allowed to state that the roof is basically sound and call that a survey. There’s no redress if you miss the separate caveat. Agent told me this is normal practice to not inspect roof timbers but I’ve seen lots of HRs flag up rotten roof timbers. Agent said if I couldn’t take his personal assurances for there being no problem, I can call the surveyor. Why when we know he didn’t inspect them?

In the Japanese Knotweed section the surveyor says he didn’t look for it and assumes no problem. It takes 5 seconds to walk up to the hedge and see it growing in the next door vacant plot. It was regrowing after being removed earlier in summer, so if I’d viewed then I’d have missed it. Because he stated he chose not to inspect for it, a buyer who either didn’t think to look, wasn’t sure what it looks like, or didn’t view at the right time to see it would have no redress and insurance companies would not pay for any damage. There could have been constant eradication fees and it would keep coming back in from next door. Even when “eradicated” it comes back for years. It’s a C listed building with, I’d guess, poorish foundations and if you don’t protect it from Knotweed the council will do it and make you pay. I’d be unable to sell because buyers wouldn’t get a mortgage for a property with knotweed or history of it. If I was lucky and find a buyer with no mortgage, the price would be so low I couldn’t buy another house. I don’t know if the surveyor saw it, or genuinely chose to not look so as to not take on any liability. Either is not OK. So it sounds like if there’s knotweed in your area, you need a surveyor that you are paying.

HR said small improvements needed to leccy and graded it 2. It has bare wires and needs rewiring.

HR said no problem with flooring but hadn’t lifted the floor coverings. The bare cement floor had a hole 2 foot wide and 6 inches deep that’s been patched and repatched.

Also no certificates for anything and no tests done on chimneys, drains etc.

Surveyor valued the property without seeing documentation on planning permission for recent extension to a listed building, and there is no record of it on the council site. That’s a meaningless valuation. To tear down and rebuild in the original appearance could cost most of the asking price and also reduce size and value of the property. Your own solicitor would check this but only after an offer has been conditionally accepted, and so you have to pay your solicitor hundreds to find out if the property has a negative value. A HR and valuation should not be allowed without this basic info.

I stayed more or less polite but the agent thought I buttoned up the back and faked offence at me suggesting his verbal assurances on the roof timbers and the high quality of the survey were not enough to base an offer on.

If we add in knotweed nightmares, putting right the visible and likely problems flagged up in the survey, plus putting right the definite and potential problems the survey didn’t mention or was misleading or inadequate on, could cost a lot more than the asking price of the property and even if all this work was done resale could be difficult or impossible and then only at far lower than the current valuation. I know it would be my solicitors job to tell me I needed to get an independent survey done on this house but even if they didn’t, given how these professions are regulated, I would still have no chance of redress on some of these issues, and only a chance of a redress on some issues if I had the money to sue. Most people don’t. I’d be relieved if someone could tell me I’ve got all that wrong. I’m new to this so it’s likely I’ll have misunderstood some of the procedures.

If this level of competency and honesty is normal, there needs to be changes to HRs and then the Scottish government needs to create an independent auditing system that has the right to give out temporary bans, re education, or disbar surveyors from doing HRs. (professions can’t self regulate and the ombudsman is unfit for purpose.) This wouldn’t solve all bias problems and would increase cost, but it would be a start.

On this one experience I’d say HRs, as they’re done now, can’t be treated as an adequate initial valuation let alone a survey. I’ve found the comments above really useful. Thanks to all. When I find the one I really want, I’ll get my own survey done.

I think the system is right it should be a mandatory thing for sellers to get a proper survey done before selling but the home report is not a proper survey.
I have just bought a house, home report states that it couldn’t check under the floors as fitted carpets did not allow access. The hatch in my new house is not covered by anything. I noticed this also in the house I sold same wording but again not true hatch was easily accessible.

I now could have a very large bill for wet rot damage, I realise that I should have paid for a timber survey but nothing in the home report to suggest I needed to, house seemed in good condition. My fault, but my specialist now is saying even if the home report surveyor had looked or smelled under the hatch he would have noticed it. Not sure if I have any come back, the questionnaire also asked if any work had been done and it was not disclosed even though work is evident. Again not sure how much of a come back I have with it.

The report doesn’t in its present form protect home buyers.

Home Report -online states in question 1- should I get another survey done – quote- there may be occasions when you ,or your solicitor think another survey might have a different view —in this case it might make sense to instruct a survey on your own behalf ,either before you submit an offer or after an offer has been accepted .your solicitor must ensure that that is an explicit part of your offer . It seems to me that although Home Reports are compulsory in Scotland they should be looked on as basic or interim reports also you dont have to pay the seller for the report if you buy the house .

If I had reached the stage of buying something that I did not totally understand the construction and condition of – let’s say a £250 000 house – then I would think it very prudent to commission someone properly qualified (and insured) to do a full survey for me even if it cost £1-2000 – less than 1% of my investment. I would be protecting myself. I certainly would not rely on a report produced by the seller. Why be stingy with such an important purchase? Chances are if defects become apparent that you can deal with you are likely to get a reduction in price to offset your survey. If defect free, you can sleep at night.

Absolutely waste of money the surveyors carrying out these reports are making a fortune . In England you can make a profit if you have updated a property by putting in new kitchen and bathroom but not here it is only valued more if you have extended it. This stops sellers getting their money back on updated property’s very annoying .

I had a home buyers survey undertaken and the report indicated several items marked 2, which is that there is no immediate problem but action should be taken to prevent deterioration. I challenged these saying that his judgement was either his own personal preference (re decoration) or merely outlined a sensible maintenance routine. He amended five items from 2 to 1 making me think that he couldn’t defend his professional judgement. My conclusion is that they are a waste of time and money

A corrupt system that has fed the line of PWPs for many years a 2 year old could come up with a better system. (if they were impartial) homwereprots are useless. most banks santander will send out their own evaluation……surveyors do nothing in and out with a glance….good read on the judge sunday mail 12/11/2016 sums it up.