Structural surveys – what exactly am I paying for?

A surveyor should describe the services in general terms and then go on to advise of any obvious defects, noting the age of the systems and need for upgrading to meet current standards or good practice, highlighting any safety issues etc. If a surveyor falls short of this then you have not chosen a good surveyor. However, homebuyers can honestly not expect a surveyor to provide in-depth advice in this regard, as by law, only Gas Safe registered engineers can test and work on gas / heating installations, EIC or comparable registered electricians for electricity and so on… Therefore, a surveyor cannot comment on services in-depth as clearly they will not be competent, trained or allowed to do so to these levels, or carry out testing of any kind which could reveal hidden defects. If they did offer this level of service, it would require them to carry out 3-4 years to be a heating engineer, 3-4 years to be an electrician and so on, which, unfortunately, there is not a surveyor in the land which will be able to do this for you. Services is therefore a tricky one in this respect.

I would add, buildings are complex structures with many areas concealed from view. It is not possible to open-up the structure, drill holes in walls, take samples or lift up floorboards etc., unless the owner allows it, which they usually don’t. Would you be happy to come home and find a hole in your house wall? For this reason, and the fact that homeowners will never hesitate to claim against a surveyor and sometimes for very minor things, caveats are added (these simply state what could not be seen which, in my view, is a reasonable statement to make). Further investigations are also recommended where there are legitimate concerns. For example, despite what you often hear from damp-proofing companies, it is not generally possible to confirm whether a wall is actually damp unless a sample of it is taken and tested with specialist equipment, which involves damage to the wall. This is easily done and well within the remit of a good Building Surveyor but unfortunately it cannot be done in a normal pre-purchase inspection / survey, so a surveyor may well recommend ‘further investigation’ and rightly so. This is not usually incompetence.

Movement to buildings is another complex and tricky case. A surveyor who states ‘the movement may not be historic’ is not automatically providing poor advice. Many Chartered Structural Engineers state the same thing. Why? Because again, buildings are complex and sometimes it is not possible to confirm the cause of movement without monitoring the building over a period of time. Insurance companies regularly monitor possible subsidence cracks for 6 – 18 months before confirming the cause and scope of necessary repairs! A pre-purchase surveyor has to make a judgement from one single inspection, without exposure work and usually within a few hours.

My point here, is that homeowners have a very unrealistic expectation of surveyors and what pre-purchase reports are designed to provide. They are not an inventory of every single defect nor are they a schedule of repair or specification.

So what benefit do survey reports have then? Well, a good survey report should still be able assess and advise upon the condition of most building elements and the site (such as – is the roof coming to the end of its life), most defects to the building including causation, prognosis and what repairs are necessary (including movement, asbestos, dampness and decay). It should provide general advice regarding the services, I.E. an indication of whether rewiring is clearly needed, or obvious safety issues. This should therefore provide enough information for purchasers to decide whether they wish to purchase, or what they need to do in order to decide.

I agree with SimBob. The purpose of a pre-purchase survey is to identify potential problems and get an assessment of their seriousness and the urgency or otherwise of any remedial action. When a prospective purchaser views a property, sometimes for a very brief period and usually in the company of the estate agent or owner, it is not easy to notice all the things that need to be checked or any tell-tale signs that might require examination. The surveyor goes round the property in a disciplined manner, usually on their own and uninterrupted [because it is in the seller’s interests to facilitate a thorough survey], and knows what to look for and where to find it. The surveyor’s report will therefore be either (a) a useful guide if the prospective buyer completes the purchase, or (b) a caution if the problems identified are very serious, or (c) a responsible and justifiable basis for negotiating a reduction in the price. Sometimes a property is described as requiring updating and that its condition is reflected in the price. A survey is a useful means of validating that proposition.

If people are worried whether every light switch and socket is correctly wired and that the circuits are correctly identified and protected then they do need to have a qualified electrician carry out an inspection and test which will result in an approved form of report indicating what action is necessary for legal compliance and what is recommended for safety and conformity with the latest standards, and will state the urgency in each case. This is worth it for peace of mind alone because many owners do not reliably know the state or condition of their own systems and because something works they assume it is safe.

A number of detailed concerns can be covered by asking the solicitor or conveyancing executive who is undertaking the legal work on the purchase to include specific questions to the owner in the pre-contract procedures and to request production of certificates and guarantees in respect of any work that has been carried out to the property during their period of ownership. Failure to produce such documents is a good indicator of something that might repay further investigation and the buyer can ask for certain things to be done before exchange of contracts. Where a vital certificate is absent [building regulations approval for an extension for example] the purchase can be made dependent on the owner purchasing an indemnity to cover any future claims or adverse consequences.

There is no specific requirement to have a Building survey of the block done. Regular inspections to ensure it is well maintained should be part of the management companies remit.

Re-assessment of the insurance valuation should be carried out (every 3 years or so) to ensure that the property is neither over or under insured.

A survey is not an asbestos audit but advice on where asbestos may be found should be given. Just because there is asbestos present does not mean there is a health risk and you might like to have a look at the guidance which can be found on line on the Health Protection Agency website. Often removal of the asbestos material is the worst thing you can do. Much will depend on condition and the type of asbestos material.

Ultimately, if you feel let down by the surveyor, you should make contact and voice your concerns.

Please be aware that on occasion, contractors can over state issues. I remember identifying asbestos to a ceiling in a garage and advised on it presence. The client had an asbestos contractor look at it who instantly pronounced it to be blue asbestos. There is no way to identify the type of asbestos without tests and this was pointed out. My client had another company look at the issue and the material was deemed safe but recommendations for encapsulation and monitoring were made.

I totally understand why people feel totally miss informed from their surveys. I had a survey completed 12 months ago, the surveyor missed key areas such as:
1) Stated all the windows were uPVC, they are actually all very old aluminium – cost to replace about 10k.
2) Missed obviously signs of structural movement, including big cracks in 1 ceiling beam and 1 wall is actually ‘leaning’ – cost to repair – still unknown but given initial idea of 15 to 20k.
3) Various other issues that they totally missed.

We complained and they said we were right and without saying in so many words that they were wrong, we asked for compensation, they laughed!
Unfortunately there just isn’t a real form of redress without going through a long drawn out court process, as the property ombudsman a worse than useless, as they basically back the surveyor up. Again stating they were wrong, but it doesn’t really make any difference!

Steve

It is very disappointing that you have had the experience you have. I wouldn’t try to defend the mistakes or attitude of the surveyor if they are as you say they are. If the cost of repair work exceeds £25,000, you will have to look at the Court route but there are solicitors out there who will take cases on a non win no fee basis.

What sort of survey did you have and what type/age of property did you buy?

Make sure you have asked for and followed the surveyors complaints handling procedure (CHP). Ultimately, if the attitude of the surveyor has been unprofessional you can report them to the RICS.

The Ombudsman service is there to provide unbiased opinions based on the facts before them. Ask a surveyor and they will complain that the Ombudsman is biased toward the consumer!

If the surveyor is A chartered RICS surveyor and you have a complaint send your compliant to them in writing and if you do not get a satisfactory answer then the RICS has an arbitration process. The issues you raise could be potentially serious. There is a point about detail because the cheaper surveys do not give much detail as to what to do about some defects or how to asses them or costs for repairs. They are designed to be an initial heads up with recommendations to follow up. The more detail you obtain the better you can negotiate but I agree there is no room for negligence. As a general tip be sure to use a suitably qualified surveyor for the more complex and period properties. Some surveyors are linked to agents and lender so this can be an issue of a conflict of interest for some clients which they avoid by using an independent chartered surveyor.

It don’t know the facts of this and I’m sorry you feel caught out but how did the issue of the need to replace the roof arise? If a builder has suggested this is the best remedy then this would be a matter of opinion not necessarily a fact. You do have redress if it is found the surveyor was negligent but do be careful that others that follow often have a completely different view on how something is remedied. Contact your surveyor and ask why roof replacement was not flagged up. I see many roofs with poor detailing that don’t leak. In these cases I explain in my survey what I have seen and how much it would cost to upgrade but the roof is not necessarily defective. The client can then choose how to negotiate the price by balancing the risk to market conditions.
The term “full” survey is often used by agents and solicitors but it is an old term. It implies that everything is checked and tested and often this is not the case. In my experience of offering options to test everything that very few clients pay for that. When they do it is amazing how strong a negotiating position they have and the survey pays for itself.

Often vendors ask to see the report but the issue is that the information is not public. It is specifically for the client and is confidential. It is the buyers responsibility to check all issues and to ensure they are happy with the price offered. In my experience there is no knowing what a buyer may perceive as a problem. One mans “defect” is another man’s “character.” What I have experienced is vendors trying to sell an adulterated survey which is very deceitful. Do not Buy the last survey as you are not party to it and you will have no redress. Check your surveyor is independent for absolute certainty and make sure you know that there is a difference between a Building Surveyor and a Valuation surveyor. Most House surveys are not undertaken by Building Surveyors.

My son bought an ex-council house and, when renovating, found asbestos where a heating boiler had once been installed. This possibility had not been mentioned in his own survey and, being cautious, he contacted his insurance company. They paid for all costs of having the asbestos removed and disposed of, and replacing all items where asbestos fibres may have been caught – carpets, curtains, clothes,even household appliances like a toaster. Was it overkill? Maybe, but it put his mind at rest.
If, before purchase, the survey detects asbestos then presumably you would have to pay the (potentially high) cost of removal and disposal if you disturbed it through renovations.

Asbestos has to be managed carefully and with some basic precautions it can be left in place safely enough so no expensive removal need be employed. Much of the asbestos left now is hidden. However renovations do cause a lot of disturbance which is a risk in older buildings. If you intend to undertake such work a “Residential Building survey” might be more valuable as you can ask the surveyor to comment on your proposals and the risks associated. This will help you budget your contingencies. It is quite likely that in a house built before the 1970s that asbestos can be present so “project” houses need more investigation and a two way discussion with your surveyor is needed. I would recommend people looking at older properties brief an independent chartered Building surveyor rather than a standard template home buyers survey.

Discovering asbestos in your project will stop it instantly for at least two weeks for notices to be given so it is very expensive if you have to stop contractors. I hope his project is well under way now. Interesting to hear that his insurance company paid up. Not all of them do that.

Hi Malcolm,
We just bought a house and found out that there is Asbestos Insulation Board in the cupboard. It is in rather bad condition (i.e. broken with pieces on the floor!) so it will need to be removed. It will cost thousands as far as I know and we don’t have budget for it.
May I ask you how your son claimed the insurance company for it? Will it be covered by basic home insurance or it will need to be premium?
Thanks a lot!

My son took a sample when he discovered his asbestos to a local company that dealt with that sort of problem. They confirmed it was hazardous and he then claimed on his insurance as he had accidental damage cover. His asbestos only came to light when he was doing an alteration.

In your case it maybe should have been discovered by your surveyor, depending on the type of survey requested. They may be liable (they would be insured). You could also consult the solicitor that did the conveyancing for advice. Then try your insurance company. But I would think if the sellers knew there was asbestos present and didn’t disclose it they may have liability; I don’t know whether claimed ignorance on their part would be a defence.

Maybe Which? (Legal?) could help or comment.

Asbestos is only a danger if disturbed, for example if you wanted remove an Artex-coated ceiling or carry out structural changes to the house. My understanding is that later textured ceiling coatings are unlikely to contain asbestos, so you might have nothing to worry about.

Post 1999 I have seen quoted as the end of the asbestos products. I have a friend who is an asbestos surveyor and it has been interesting to hear his tales.

Asbestos as a scare tactic is often due to mis-identification of the particular type.

AFAIR Reading University around 20 years ago set up a house and had many surveyors come to do a brief survey for the benefit of the mortgage company – though paid for by the applicant. They were fairly dire almost universally.

Perhaps it is time for another sting!.

Full structural surveys are an interesting case as without getting involved with removing parts there is a limit as to how much can be seen. I do have a copy of the RICS manual so feel reasonably competent but anyone with some intelligence should be able to notice most things.

Blocks of flats …aah … they can be a whole different problem.

Incidentally in France they do not instruct surveyors! Perhaps a tribute to the quality of the original workmen. The vendor though is required to provide reports on the important matters such as drainage , gas , electric , asbestos , and woodworm.

Hi! Having the manual is a nifty trick – where can i buy it? can you please share the name of the book?

Belatedly I come back to this subject. The book I bought second-hand at a second-hand bookshop and it is for members of RICS, and possibly libraries.. Annoyingly I cannot find it currently.

There is a huge amount of advice available on the Web and in books and I believe given the money you can spend buying and doing up a property that people really ought to acquaint themselves with the subject.

It is not scary and most “signs of this or that” will probably be minor. Basically though do not rely totally on surveyors and give them a hard time on getting explanations that are satisfactory. The best instrument for you is the Mark 1 eyeball you possess and you really really need to use it on a second visit if you think you might offer.

Also check neighbouring properties to see if there are any curious points. Purchasing this property I noticed that drainage was sluggish by seeing overflow at the external drain for a sink.
Re-lining the main drain and the cost of re-wiring given none since construction 50 years ago saved £8500. I did fail to pick-up the recent flat-roof was shoddily done : (.

As for the surveyor – just a mortgage valuation agreeing the already low offer made by us. I am not a great fan.

An MoT will check the long list of safety features that could affect your car. Many people (well, some) would have no idea of the condition of their car, and its threat to other road users, if they were not forced to have an annual check – very good value for money. Just have to overlook the minority of rogue garages (try Which? Local).

Equally with surveyors; unless you know what to look for you cannot assess the problems that might lurk in a potential purchase – and at risk is a lot of your money. Surveyors should be insured if they miss something that you have paid for them to look at, and that gives you protection. If defects are found you can either negotiate the price or decide to reject the purchase. Most of us have very little experience of surveys so to draw a general conclusion is impossible. But I have respect for the professions – bad apples of course but I expect most will benefit from their services. Which Local lists those with personal recommendations that Which? have accepted.

Again have a look at what most people think of Surveyors – most do not benefit. An MOT on a car checks it safety, yes. But does not check it functionality. And yes an MOT is a good idea but having a Surveyor isn’t. In the case of a house – a Surveyor it would seem, in most cases, do neither the job of ensuring your safety or make sure of the buildings functionality and take money for nothing. Therefore, they are not value for money. I would also suspect if a garage were found to be giving out dodgy MOTs their ability to supply the certificates would be taken away. And I suspect issuing of such an MOT is a criminal offence.

Surveyors should have a CHP, yes. However, to follow this and get redress costs money. Surveyors appear to know that house buyers have just made the most expensive purchase of their life and hence have little money left over for the extra outlay of taking on the Surveyor and RICS. And due to their ineptitude and/or laziness the house buyer has even less money because they have brought something that requires so much work to rectify they have even less money to deal with the Surveyor and RICS. Also from what I have read sellers can also be hit by the inabilities of Surveyors, as people get margins slashed on their house prices only to find that the initial Surveyor report is wrong. My belief is that most people want to deal honestly with issues. Surveyors are diminishing that interaction between people.

Surveyors should either get on board with an overhaul of their ‘profession’ – or go do a job that actually benefits society. A chartered profession should not require you to have to look up whether they can do the basics of their job title. A Surveyor should know what to look for but in my experience, my work colleagues experience and apparently most of the people who have dealt with a Surveyor (most common experience from posts) – Surveyors don’t know what to look for. This type of experience should not be that common. Hence – get rid of the Royal Charter and because it is so hit and miss (more likely to be miss) you might as well use a registered specialist company (and yes get those from recommendations on Which? and you will save money too!). Or we should have a Danish system where the Surveyor’s work is insured from the start – hence bad Surveyors cannot continue to practice because they cannot get insurance! Doubt any (in this country) would be left though.

What a load of rubbish.

I will add, does anyone who is a satisfied customer ever respond internet forums? Statistically no. The only people who moan are those with a bad experience so how you can draw conclusions of how many people use or are satisfied with their survey based upon reviewing websites? It is not even possible to establish the true circumstances of a problem from what someone states on an internet forum so even those who are dissatisfied may be wrong or exaggerating the issue.

Honestly, do not listen to people like this. Find a good quality Chartered Building Surveyor (they are different to valuation surveyors, damp surveyors etc.) who has a good reputation. Ask to see their reports. You want one which does not make mountains out of molehills but gives you the facts. If you are purchasing a traditional building, IE anything pre-World War II and particularly those with solid walls or historic timber frames, you need a surveyor who has experience of historic buildings as they function differently.

SimBob quote: “What a load of rubbish”.

That kind of response is really indicative.

Everything else really goes along with it.

Hold your fingers in your ears and whistle and tell everyone else to do the same.

It doesn’t engage with the main points or concerns – just wants business as normal – i.e. People getting ripped off.

At least a professional has confirmed your findings and, together with specialist reports may help you decide whether you buy or not or enable you to bargain with the seller. The latter should aim to more than cover the report costs and remedial work necessary.

Whilst you spotted damp and cracks the surveyor might well have found other problems you would not have spotted, or otherwise given reassurance.

I am not sure you would have been in a happier position if your surveyor had also discovered more serious defects – thus justifying the scope of the survey – leading you to withdraw from the purchase and be out-of-pocket for the survey. As Malcolm says, at least you now have a professional condition survey that (a) confirms that the property is in no worse a state than you thought, (b) can be used to negotiate on price for the purchase [to the extent that the condition is not already priced in], and, importantly, (c) can be used to ensure that the specialist repair and treatment contractors that you employ will do what needs doing, will leave nothing undone, and won’t invent work that isn’t necessary, You might find that a friendly word with your surveyor might elicit some useful advice or suggestions for no additional fee.

You would have been entitled to feel cheated if the surveyor had not produced a comprehensive report on the full extent of any defects in the house you wish to buy but since the firm has done what they were paid to do I can’t see how you have been “totally cheated”. As US Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said : “Reports that say that something hasn’t happened are always interesting to me, because as we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns – the ones we don’t know we don’t know.” A good surveyor’s report should cover all bases.

Yes Ann,

I feel you are not really being listened to here. You have paid £750 for a report that in all likelihood has taken about 3-4 hours to complete. Work out the hourly rate on that?

This is then compounded by someone saying … ‘oh I don’t really know if that is what I am looking at, you had better go and get a professional to tell you actually what it is’ – lol

A friend of ours bought a house at the end of last year. She asked me to have a look at it. I am not competent to examine and report on structural and fundamental problems so I said my observations would have to be superficial and that although I could not advise her not to have a professional survey I could certainly recommend one if I thought it would be advisable to do so. We were not certain of the date of the house, either just prior to the Second World War or just afterwards. Outwardly it looked in good condition and appeared to have been reasonably well-maintained, but inside there had been many minor alterations and installations that suggested a lot of odd jobs had been done over the years and the electric circuits had certainly been ‘stretched’ several times with spurs and surface cabling. I thought she should have a survey which she did. The surveyor noted the obvious things and numerous unsatisfactory aspects which might be expected in such a house but also reported that there were signs of woodworm in the flooring and under the staircase. This would not otherwise have been known. Although it means she will now be having extensive timber treatment carried out, by knowing about it at the outset at least it can be dealt with before she embarks on complete bathroom and kitchen refits and other internal alterations. I don’t know how much she paid for the survey but it was probably less than a quarter of one per cent of the price she paid for the house. The remedial work will also cost a small fraction of the purchase price and she will get the electrical work done while the floors are up to minimise the expense and disruption. As well as confirming that other invisible conditions [like chimneys, drains, and rainwater disposal] were satisfactory, the surveyor’s report contained plenty of advice on what should be done and how to go about it.

Considering the high cost of houses and of possible repairs, and the lack of ability of most purchasers to detect actual and potential problems, it seems surprising that they should quibble at the cost of a full survey. Any expensive problems uncovered can often be partially negotiated off the purchase price, thus saving money (as in the example above perhaps). As John points out, a proper survey will be a minute proportion of the value of what you are buying. Perhaps the trouble is we are so focused on buying to the limit of our finances that we neglect to factor in other items.

As far as I am aware professional surveyors will be insured and if they are clearly negligent you should be able to recoup costs.