I’ve got a 200 year old house that I bought 8 years ago. It was re-roofed 4 years before that.

I’ve just found out that whoever put the roof on didn’t know what he was doing and I’m looking at a bill of £4.5k to put it right.

When we bought the house we had a full structural survey. I would have thought that “Is the roof on properly? Y/N”[/i] would have been one of the questions on the surveyor’s tick list.

Not happy.

200 year old house = money pit.

Seriously though, who told you that the roof needs fixing? A roofer perhaps? After being fleeced and seeing others fleeced by tradesmen and other companies offering all sorts of ‘fixes’ I have very little faith in anyone who tells me something is wrong. Get a 2nd, 3rd, 4th opinion. Or wait til it falls down then fix it.

Our survey told us that the driveway down the side of the house might not be wide enough for a car. The surveyor didn’t actually bother to measure though.

It also said there was Japanese knotweed in the garden, but that was 9 years ago and I’ve still not found it.

Oh, it also didn’t mention that the kitchen extension curves and changes width and height. That might be a hint that it’s shit?

Building Surveyors rank the same as used car salesmen and traffic wardens. Money,money,money. We paid for a full survey 2 years ago when we moved. Nothing was picked up , however the house (old grade 2 listed cottage) suffers from damp due to poor ventilation. We didn’t realise this and had damp all over the upstairs walls. Got a damp expert in who gave us the diagnosis and asked why it wasn’t picked up on the survey. He replied that most Surveyors are fairly clueless. 😐

On the other hand –

Paid £400 for a home buyers survey. Picked up a few issues including damp, which allowed us to negotiate more than the cost of the survey off the house after the price had already been agreed.

We investigated the damp when we bought the house and it turned out to be a bridged cavity between the dining room and conservatory extension. Probably wouldn’t of looked there otherwise and would of been a bigger problem further down the line.

I’ve got a 200 year old house that I bought 8 years ago. It was re-roofed 4 years before that

We’ve got a 200 year old house.

Pretty sure the roof hasn’t been re-roofed, like, ever. It’s all wibbly wobbly where it was made with whatever twigs and sticks were lying around at the time. Nothing has fallen off though and it still keeps the rain out.

Are we on borrowed time?

What’s wrong with the roof to warrant it needing renewing? Is the original roofer still trading?

So your roof is now 12 yrs old, whilst that is below expectations for lifetime it can’t have been that bad if its lasted that long. Is the fault immediately obvious, and if so why has it taken you 8 years to find it? What did the original survey say about the roof? What did the surveyor say when you called him to discuss his 8 year old report?

How is the roof not on properly.

 After being fleeced and seeing others fleeced by tradesmen and other companies offering all sorts of ‘fixes’ I have very little faith in anyone who tells me something is wrong

“Tradesmen” don’t do this!

It’s all wibbly wobbly where it was made with whatever twigs and sticks were lying around at the time. Nothing has fallen off though and it still keeps the rain out.

Are we on borrowed time?

Sounds like my roof. Stone slab affair with heavy duty eaves. Started leaking the week after we moved in, which wasn’t picked up on the surveye. Quote of nearly 12k to fix it. I went to B&Q and bought some of that rubber type paint sealant. Went mental and plastered it all over the roof. No leaks in five years. Live in fear of the roof just falling down though.

Live in fear of the roof just falling down though.

had this with our previous house. Not listed but 150+ years old and roof was untouched – the four years we were there was a procession of replacing tiles, using sealant to mend small holes and, if the rain and wind blew in a certain direction at the same time, watching water drip down the wall. Wasn’t picked up on the survey – but then it had picked up on woodworm in the loft. Of which the pest chap could see no sign of. Clearly he’d not been in the loft…

The point of them is so the lender knows they can recoup the money if you dont pay the mortgage

its tells you nothing at all about the state of the house

Ours did not survey the roof because it required a step ladder to get on the attic and still charged for looking at it!

I just got a builder in to look for me.

When we sold our first house our buyers survey suggested the downstairs wooden floor could potentially be damp and they tried to renegotiate.

It was a concrete floor.

We didn’t negotiate.

A “full structural survey” is not a “tick list”. Just saying…..

Second opinion from another roofer giving exactly the same diagnosis. It turns out that the roof was incorrectly fitted with insufficient overlap on the slates. The slates can all be lifted by a good 5″.

How was this not spotted on the survey? It isn’t exactly hidden, what with it being a roof. If the surveyor had lifted just one slate he would have spotted it.

Because he’s a surveyor not a roofer. Probably wouldn’t know difference between a slate and a tile

Even if it came off in his hand?

Is there any possibility that the roof is quite high up and out of reach?

It isn’t.

Are you getting any damaging water ingress into the roof space? Are the tiles coming off in high winds? If not then you could just leave it as is, even if it’s not perfect. Otherwise it’s a case of fixing a smile on your face and reminding yourself you’ve bought an old house that’ll have lots of issues but if you look after it properly it’ll be ace (owner of an old listed property here too!).

It’s not a fault, it’s “character”.

That excuse does lose a bit of force when it’s a recent bodge rather than part of the original house though.

Are you getting any damaging water ingress into the roof space? Are the tiles coming off in high winds? If not then you could just leave it as is, even if it’s not perfect. Otherwise it’s a case of fixing a smile on your face and reminding yourself you’ve bought an old house that’ll have lots of issues but if you look after it properly it’ll be ace (owner of an old listed property here too!).

We are getting water ingress. The estimate to find and fix the existing leak is near enough 20% the price of a re-roof and would only address the patch currently affected. It looks like we are going to go with getting the whole lot done.

I’m sure our (new) roof came with a 15 year guarantee.

Any paperwork kicking about?

We had a survey on a 70’s house we’re buying. Showed up ‘possible asbestos’ so had a full asbestos survey. It’s around £25k to remove the asbestos and replace fascia boards, soffits etc. We’re hoping to get the work done as part of the sale as the proceeds are going to charity.
If they agree, the money for the survey will have saved us £25k so I think it’s worth it..

It’s so you can sue the surveyor if they fail to spot something they could have and you’re put to the expense of putting it right, as any fule kno.

Just read the survey concerning the roof. It reports that it was 5 years old at the time of survey and says it will be sound if it was correctly installed.

He could have done that using Google Street View.

Probably did

Glad I payed the extra for it.

I think I wouldn’t bother again. Appears to be no recourse if they missed something. That said they did pick up some stuff I hadn’t noticed so mixed feelings.

IME not worth getting anything other than a valuation survey to satisfy the mortgage company.

Then you need a ‘tame’ builder, or at least someone who knows about buildings, to have a look at the house and identify any work that needs doing.

There always seems to be confusion as to what exactly is a survey.

I blame the RICS for being utterly rubbish at setting out exactly what is what.

Firstly, Junkyard has is right – many “surveys” are basic valuations done for the lender to make sure it is not subject to fraud and that the lend is safe. It is not a structural, nor a detail report, just a protective measure for a lender (and their underwriter).

The second is a Homebuyer which is aimed at the private individual and will have more detail, maybe some comparables and if obvious, highlight any defects. However, it is not a structural survey, and it is done by a Valuation not a Building Surveyor. Different skill set and training.

Neither of these reports are really much use in terms of determining the quality of the structure and any repairs or issues.

People often confuse this with a Structural / Building survey.

For this, you usually find 2 types. A more basic building survey which is cheaper and will target key areas and highlight the more obvious (to the Building Surveyor) issues. Costs about £500 to £750 quid.

The next is a full structural survey. Takes about 3 hours, costs about £1,500 and is a full crawl over the house.

Then we have the question of “Surveyor”. People can often be surprised to know that the “surveyor” they have used is not what they thought. Chartered Surveyor is a protected profession, like solicitor. A “surveyor” could be Dave down the pub who does a bit of building and has set himself up doing building inspections. You won’t have any PI cover, nor any recourse through a professional body (RICS), but he’ll be cheap. He might event tell you that the house needs a damp proof course, because he’s on a back hander or he happens to run a damp proof course business on the side.

So, you need to read the report and check the terms of engagement, extent of instruction and the conditions. If it is a full RICS Building Survey, you might have a claim, although it tends to be 6 years limit of liability. If it is a more limited survey, probably not, and if it is not undertaken by a Chartered Surveyor then you’re ****.

The question is, is it reasonable to have identified the defect? If it’s a basic look and see for £500 then no, a surveyor should not be expected to undertake a detailed survey and put PI on the line for 6 years for that. If it is a detailed survey, costing a lot more then possibly -all depends on the facts.

The next is a full structural survey. Takes about 3 hours, costs about £1,500 and is a full crawl over the house.

We paid about that, but he obviously forgot to do the “full crawl” bit in the loft or on the outside.

Ah, then you should have recourse. I am not sure what the run off period is for the Brick Monkeys but if it was an inherent defect manifest at the time of inspection and failed to pick up (so far as is reasonable) then possibly.