Homebuyers survey - Indemnity insurance claim.?
Discussion
Hi
Earlier this year I went through the process of buying a house - I had a RICS chartered firm perform a homebuyers survey.
In the garden of the house was a tree, trunk width 7-8", which was planted within a foot of a brick garden wall (after the wall was constructed, 13 years ago) Subsequent Googling reveals soil type around here to be clay-ish.
I completed beginning of June. We have had a dry hot summer this year. Within 10 weeks, the wall has obviously suffered subsidence due to the tree and dropped, cracking bricks and mortar.
The wording in the report was "there are young trees in the front and back gardens, these are within potential influexncing distance - future risk will need to be mitigated by pruning or thinning".
On the one hand I can see that the surveyor has covered his backside with the wording. On the other hand, given he is a local expert on soil conditions etc, he could have written something along the lines of:
Action - the soil type here is clay, the tree is mature and needs pruning ASAP.
In which case I would have instructed a tree surgeon... I am not an expert and was not suggested to get a second opinion. I didn't expect my nice garden wall to need rebuilding within ten weeks of moving in. Do I have any recourse or do I take this on the chin as an example of 'life experience is a great teacher, she gives the test first and the lesson after...?'
:-)
Earlier this year I went through the process of buying a house - I had a RICS chartered firm perform a homebuyers survey.
In the garden of the house was a tree, trunk width 7-8", which was planted within a foot of a brick garden wall (after the wall was constructed, 13 years ago) Subsequent Googling reveals soil type around here to be clay-ish.
I completed beginning of June. We have had a dry hot summer this year. Within 10 weeks, the wall has obviously suffered subsidence due to the tree and dropped, cracking bricks and mortar.
The wording in the report was "there are young trees in the front and back gardens, these are within potential influexncing distance - future risk will need to be mitigated by pruning or thinning".
On the one hand I can see that the surveyor has covered his backside with the wording. On the other hand, given he is a local expert on soil conditions etc, he could have written something along the lines of:
Action - the soil type here is clay, the tree is mature and needs pruning ASAP.
In which case I would have instructed a tree surgeon... I am not an expert and was not suggested to get a second opinion. I didn't expect my nice garden wall to need rebuilding within ten weeks of moving in. Do I have any recourse or do I take this on the chin as an example of 'life experience is a great teacher, she gives the test first and the lesson after...?'
:-)
I suspect they covered themselves. Many years ago I phoned a surveyors to ask about a "housebuyers Survey" I thought at the time this may be similar to taking a car to the valet who says he can do a "silver" or "gold" valet- ie a load of bs.
Anyway conversation went thus
Me "The house we are interested in has a large tree in garden, about 20ft from property, and the fuse box is very old(looks like it's suitable for a museum), does your HS cover these items.
Surv. "You need a tree specialist to give an opinion on the tree. We can tell you how old we think the consumer unit is"
Me " so basically instead of paying you £600 I may as well chuck £100 at a tree man and similar to an electrician" and get realistic opinions.
Surv "Er, well, yes"
Anyway conversation went thus
Me "The house we are interested in has a large tree in garden, about 20ft from property, and the fuse box is very old(looks like it's suitable for a museum), does your HS cover these items.
Surv. "You need a tree specialist to give an opinion on the tree. We can tell you how old we think the consumer unit is"
Me " so basically instead of paying you £600 I may as well chuck £100 at a tree man and similar to an electrician" and get realistic opinions.
Surv "Er, well, yes"
So, understand anecdotally that the modern survey is full of backside covering legalese.... However in this scenario it doesn't say 'you should immediately seek the opinion of a qualified tree surgeon', nor does it say 'I am of the opinion there is an immediate danger'.
Which is the only, albeit slim, chance I am hoping that having paid for this professional advice, I am open to some kind of redress.
If not then fine, but worth asking the question on here..?
Which is the only, albeit slim, chance I am hoping that having paid for this professional advice, I am open to some kind of redress.
If not then fine, but worth asking the question on here..?
For what it's worth my opinion is that unless these surveys find something major they are a waste of time and money.
They always say you need a specialist this or that so generally you don't end up much wiser.
From what you have said I would expect his professional indemnity to refute any claim
They always say you need a specialist this or that so generally you don't end up much wiser.
From what you have said I would expect his professional indemnity to refute any claim
jamesc_1729 said:
So, understand anecdotally that the modern survey is full of backside covering legalese.... However in this scenario it doesn't say 'you should immediately seek the opinion of a qualified tree surgeon', nor does it say 'I am of the opinion there is an immediate danger'.
Which is the only, albeit slim, chance I am hoping that having paid for this professional advice, I am open to some kind of redress.
If not then fine, but worth asking the question on here..?
You have nothing (except some time and effort) to lose in the first instance by challenging them - It could certainly focus their attention on doing a better job in the future. If nothing else it may "get it off your chest" and provide some comfort that you've made them wriggle and maybe apologise, even if you get no fiscal compensation.Which is the only, albeit slim, chance I am hoping that having paid for this professional advice, I am open to some kind of redress.
If not then fine, but worth asking the question on here..?
I'd certainly not let it lie myself - you pay them to advise because that's their job, and if you knew better yourself you wouldn't bother asking them. I'd at least ask for their fees to be returned (although I'd try for more)!
Homebuyers surveys are not much good in my experience. I've always spent out whatever has been necessary to get a house fully checked out by more appropriate experts, or at least those who specify precisely what they will be reporting on - I then add in whatever I feel needs special attention.
In any event, at least he brought your attention to the tree, many wouldn't have even bothered with that.
In any event, at least he brought your attention to the tree, many wouldn't have even bothered with that.
Issi said:
The surveyor pointed out that there were trees in the garden that could pose a risk, and that you should look into having them pruned.
You didn't take any notice of this, and now want to sue because what he warned you about actually happened.
Did I get this right?
No, you didn't get it right. I don't want to sue, and I'm not saying he has done anything negligent. Yes it was mentioned, but not with the clear implication that damage would occur within weeks of buying the house. Therefore I am simply asking people for advice, as to whether this should have been worded more strongly and whether this kind of situation falls into the realms of a PI claim.You didn't take any notice of this, and now want to sue because what he warned you about actually happened.
Did I get this right?
As I said in the opening post, quite happy to chalk this one upto experience.
Edited by jamesc_1729 on Saturday 10th September 20:36
Gassing Station | Homes, Gardens and DIY | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff