Suing a surveyor after house purchase
Discussion
HI guys,
I was wondering if someone could give me their seasoned opinion on my situation. We recently bought a property (May 2015). Before purchase, I ordered a valuation report (through Nationwide) and when it came back there were notes regarding dampness. The dampness issues were rectified (it was a condition for completion).
After moving in, we found the following issues:
- lintel missing from double doors in the kitchen facing the garden (hence double doors needed changing as well since bricks on top of doors were pushing the doors downwards and had bent them).
- many double-glazed windows had condensation/mould inside so needed replacing
- large sections of the external brickwork needed re-pointing (gaping holes, causing leaks when it rains).
I did contact the surveyor involved (after contacting Nationwide), but was informed that they deny any liability. It was not a structural survey, however basic issues like the ones above should have been found, as they affect the mortgage value (and indeed the dampness issue was picked up).
Is it worth pursuing further, or are my chances too slim and I'd better sleep over it?
Thanks
I was wondering if someone could give me their seasoned opinion on my situation. We recently bought a property (May 2015). Before purchase, I ordered a valuation report (through Nationwide) and when it came back there were notes regarding dampness. The dampness issues were rectified (it was a condition for completion).
After moving in, we found the following issues:
- lintel missing from double doors in the kitchen facing the garden (hence double doors needed changing as well since bricks on top of doors were pushing the doors downwards and had bent them).
- many double-glazed windows had condensation/mould inside so needed replacing
- large sections of the external brickwork needed re-pointing (gaping holes, causing leaks when it rains).
I did contact the surveyor involved (after contacting Nationwide), but was informed that they deny any liability. It was not a structural survey, however basic issues like the ones above should have been found, as they affect the mortgage value (and indeed the dampness issue was picked up).
Is it worth pursuing further, or are my chances too slim and I'd better sleep over it?
Thanks
LoonR1 said:
Not a chance. You ordered a Valuation report and got just that. If you wanted proper survey, then ask and pay for a Full Structural survey, or a Homebuyers report as a minimum.
I would disagree. Slim chance perhaps, but not "not a chance". I successfully got a 5-figure settlement out of a surveyor (without having to go to court) for missing some very glaring subsidence which would significantly affect the value of the property. It depends really how glaring the issues were and how negligent the surveyor was. You'd need to go through your lawyer. This is the reason these reports are performed by surveyors rather than estate agents - there is an expected level of professionalism/competence.
The lintel .. Was the work done recently and was it detailed on the info form ? Was there building regs approval or was it covered by indemnity policy?
DG and repointing in fairness aren't major issues. DG will still work and you can replace the panes as and when. Repointing won't be too expensive.
DG and repointing in fairness aren't major issues. DG will still work and you can replace the panes as and when. Repointing won't be too expensive.
StamV said:
After moving in, we found the following issues:
- lintel missing from double doors in the kitchen facing the garden (hence double doors needed changing as well since bricks on top of doors were pushing the doors downwards and had bent them).
- many double-glazed windows had condensation/mould inside so needed replacing
- large sections of the external brickwork needed re-pointing (gaping holes, causing leaks when it rains).
Did you not look the house over before putting your offer in? Both those sound rather blindingly obvious...- lintel missing from double doors in the kitchen facing the garden (hence double doors needed changing as well since bricks on top of doors were pushing the doors downwards and had bent them).
- many double-glazed windows had condensation/mould inside so needed replacing
- large sections of the external brickwork needed re-pointing (gaping holes, causing leaks when it rains).
But if the only survey done was the lender's valuation, then it's done exactly what it was intended to do - confirm to the vendor that the property is acceptable security for the loan. If you wanted a half-way reliable condition report for your own purposes, then you needed a home buyer's report or a full structural survey. They would both have picked those problems up.
When I last moved I arranged, and paid directly for, a comprehensive survey on the rather substantial property I was buying. No mortgage.
I paid, in 2010, about £1200 or so and received a detailed report with pictures and cautions and recommendations.
If I'd gone ahead to find something amiss that should have been spotted I wouldn't have been happy but as it seems that your survey was simply for a valuation and was, in any case, commissioned by the lender I doubt that you have any grounds for a serious complaint.
I paid, in 2010, about £1200 or so and received a detailed report with pictures and cautions and recommendations.
If I'd gone ahead to find something amiss that should have been spotted I wouldn't have been happy but as it seems that your survey was simply for a valuation and was, in any case, commissioned by the lender I doubt that you have any grounds for a serious complaint.
Valuation survey only. In other words the bare minimum for the lender. If you wanted to go around suing people then next time invest in a Full Building Survey.
It's not always possible to see blown d/g windows anyway it depends on the severity and weather conditions, and it's easy to miss a missing lintel as they're behind plaster, unless there are other symptoms.
Move on chap.
It's not always possible to see blown d/g windows anyway it depends on the severity and weather conditions, and it's easy to miss a missing lintel as they're behind plaster, unless there are other symptoms.
Move on chap.
Hold the horses.....
On the legal side clearly the OP is very likely to have no contract with the Surveyors. However it can still be argued that the have a Duty of Care and could be sued under the Tort of Negligence.
OP needs to make a formal complaint to the lender, and to the firm. Ask for a copy of their Complaints Handling Procedure and to raise the stakes the next step is to ask them to confirm that they have notified their insurer of a potential claim.
Pointing I'm 50/50 about. Double glazing nah it's not value significant not going to affect the lenders security. Lintels... If there was physical indication, eg cracking over the doors etc. should have been spotted and reported/further investigation required.
When I last had a (well experienced) colleague doing residential valuations he was very much of an opinion that it's a numbers game. You'd never catch every single defect every single time (he'd recently got caught out by a rotten floor joist under a leaky floor bath - not obvious till bath run), but most firms will have a pot to sort this stuff out rather than seeing it go legal.
Obviously if OP wants to take them to the cleaners, they'l go legal and it will take years to sort....
On the legal side clearly the OP is very likely to have no contract with the Surveyors. However it can still be argued that the have a Duty of Care and could be sued under the Tort of Negligence.
OP needs to make a formal complaint to the lender, and to the firm. Ask for a copy of their Complaints Handling Procedure and to raise the stakes the next step is to ask them to confirm that they have notified their insurer of a potential claim.
Pointing I'm 50/50 about. Double glazing nah it's not value significant not going to affect the lenders security. Lintels... If there was physical indication, eg cracking over the doors etc. should have been spotted and reported/further investigation required.
When I last had a (well experienced) colleague doing residential valuations he was very much of an opinion that it's a numbers game. You'd never catch every single defect every single time (he'd recently got caught out by a rotten floor joist under a leaky floor bath - not obvious till bath run), but most firms will have a pot to sort this stuff out rather than seeing it go legal.
Obviously if OP wants to take them to the cleaners, they'l go legal and it will take years to sort....
surveyor said:
most firms will have a pot to sort this stuff out rather than seeing it go legal.
Really? What pots that then because if it's the one they piss in its already gone due to the low fees they get from the lenders.Sorry to say given the festive cheer but your post is rollocks which given the username.....
Chartered?
V6Pushfit said:
surveyor said:
most firms will have a pot to sort this stuff out rather than seeing it go legal.
Really? What pots that then because if it's the one they piss in its already gone due to the low fees they get from the lenders.Sorry to say given the festive cheer but your post is rollocks which given the username.....
Chartered?
I suppose I've got limited experience since 2007, but the legal side of my opinion is correct, and I'd be surprised if a firm would want a claim for not that £ fix, assuming that the lack of lintel was visible. Certainty back in 2007 there would be a budget (and a friendly builder to help keep the budget down).
V6Pushfit said:
surveyor said:
most firms will have a pot to sort this stuff out rather than seeing it go legal.
Really? What pots that then because if it's the one they piss in its already gone due to the low fees they get from the lenders.Sorry to say given the festive cheer but your post is rollocks which given the username.....
Chartered?
ClaphamGT3 said:
Whilst I disagree that the situation here is as 'grey' as Surveyor interprets it, he is quite right to say that all practices of any scale will accrue a fund to settle minor issues, rather than claim on PII.
That pot/fund just doesn't exist. It might be called excess of income over expenditure, ie profit, ie their personal income. I think to imply that there is bound to be some marvellous fund that OP can dip into is misleading.In any event the claim here is a non starter.
The only claim I've had and rebuffed was a backfall on a boxed wc waste only discovered when the ensuite was refitted. Chancers were using the Full Building Survey as insurance against anything and everything they came across when they refurbished the property.
BenWRXSEi said:
LoonR1 said:
Not a chance. You ordered a Valuation report and got just that. If you wanted proper survey, then ask and pay for a Full Structural survey, or a Homebuyers report as a minimum.
This. You get what you pay for.Breadvan72 said:
surveyor said:
...the legal side of my opinion is correct, ...
If by "correct", you mean "completely wrong", then, yes.I'm still a little surprised. I always understood in the case of residential purchasers (ie not professionals or people buying in the course of business such as buy to let) that case history had established that their was a duty of care, assuming that some tests were met....
I'm wary of arguing my position with you as I don't want to dig myself any deeper!
ETA - I think your over egging the pudding with completely wrong. I've over simplified what is a complex area, but assume that the OP is not a buy to let purchaser there's a fair chance of him being owed a Duty of Care. This of course does not necessarily mean there's liability.
Edited by surveyor on Monday 28th December 21:24
A Full Building Survey should be instructed by the buyer on every purchase IMO, and many surveyors would throw in the valuation and any decent lender would agree to that as the mortgage valuation. The trouble is the lack of advice for buyers and even the RICS punts the house buyers report - which is a load of twaddle.
If you're spending £250k++ then a £1000 survey is small beer.
It's not for the potential use in a claim it's to know what's wrong with a property to start with it's surprising what can be found even with newer properties.
The likes of BV and his mates used to 'walk the boundaries' - an archaic exercise but it had a use. Buying a property by form filling works for 90% of purchases it's the 10% that may come unstuck at a later date. Same for leases.
If you're spending £250k++ then a £1000 survey is small beer.
It's not for the potential use in a claim it's to know what's wrong with a property to start with it's surprising what can be found even with newer properties.
The likes of BV and his mates used to 'walk the boundaries' - an archaic exercise but it had a use. Buying a property by form filling works for 90% of purchases it's the 10% that may come unstuck at a later date. Same for leases.
If it was a case of surveyors being sued on valuation reports they would have eliminated the current three tier system a long time ago. The valuation survey is merely to make sure there is value in the property to cover your loan hence why the lender commissions it for their benefit and independently of you. The points you have mentioned are pretty minor in this respect and will be no grounds for action.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff