A 2 day "forensic" inspection ref damp & timbe

[dann09]

I recently completed a two day inspection and report on a pre-1914 terraced house for Damp & Timber & Structural issues.

There was a history of five previous reports and inspections and various works over a 15 year period.

Two mortgage surveyors had trotted thro the property.
Two Damp & Timber "Surveyors" had issued reports and attempted various works.
A Builder had inspected and quoted on what works he thought necessary.

First, i collated, and made a checklist from the paperwork, and then tried to make sense of the previous reports - no easy task.

I then crawled and wriggled under floors, and climbed into the loft and over the roof. I took pics of every item on the checklist, and all separate issues that my inspection revealed. All pics were annotated and keyed to floor plans.

I made a rough report on site and walked the property to confirm details.
I talked to neighbours about anything of interest.

Next day i gathered my material and made more sense of it for the "typist". I then returned to site in respose to a neighbour's phone call -i was shown party wall issues due to our D&T work, and the spread of dry rot from our side.

The above took 2 1/2 days to complete.

The original D&T company missed most defects of interest and charged £200 for cleaning vents, which had not been cleaned 15 yrs later when they again claimed to have cleaned the vents for £300.
They replaced 5 joists and billed for 11.
They missed the dry rot - as did everyone else, by not crawling under the floor or going into the loft. One D&T guy had remarked that he had no torch/flashlight to examine sub-floors and lofts.
Neither noted the extreme settlement, the roof humping on two sides, or the rafters spreading - neither did one of the mortgage surveyors: he noted " there are issues with the roof planes"
None of the 5 had brought steps or ladders.
The lounge knock-thru (a bearing wall) was lintelled with sagging 4x2's, not picked up by any of our investigators, but the builder did offer to decorate it.

Dear readers, i could go on, but whats new?

MY purpose is to show how much time and energy can be used in investigating a simple terraced house, esp. when solicitors might become involved. The above, of course, was an unusually detailed and time consuming inspection.

If any reader is interested, just say, and i'll post a thirty odd item defect list that was missed or bungled by the above five. Plus details of how the Damp companies actually caused further damage.

 

[^woody^]

MY purpose is to show how much time and energy can be used in investigating a simple terraced house, esp. when solicitors might become involved..

IMO that's way too long

I would not take that long when Solicitors might get involved, or if they are involved and the claim is going to court.

The time it takes someone to survey on site is no reflection of the quality of that survey or the thoroughness of their investigation.

Most of the work should be done back at the office considering what was seen on site, and reaching the conclusion after researching. The inspection is a small part of the overall survey

Again, IMO, you should have been able to see what you needed to see, and do what you needed to do in much less time

 

[peterperfection]

LETS SEE SOME PICS- AND THEN YOU CAN ASK OPINIONS .
I am sure you will get answers off here .

 

[dann09]

My instructions were to take whatever it took, and to open up whenever it was judged needed, no inaccessible areas were to be left closed.

There were about 75 - 90 items collated from other reports, and 30 or so from my own inquiries - all had to be eyeballed and noted and, where necessary, validated with research references. I am not a surveyor, D&T excepted, i am an on the tools tradesman.

Two floor traps were cut, two sub-floor brick knee wall knock-thro's were made in two houses, and access to two loft areas, and various other areas, was opened up.
Drainage was tested, and flues were smoke tested.
Elec. gas and water was tested/inspected.

As i indicated above, work on my observations was done back at the office. However, initial word was out and i was obliged to have long and frequent phone conversations with interested parties - thats how it was.
On day two, I was obliged to return to the site neighbour's, and do further opening up and a seperate( attached) report.

"The inspection is a small part of the survey" who said that it wasn't? The above, as i made clear, was not (for me) a typical investigation.

AAMOI: i've seen a chartered surveyor do a two day survey, with measurements, and finalise and mail his report from a lap top on site.

However, thank you for taking an interest in my post.

 

[^woody^]

It's an interesting post, and I'm not having a pop.

I do a load of these surveys for expert witness court work, where another person is making a claim and there may be another surveyor working for the other side.

The thing is, most surveys can be done without invasive investigation, and there is often no need to rip the place apart as the information is already there. It's knowing what to look for, rather than the looking

You don't mention what the purpose of the survey was, or your instruction. But typically the purpose is to get opinion on a problem, not looks at every nook and cranny, so the main decision is "What do I really need to look at, and what is the best way to achieve that?"

Regarding the mention of Solicitors, did you know that if a claim does progress, then the surveyor with the better qualifications is invariably the one who's opinion is believed more valid - even if his report is crap? So you may need to counter that if it comes to it

 

[Nige F]

Anyone that reads Danny Boy's posts will know he rarely makes any sense. .

Pot and kettle There is nowt wrong with being thorough - or like me , do your own survey then address the problems and fix them after you`ve bought I like to live dangerously

 

[dann09]

FWIW: Just a bringing up to date of what happened next:

The other side(s) made an offer on the basis of my report(s).

My report(s) were previously handed over to our expert witness, but we had no cause to use him as the other side (as above) made the deal.

Our side's solicitors, and the expert witness, charged a ferocious amount, leaving nowhere enough monies in the kitty for doing all the schedule of works.
However, my clients, now between a rock and a hard place, went for the full re-furb.

As usual, during demo and opening up further damage was revealed.

The dry rot had made it's way from the roof area, down the c/flues to the sub-floor and extensively spread behind plasterwork on the party wall, and into the neighbour's sub-area and bathroom.

Eight to ten men were at work at any time: new bathroom(s), new kitchen, re-wire, re-plumb, re-roof and extensive remedial plastering and rendering, new frames and suspended floors, and steel linteling.

Not all the above was due to D&T conditions, of course, but so much was.

My purpose in listing the above is to give a cautionary warning to those who would accept smooth talking national franchise Damp and Timber "surveyors" when they probably have a time tested local builder at hand to give a view.

AAMOI: while on site we were approached by two neighbours from up the street, ref. gas "smells" - we investigated and located and fixed two minor gas leaks behind cookers.