help.has anyone been able to obtain a mortgage on an ex-airey house that is attached to an airey house? If so who was the mortgage lender.
airey houses
- Thread starter VAP
- Start date
Sponsored Links
Any of the lenders will usually lend on those, but, as it's non-standard construction, they will require a detailed report carried out by an SE, in accordance with BRE Digest xxx (can't remember number offhand) which states that it's structurally sound. This involves looking at the feet of the concrete posts, as these have scaffold poles in the centre, which rust, expand and crack the concrete casing.
The Digest gives a damage classification, depending on the numbers of feet that are cracked. It also requires carbonation testing of the concrete, using phenopthaline. The investigation will require the removal of internal panelling, supplemented by a borescope investigation (if the void is not insulated). Because of the way the external concrete panels are installed, it is not usually possible to remove these to get access to avoid internal panel removal. All in all, it's quite involved.
Expect to pay in the order of £1300-£2000 plus vat for this survey.
The Digest gives a damage classification, depending on the numbers of feet that are cracked. It also requires carbonation testing of the concrete, using phenopthaline. The investigation will require the removal of internal panelling, supplemented by a borescope investigation (if the void is not insulated). Because of the way the external concrete panels are installed, it is not usually possible to remove these to get access to avoid internal panel removal. All in all, it's quite involved.
Expect to pay in the order of £1300-£2000 plus vat for this survey.
I'm not so sure about this Shy, I know a few mortgage lenders won't touch non-standard construction. I was recently involved with one where the only way the owner could get a mortagage was to have all the concrete panels removed and completely reskinned with standard brick construction.
Sponsored Links
C&G to my knowledge are the only ones that get a bit iffy. However, they do all apply different lending criteria and, these days, will probably be tighter on such properties in the misguided belief that there's something intrinsically wrong with them.
Aireys are more problematic in industrial areas (if we've got any left), where airborne pollution tends to result in greater depths of carbonation. Over here in the sticks, they don't tend to be too bad.
Removing all the concrete panels on an Airey shows just how little the lender understands what it is they are lending on. The concrete panels are usually fine and provide racking resistance to the structure (as well as weather resistance!), the posts take the vertical loads. The connections don't fail, as they are copper tie wire - but if the pikies ever get to learn that, then you might wake up one morning and find them all off the wall!
These structures were designed to aid the post WWII housing shortage, with a design life of 15 years. That they've lasted 70-odd is testament to how good they are. Their only achilles heel is the lack of cover to the scaffold tube at the base of the column, brought about by the long-line method of casting and steam curing.
The biggest pressure against their retention has been less to do with their structural condition and more to do with the fact that they sat on sizeable chunks of land, where 3 or 4 can easily be got in for the removal of 1.
A much maligned species in my view
.
Aireys are more problematic in industrial areas (if we've got any left), where airborne pollution tends to result in greater depths of carbonation. Over here in the sticks, they don't tend to be too bad.
Removing all the concrete panels on an Airey shows just how little the lender understands what it is they are lending on. The concrete panels are usually fine and provide racking resistance to the structure (as well as weather resistance!), the posts take the vertical loads. The connections don't fail, as they are copper tie wire - but if the pikies ever get to learn that, then you might wake up one morning and find them all off the wall!
These structures were designed to aid the post WWII housing shortage, with a design life of 15 years. That they've lasted 70-odd is testament to how good they are. Their only achilles heel is the lack of cover to the scaffold tube at the base of the column, brought about by the long-line method of casting and steam curing.
The biggest pressure against their retention has been less to do with their structural condition and more to do with the fact that they sat on sizeable chunks of land, where 3 or 4 can easily be got in for the removal of 1.
A much maligned species in my view
.Engineer on site 8 hours 720.00
Mileage 30.00 say
Builders work in connection 250.00
Repairs to interior of structure 300.00
Phenopthaline 50.00
Supplementary lab testing of samples 150.00
Report write up collation issue 4 hours 360.00
Quite a bit to it and more than a day's time, my old fruit
.[quote="Shytalkz
A much maligned species in my view.[/quote]
I think there is good reason for this. The problem is a little more complex than carbonation though I take your point relating to where they are located. I have a whole series of reports carried out by the BRE in the 80's relating to all non traditional housing. Admittedly my personal experience is limited to Unity and no fines but many of these properties use mild steel ties. The BRE also found that the structural condition of these properties was quite often related to the type of aggregate that was used. They exposed reinforcement on columns and found that the corrosion was so bad that cracking should have been expected. The columns hadn't cracked because a porous breeze, rather than dense aggregate had been used. My point being that damage can be much worse than a visual survey might lead you to believe.
A much maligned species in my view
.[/quote]I think there is good reason for this. The problem is a little more complex than carbonation though I take your point relating to where they are located. I have a whole series of reports carried out by the BRE in the 80's relating to all non traditional housing. Admittedly my personal experience is limited to Unity and no fines but many of these properties use mild steel ties. The BRE also found that the structural condition of these properties was quite often related to the type of aggregate that was used. They exposed reinforcement on columns and found that the corrosion was so bad that cracking should have been expected. The columns hadn't cracked because a porous breeze, rather than dense aggregate had been used. My point being that damage can be much worse than a visual survey might lead you to believe.
- Joined
- 28 Oct 2005
- Messages
- 31,282
- Reaction score
- 1,998
- Country
Engineer on site 8 hours 720.00
Mileage 30.00 say
Builders work in connection 250.00
Repairs to interior of structure 300.00
Phenopthaline 50.00
Supplementary lab testing of samples 150.00
Report write up collation issue 4 hours 360.00
Quite a bit to it and more than a day's time, my old fruit
£720 is more than the pay of a heart surgeon doing a transplant.
Just a rip-off me old son. Just a sheer rip off.
As ever, Joe had the Green-eyed monster firmly in check.
So? I spent nine years doing studying and three years' post grad, plus a seven hour exam to get to be chartered. Truck drivers have a few days' training and they're on £36k, which is not enough, apparently.
Footballers: what purpose do they serve in life and look at their dosh. Stop being so green-eyed Joe, it doesn't become you.
True, but if there was absolutely no concrete and just the tube (no, not Joe
) remained, they would not collapse: the close centres mean that the load on each column is of a low order, insufficient to result in buckling. The concrete was more cover to the tube to protect it, rather than structural. If they hadn't made them on a long-line method and given the bottom column adequate cover, the instances of rusting of the tube would have been greatly reduced. But then, as they were only required to have a 15 year design life, presumably the feeling was that, without bottom cover they'd last that long. Which they did, quite happily.hi,thanks for all the comments but the house i am trying to buy has been stripped down to ground level and all the metal posts removed.then rebuilt using bricks and mortor,underpinning the foundations,etc.The problem is nationwide wont give us a mortgage on a house that is still connected to a Airey house even though its now only the roof that are connected to each other,any help would be much appreciated.
Ah, a house rather like Trigger's broom then
It's difficult to understand why a lender would take that stance, but would (presumably) lend on it if was still an Airey attached to an Airey - which just goes to show that there is no understanding on their part. Twas ever thus.
If that's their criterion, then no amount of arguing with them will get them to change. The only suggestion that I can make is try another lender, one that is more enlightened.
Or pay cash.
It's difficult to understand why a lender would take that stance, but would (presumably) lend on it if was still an Airey attached to an Airey - which just goes to show that there is no understanding on their part. Twas ever thus.
If that's their criterion, then no amount of arguing with them will get them to change. The only suggestion that I can make is try another lender, one that is more enlightened.
Or pay cash.
DIYnot Local
Staff member
If you need to find a tradesperson to get your job done, please try our local search below, or if you are doing it yourself you can find suppliers local to you.
Select the supplier or trade you require, enter your location to begin your search.
Are you a trade or supplier? You can create your listing free at DIYnot Local
Sponsored Links
