King post not attached to Truss/tie beam

[RichTeaBiscuit]

Hello,

I am looking at purchasing a barn conversion and had a look in the loft, I saw something that raised a few eyebrows (both mine) but wanted to get a bit more info before I wasted money on a survey. Forgive my probably incorrect terminology, but I've been learning from Google!

The roof is of timber construction sort of like the image I've attached. The horizontal beam is metal, and is called a "truss" on the planning documents. In the loft, there is a timber king post resting on top of the truss, going vertical.

When I say resting I mean the wood is not attached to the metal in any way, it is just sitting on top (with a few thin pieces of wood wedged in between, I assume to make the fit snug).

Is this a permissible roof structure? Or should I run away screaming?

 

[JBR]

I may be talking out of my backside, but I should imagine that the king post is there to support the horizontal beam (the truss/tie beam). If that is the case, then yes, it should be attached. I believe it is usual for the king post to be supported by the diagonal beams which meet at the top and, provided their bases are secured to the truss to prevent them spreading, then they will be very strong in supporting the king post at the top.

However, if in this case the truss is steel, it probably would not require any support in the middle.

I do know that triangles are very strong and stable shapes!