Homebuyers versus structural?

[Bellenden Belle]

So we are buying a house.

It is a Victorian terrace that has had a loft extension and a side return done since the present owners moved in.

All of the surveyors we have contacted so far have refused a homebuyers survey and said we need a structural survey.

Is this wise advise? Likely to save money in the long run? Or just a money grabbing exercise? Having already paid for one structural survey on a different property ( Georgian terrace so it felt more

Necessary) I am reluctant to spend another thousand pounds....

Wise forumites - advise me!

[????]

Although in 99% of cases it'll be alright - Mad not too - IMO. just insurance against the horror stories of those that tried to do it on the cheap. Plus does tend to show things that you should also think about getting on with first in terms of maintenance and keeping an eye on too (ie it has some other value too) and can be used to reduce price if something needs doing.

[Peckhamrye]

For the amount of money you are spending on the house I would go for structural.

[KrackersMaracas]

I am not a property afficionado - but all the advice I received when buying was that you should go for a full structural when buying a house - although homebuyers could be used for a flat.

[Twirly]

Rule of thumb I read years ago was that if it's over 100 years old, always have a full structural survey done, less than that and you can probably get away with a homebuyer's if it appears to be in good condition. I had a full one done for the flat I bought in a Victorian property in ED - I can't see why you wouldn't if the property is old, whether it's a house or a flat.

[AbDabs]

I would have thought that the only reason why a homebuyers report might be thought acceptable for a flat is just the practical reality of not being able to carry out a full structural - if you can't get access to all the other flats and the loft space, back garden etc, the surveyor/engineer can't describe it as a 'full' structural.

I'd always have a full structural for a house, even if brand new (perhaps more so). The cost is a very small percentage of what it might cost if you've bought a dud. A homebuyers report doesn't really tell you anything more than what you can see for yourself (assuming you've owned a home before and have a basic understanding of general maintenance)- now that does seem a waste of money.

[Mustard]

I had a full structural done on a house when I moved here, and they still failed to pick up on a few things. If there are fitted carpets they usually have a get out clause to say they couldn't inspect the floors underneath them. Most people aren't going to accept having their fitted carpets uplifted to do a full inspection.

But, I still think I would have another one done were I to buy another house.

[MrBen]

For a rare lifetime transaction of this size I would go structural too. But my experience is that most will simply trundle out a standard format with some paragraphs to customise it. Many also skip inspecting the roof or sub floor for health and safety or access reasons....so you have to ask specifically if you want these inspected properly.

Good ones will pick things up you didn't notice...stuff that you could use in negotiations if you wanted to. The main things to look out for at survey are the state of the roof, any water/flood damage from leaking pipes, roof or boiler, dry and wet rot and general signs of movement / subsidence (e.g. uneven floors, window frames, cracks greater than 5mm etc. Also general state of the windows and the boiler as replacing both is always an expense.

Good luck.

[Earl Aelfheah]

I know I'm on my own here, but I think that all house surveys are a complete waste of time. Anything they tell you is usually based solely on a 'visual inspection' - which basically means that unless there is something obvious (which you would normally pick up on your own anyway), they add nothing. They'll say things like "there should be a steel here, it's not possible to say if there is or not without disturbing the fabric, but we suggest you get it checked". Yeah, thanks.

[Earl Aelfheah]

... and Mustard is right - they won't even move the carpets.

[alice]

check with southwark council they got all building regs for work - then do your own visual check. take a trusted builder. thats what i do.

[MellowYellow]

I'm an estate agent (hear me out!) though not locally based for work which is Chelsea where no one gets a survey!

As a rule of thumb which I've applied each time I've bought and sold as well is that a homebuyers is plenty unless a) you're aware of issues with the house, or b) the homebuyers flags up something which needs further investigations.

If you're getting a mortgage, your bank's survey will also have comments about the property and they are within their rights to request more investigatory work, down value the property or issue a retention if there is a major problem.

Surveys are by their nature designed to find out any upcomg problems in the property so expect some structural movement (historical- London is full of clay soil which expands and contracts and this causes movement), some damp (kenwood will do a free quote to ascertain further costs) and caution advised re gas and electrics (as surveyors generally arent qualified to give assurances for such).

Good luck with the purchase! X

[Bellenden Belle]

Thank you dear forumites.

We are going with the structural option. Though I've read all the comments with interest. Curious that no one in Chelsea does surveys...do they simply already know they can afford to fix any problems?

I will be advertising my one of my kidneys in the for sale section shortly....

[se15mum]

Hi Bellenden Belle

We're currently looking for a surveyor can I aske who you used and would you recommend them?

Thanks

[*Bob*]

If I was buying a house now which had potential 'movement' issues giving me concern, I'd find a private surveyor (not one the lender or EA recommends) and get a 'the one in the middle' type survey (whatever you call that now) and spend the extra on getting a structural engineer (ie someone who actually knows rather than just guessing) around to look at the important stuff.