Jump to content

Recommended Posts

We have a just received our Homebuyer's report on a house (built c.1900), which red flagged high damp readings at various points in the walls of the ground floor and that at various points the damp proof internal floor is higher than the damp-proof course and should be lowered.


We will get a damp and timber report but have read that this is common with houses of this age and not necessarily a problem. The mortgage company have approved our loan without retaining any funds, which I have read they tend to do with cases of damp. Is it reasonable to infer that the damp issue may not be terrible, if they are prepared to lend?

Most houses of this age will have some damp spots. The survey is always going to flag up worst case stuff - they have to cover all bases. Unless the walls are visibly crumbling, you were wheezing, or the walls were wet with large visible patches you'll probably find you're OK.

You can never be sure of anything with houses of this age. Homebuyers reports don't even scratch the surface (both metaphorically and literally). But high damp readings are very very common and wouldn't put me off (unless there is evidence of rot to structural timbers).


I think normal procedure would be to get a quote covering all remedial works, then ask for the price to be reduced accordingly.

We had the same with our recent house purchase and took the risk. The valuation survey is bound to cover themselves. When we got a good damp company in, they said it needed work but not as much as the survey suggested, so for us it looks like the risk was worth it(touch wood)!


We're getting the work done and what we thought might be ?5-10k is going to be ?1500.

Thanks all for the good advice.


It's difficult to know what is a real problem and what we could live with for another 5-10y, e.g (not damp related) re:windows - double glazed plastic(!)of some age and some of the panes have failed and misted over. Windows are likely to require replacing at some point in the near future.

Ideally, we would rip them out and replace with wooden sash but we are uikely to be able to afford that for quite sometime and it may actually be fine for a while.


I suppose in reality, unless buying a new build or recent renovation (and even then), there will be a list of imperfections which we will have to prioritise from necessary to would-be-nice. I'm hoping for a similar outcome to yours, Edcam.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Another glowing recco for Jon, he painted our rental flat which after 8 years of a single tenancy was in quite a state. He listened carefully to our requirements, and worked incredibly speedily to deliver us a beautiful job, with real attention-to-detail. I was particularly impressed with how tidy Jon was - he took great care to protect any furniture and flooring and left the place spotless! Highly recommend.
    • Our current councillors follow a rather opposite course, in my view. They certainly don't respect the views of their electorate. 
    • The planters would be lovely if only the plants had been maintained once they had been planted. I think it would have been better not to have had them at all than to just leave them with plants in very poor condition. Were whoever installed them hoping that  residents in the relevant streets would look after them? 
    • I spoke at the council meeting last night to object. 400 people objected to the development. I, and I suspect everyone else, is not against development, BUT the size of this too BIG to accept. The council is held hostage by the developer who is promising 53 affordable homes. And in return they get to build 360 bedrooms for students. The original plan was all student accommodation. 8 stories is completely out of sync. It’s sets a precedent for future development. They have been taking to the council since 2022.  What did not help our cause whatsoever was Counsellors McAsh and Mwangangye speaking as ward counsellors at the meeting. As the Chair of the committee said, it’s not often ward counsellors attend such meetings. The counsellors will say they didn’t speak for or against the development. However, they did speak up for the benefits of the site bringing more affordable housing to the borough. They asked for a window to have frosted glass to protect privacy. They asked for residents to be consulted during the building phase. So let’s be really clear, they did not say anything about the “optimisation” of the site. They did not ask for the site to be scaled down. Now I know why James would not be drawn into discussing the development before now….   Make no mistake, this development is optimised for profit and the trade off is the developer profits at scale and the council have 53 affordable homes. The Southwark Plan says they should respect the character of East Dulwich. How can an 8 story building be ever respectful to the character of East Dulwich. It’s a hugely imposing building.  Unless we stand up together as a community, then we shall be stuck with it, although I suspect we won’t be stuck with our Labour counsellors for much longer… Feeling let down and disappointed this morning.   
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...