"Sacha" wrote in message ...

On 2014-05-20 15:27:26 +0000, Tom Gardner said:

On 20/05/14 13:06, sacha wrote:
On 2014-05-20 09:49:11 +0000, Tom Gardner said:

On 20/05/14 10:25, Sacha wrote:
On 2014-05-20 07:46:52 +0000, Martin said:

On Sun, 18 May 2014 12:13:42 +0100, Janet wrote:

In article ,
lid says...

sacha wrote

She only moved in two years
ago and her surveyor assured her the house had never flooded.

Aren't surveyors
legally responsible for their surveys?

Yes, but if he reported the truth he can't be faulted. A survey
report
only reflects the current status of the property, it's not a future
guarantee.

The flood maps provided by the EA show potential flooding areas, with
probabilities of flooding, not just historic flood areas. Both my
children used
the maps when buying their houses. It could be why they both live on
top of
hills. http://apps.environment-agency.gov.uk/wiyby/37837.aspx

Nonetheless, the property had never flooded and a surveyor can only
comment on current conditions in the property. He can't say e.g. you've
got wooden beams in the kitchen, so you might get woodworm
one day!

Of course they can - and should, particularly as it is a
simple prudent way for them to avoid the possibility of
future claims.

The surveyors of my houses have done exactly that kind of
thing and more - and I'd be miffed if they hadn't.

Of course a "house valuation survey" (to convince a lender
that they would get their money back if they had to sell
the property) is pretty vestigial. I'm sure there are cases
where it was sufficient for them to merely drive past the
property without stopping.

I don't know how many houses you've had surveys on but for me, it's four.

Four, the first of which cause me to run away from the property.

I've never encountered a surveyor who deals in things that don't exist
and have never happened. If he or she starts that, the
house seller may well sue them.

If the surveyor can't insert suitable weasel words, they
aren't a competent surveyor!

I've just fished out my last survey, and the first paragraph
I read, on p5, states:
"No cracking of the masonry was found indicating that the
wall-ties are providing adequate support to the walls. It
is commented that in older properties where cavity walls
have been constructed, wall ties are reaching an age where
corrosion may well affect their structural integrity."

There are /many/ other such examples in the report,
including noting that he is unaware of any problems
relating to a nearby club!

But nobody can introduce a hazard that does not exist. This is getting
a bit silly. You're talking about surveyors 'alluding' to know hazards.
This was not a known hazard. No surveyor can say "this property is
close to the River Parrett which might give rise for concern", when
that has never, ever happened! Your surveyor's comment on the wall
ties is absolutely vital to the integrity of the structure because they
"are reaching an age". The water had never reached this particular
property.
--

Sacha
======================================


Just thought I would add to the non pruned thread

A Surveyor can only do and report on what is evident at the time. He is not
a fortune teller. Common sense will tell anybody that.

Mike

---------------------------------------------------------------
www.friendsofshanklintheatre.co.uk