To think this is more than unfair on a potential buyer?

[eeffoc123]

People we know went on the market with their house a few years back and accepted an offer, but when the buyer had paid out for the survey it was discovered that the roof needed a whole load of cash spent on it so the unfortunate buyers had to pull out, having lost the money they spent on their survey.

The sellers are back on the market again but they have switched agent so they aren't forced to declare the problem. They have not priced the house to take into account the fact that the work will need to be carried out.

The way things stand, someone will like and offer on the house, pay out for a survey and then the issue will become clear again. Those potential buyers may have to pull out like the first ones, having lost £1K or whatever a survey costs nowadays.

AIBU to think this is totally out of order of the sellers? The have form for being dishonest over other matters. Goodness knows what other issues with the house they are hiding. Surely considering a survey will show up the issue they should take the cost of fixing it off their sale price.?

Just interested in other people's opinions on this- or is that the risk you take when having to instruct t a surveyor?

Unless you buy a new build, there will be a list of things a surveyor will happily list for every house. On one house we bought the surveyor stated it needed to be reroofed. 20 years later it's still perfect.

Of course the vendor's price reflects the current condition. Why do you think you can more accurately value houses than an estate agent?

This happened to us. We wanted to buy a converted church. Survey showed major issues with roof structure. The sellers 100 % must have known. They even had the gall to ask us to share the results of the survey (they obviously didn’t want to contribute for it so we declined). They changed estate agents after that.

No I am afraid it is a case of caveat emptor.

The seller makes no representations as to the condition of the house, which is sold as seen. It’s for the buyer to obtain a survey.

If the buyer specifically asks “does the roof need work?” and the vendor said no, that would be a different matter. But that is not a standard question in the pre-purchase documentation, and if a potential buyer did ask that question the vendor would be within its rights to say “not answering, that’s a matter for you and your surveyor.”

Apart from anything else, you can’t expect a purchaser to go on the vendor’s assessment of what needs doing because it’s too subjective. One person’s “major works” is another person’s “I assumed that anyway” or “I’ve been living there for 20 years and I think it’s fine.” The purchaser has to get an independent assessment from a surveyor, ask them questions and make their own assessment.

The surveys for the last three houses we bought (Victorian, Edwardian, 1930s) all said that the roof needed replacing because it was reaching the end of its life. The first of those houses was bought nearly 30 years ago, and as it’s in an area I visit occasionally I always have a look. It took until 2018 for it actually be replaced. And at the same time the gorgeous originally wooden sash windows, which were in perfectly serviceable condition, were replaced by soulless upvc which I can guarantee won’t last the 100 or so years the originals lasted!

What business is any of this of yours?

Some personal grudge?