Are homebuyers surveys worth it?

[Bakingnovice]

We've had a v basic valuation survey done and everyone we speak to is saying dont bother with a homebuyers one as it'll just be full of caveats and recommending further reports. Are HS worth getting done?

Yes!
I'm not going to spend £100k+ without someone who knows what they're doing looking at it. Its only £500.

You need to read it with a pinch of salt. Ours said replace the fuse board immediately, we know an electrician who had a look and said - it'll be fine, don't panic.

You can use it as a bargaining tool if they find something.

No, just seen the one produced on our house for our buyers. About 90% factually incorrect and another 5% misleading! Also missed the one obvious issue that actually is wrong with the house, and completely different to the report the previous buyers (who fell through) had, and the survey we had when we bought. Full of caveats as you say and just states they aren't qualified to comment and you should get an expert.

Not sure I'd have the guts to go ahead without one myself as it just seems like the responsible thing to do, but logically I know its not worth it at all and would be better of taking a builder, roofer, electrician etc for their opinions.

I don't think what they do is beyond the abilities of an experienced DIYer, BUT I agree with GD that when you're committing to possibly hundreds of thousands of pounds, these checks need to be done by somebody. Are you prepared to go round lifting carpets, checking plumbing, electrics and drains, looking at roof timbers? If not, I suggest you pay somebody else to. It may not be watertight, but at least you're not completely blind.

I want one but dh thinks they are not worth it as they are full of caveats or recommendations to carry out further investigations. I think I'm going to go ahead and get one as it will be worth it for the peace of mind. As far as using it to bargain, our vendors are older baby boomers and won't even budge on the price by 50p!

Dh reckons it'll only tell us what we know: some windows need replacing, the roof will need looking at at some point and that the electrics are over three years old.

Unless the house is pretty new, I would get one done.

I spoke to the surveyor of our current house about this. He said the bigger companies will often recommend further specialist recommendations, but the individual firms will usually give you more information about problems found.
It's not just a bargaining tool though. If something serious is discovered, you will at least have the option to walk away or continue with full knowledge of what you're taking on.

I look on them as a sort of insurance - so yes, they are necessary.

Thing is they don't lift the carpets, look behind furniture or check electrics etc. If you read the caveats at the start of the survey you'll see that lots is excluded. I agree they are a type of insurance, and if you're not very experienced they will flag some issues you may want to investigate further. However, I'd take it with a pinch of salt and get a builder to check any potential issues they raise - and you may well find they aren't issues at all or that the builder spots something the surveyor has totally missed.

I think it probably boils down to the individual surveyor.
Our buyers had a homebuyers survey and I was interested to see how thoroughly he went through the house.
The fuse box was checked, the boiler too, he went up in the attic for ages with a torch, all doors were opened and closed, flooring and walls checked. He was here for well over 2hours and this is only a small house!

I was very impressed and took his card in the hope that we will need to book our survey soon.

Depends on the property. If you are buying an ancient doer upper with serious risks involved, I'd go one further and do a structural survey. But in a new block of flats, I wouldn't bother

"I don't think what they do is beyond the abilities of an experienced DIYer"

You are joking of course?

After a degree course, 5 years training and many years experience, the average chartered surveyor has probably inspected more houses in a month that the "average DIYer" has seen in a lifetime.

Our surveyor is going out this week. He's a local guy who seems really thorough. It's more a reassurance for us that the house isn't falling down than a bargaining tool. The vendors are very catsbum about us getting a survey at this late stage but I'm so fed up of them anyway I dont care what they think.

I'm hoping it will also point out areas we might need to look at in the future. This is our forever house so a bit of peace of mind and more info is v useful.

I've had a few done over the years and they are only as good as the person who carries them out - that differs massively from person to person. Mostly a load of old rubbish.
The last one we had done was so inaccurate, it's gone to formal investigation procedures. Failed to spot woodworm etc, costing us thousands.

I don't doubt they are a lot more qualified than a DIYer, but if they wont commit to anything then the report is no good to anyone. For example they wont comment on damp, but will advise 'there may be damp' and you should get a damp specialist (who normally has no qualifications and a vested interest in finding damp) to inspect. They seem to say this in all houses of a certain age. If all they are going to do is suggest to get other tradesmen to look at the house then I don't see the value of the report. I understand that the arse covering is to protect themselves, but doesn't help anyone.

When we bought our house the surveyor told us there was damp and not a lot else. We had this checked before we moved in and there was no damp. He missed a leak from the bathroom which the damp company did notice! 3 years later our first lot of buyers (sale fell through) were told the floors were rotten - this was the only issue raised. One month later our 2nd lot of buyers were told there was no damp, no rotten floors, just uneven floor boards as you would expect for the age of the house. However, they were told the roof needed replacing-they had a builder out who told them one tile was missing and should be replaced (at a cost of £50), the rest of the roof was fine. I fail to see how three 'experts' who are qulaified as surveyors can completely contradict themselves like that - clearly they can't all be right!

We are thinking of not bothering either. We definitely want this house, we looked at it two years ago and just missed out on it, so now we've got this far in the process there would have to be something MAJOR wrong with it for us to pull out. I just don't think there is (although we are going round again this week to look more closely). It's of a similar vintage to the house we're selling, and we know the issues with these houses (ex-council, post-war). Lots of neighbours have extended with no issues, and the house has been rented for about 8 yrs so presumably the landlord has had to have stuff like gas/electrics/drains checked regularly.
We can't afford the full structural survey and the cheaper option seems to be a back-covering money-making exercise.

I would get a recommended local surveyor. It gives you some piece of mind and also someone to go back to if they miss something really important.

I really feel that it people can't afford a survey they should probably not be buying a house?

Was that a really terrible thing to day? Sorry I didn't mean it that way. But we have always paid for a survey. If anything it sometimes gives you a bit if flexibility with further negotiations with the seller.