To survey or not?

[blacklilypad]

We are going back and forth on whether we should get a full structural survey on the property we are purchasing. It's not crazy old less than 100 years but it does have a small extension.

We are moving to the South East and all our quotes for a structural survey have been close to £2k. Now the thing is we have got this house for a good price and below asking as the owners have lived there a very long time and wanted the house to go to a family that they liked who are in no chain (us!). And we know for a fact that we were heavily outbid. So even if the survey came up with issues we wouldn't be able to negoatiate on price.

We are also planning toDH is also very knowledgable regarding building work (although not a professional) and there is nothing there that he spotted.

So is it worth it or are we better to keep the £2k to put towards work that needs doing? My DH thinks it would just be an expensive to do list. We will definitely buy it regardless of what the survey says as we are mainly buying the location.

Bump, thanks

I'd always get a full survey, but if you really do want to buy it at that price regardless, then I guess you don't have to.

I'd always get a survey aswell tbh and have always been advised too.

Just reread my OP it should have said 'We are also planning to completely gut it anyway so any issues would get rectified along the way.'

I'm just so torn as I've always gotten a survey previously but part of me feels like it is just a big ploy that surveyors have going. Convincing us all that we need one when mostly they don't say anything useful. None of our previous ones came back with anything we didn't already know.

Totally up to you of course, but I always would.

Definitely get a full survey. I made the mistake of not having one on the last house I bought. I never had a single problem there however when I came to sell and the buyers had a full survey it brought to light loads of problems causing them to pull out of the purchase

@Thunderpants5138 what kind of problems did it highlight, if you don't mind me asking? If you never had a problem then are they really problems worth pulling out over?

I would get a survey done, our builder did the second viewing with us and didn’t identify major problems other than a fairly large refurb/ modernisation.
My dad was adamant we should get a full survey done and so glad we did. The house had been extended with no steels put in and the whole side wall demolished, the roof was held up by a piece of 2x2 and a breeze block. This surveyor said in 30 years he’d never seen anything like it. Best £2k I’d ever spent. Probably wouldn’t have got much further as presumably there wasn’t building control sign off for the extension but without the survey you might just get indemnity insurance and hope for the best.
Our builder was great and I’d trust him 100% but they look for different things. The surveyor is looking at whether the building is structurally sound.

Oh and this house was a 1970s bungalow. It was a repossession so sold as seen so to speak, it sold to a developer who lost a ton of money on it and has sold twice again (in 6 years) so I guess there are a few problems with it. Was in a lovely position though

When we sold out last house the buyers didn’t bother with a survey - they were cash buyers. This gave us the idea that we could save 2k and not get one either since we were 100% committed to buying this house. So we didn’t and we don’t regret it.
No doubt a survey would have thrown up some issues but we got the house at a good price so wouldn’t have tried to knock them down on price anyway. Sometimes you just have to use your common sense not just do what most other people do because...most other people do it.

It depends how confident you are in your ability to spot problems with buildings.

We've bought 2 houses and had 1 survey. It was an expensive to do list with nothing on that we hadn't already identified. However it was actually problematic because our mortgage company then insisted on a chemical damp proof course (damaging the fabric of the building) due to the damp in a 120yr old house which had had no heating and all the ventilation removed. Anyone who knows old buildings would say "of course it's damp, heat it and open the windows/chimney" not "spend 3k and trash the bricks".

Our 2nd house is of a similar age and we deliberately did not get a survey; we could see it needed work on the roof and a few other bits. The survey would have reduced our funds to do that work

BUT if you aren't confident that you know what you're looking at pay a professional

@DancingDog how could the surveyor see there were no RSJs? Surely it was all plastered over? That's very scary to think of what could happen at any moment to that house and occupants.

Survey may be cheaper in long run.
Older extensions may not have needed to comply with building regs and have foundations checked and signed off. Look on Council planning and check houses in street.

[quote blacklilypad]@Thunderpants5138 what kind of problems did it highlight, if you don't mind me asking? If you never had a problem then are they really problems worth pulling out over?[/quote]
There were things in the loft such as no firewall between myself and the adjoining property, a chimney breast had been removed from the downstairs levels and "potentially" not secured in the attic (this was discredited). Then damage to roof tiles etc.
In the end we sold the property to another buyer at a reduced rate to compensate for these issues

If your planing on gutting the house then I wouldn’t bother, If your husband knows what he is looking at then just concentrate on any potential structural issues , for example cracks in the inner of outer skins , stand back and have a good look , is it leaning? Does the roof structure look straight ? Are there any dips, sags in it ?.

Go up in to the loft and check roof timbers are sound and no bits have been cut out/ removed. When you gut it you will find things, that the survey wouldn’t have spotted anyway.

I never have surveys because we always do lots of work on the houses we buy and it would be a waste of money to pay someone to tell me there are issues with things that we are going to rip out anyway.

As long as the structure is sound then everything else can easily be sorted.

We got one in the same context, it’s only use was being able to use it as evidence that the banks surveyor was a shyster when they later caused issues.

We didn’t, but had a roof specialist and reputable builder come and have a look. There was no extensions apart from a conservatory (which will probably be knocked down) and it was only 60 years ago. The roofer said it was in good nick because the property was built when the quality and workmanship was superior to nowadays.

If it helps we've always surveyed.
One showed the original house and it's (v large, 2 storey extension) were parting company. We withdrew.
Another required the vendor to construct a loft hatch to enable assessment of the roof void in the extension BUT failed to notice the weight bearing wall which had been removed and replaced by a 2m concrete lintel (and the bathroom above had dropped an inch) or that a previous extension had just added further power to the existing wiring and it was possible to find the wires in the walls because the plaster was warm.

Clearly surveys are not always useful!

Yes. Yes you need a survey on a property you’re going to gut. I assume £2k is tiny compared to the overall value of the property. Surveys are part of the cost of house buying.

Obviously you don’t have to though

OP he went into the loft (it wasn’t boarded) and you could see what had been done, he sent us some photos - don’t think he stayed up there long! There were multiple other problems, but the lack of structural work was the main thing. It had by some miracle stayed up 10 years with the wood in place but we wanted to convert the loft. Which is why the surveyor was looking into it in a bit more detail.

I agree with your DH.

Thanks everyone!