Vendor doing work on house without telling us after accepting our offer?! What to do?

[Periodpropertyfan]

We viewed a Victorian house that was back on the market (due to previous buyers pulling out because of concerns about damp), in late May. There were lots of viewings but eventually it was between us and another buyer, both interested. The estate agent also mentioned that due to the previous offer falling through due to damp, the vendor was planning to do some work (damp proof courses and replastering) to address this, meaning we shouldn't need to reduce our offer due to damp. We'd rather have done the work ourselves but didn't feel we could insist on this, as the vendor was quite possibly not going to go with our offer anyway. We were told the work had started and was ongoing, but weren't given any details of the work.

The estate agent told us the vendor was ideally looking for a cash buyer, which we're not, so if we wanted to put an offer in, it would need to be at asking price for us to be in with a chance, so we reluctantly put in an offer at full asking price, at the start of June. Our offer was rejected anyway, as we were told the vendor preferred the other buyers, who were cash buyers.

We stayed in touch, and in early July, we were told that the other buyers were pulling out, as 'they couldn't get a mortgage'! So clearly not cash buyers. 🙄We were then asked if we wanted to go ahead with our original offer, and reasoning that we could renegotiate after survey, we said yes.

We were concerned about the damp and any other structural issues, given the history with this property and the fact it was a period property, so instructed a surveyor that specialises in period properties. The survey identified a number of quite concerning things re damp, not least (as we suspected) that the work the vendor is doing supposedly to rectify the damp is instead likely to be making it much worse, and he observed the decorators in situ painting over damp plaster, that clearly has not had time to dry out. They are using modern waterproof paints and cements that are in effect damaging the fabric of the property.

I went back to the estate agent and queried this - the estate agent we've been dealing with, who'd given us little info, is on holiday and a more helpful colleague has now belatedly sent us a load of info about the damp work, including dated contracts. This shows that the work wasn't even agreed until a week AFTER our offer had been accepted - am furious that in that case, they didn't think to check with us, before starting on a massive programme of very invasive work. To clarify, they are installing a chemical damp proof course and replastering all walls on a 30 foot lounge and another 12 foot lounge, so removing this and redoing it would be a huge and very messy job and would mean we couldn't move in for months.

While we could just live with it and hope the work doesn't actually cause further damp, I have a serious mould allergy and would literally be disabled by living anywhere with a damp problem, so that's not an option I'm very comfortable with.

Don't really know what to do - we could obviously go back and reduce our offer, but get that the vendor is not going to be thrilled at taking off money to rectify work they are currently paying for! The estate agents swear that the work is high quality and guaranteed so there shouldn't be an issue; they even say they've used the firm on their own properties. Which may well be true - it doesn't change the fact that it's not suitable for a Victorian house, not what we would want and was started after our offer was accepted without checking with us or even telling us!

Any thoughts on how best to respond? We do like the house and there's nothing else out there currently that we prefer. And we've spent quite a bit on surveyors/solicitors so far. But what originally looked like a house that was ready to move in to is now anything but - in addition to the damp work, the current owner also covered the house in plastic paint and installed a new drive blocking the ventilation, so we are going to have spend ££ to basically undo everything they've done to the house in the last decade. Such a shame, as it's a really attractive period property, but owned by someone with no understanding of period properties, who never even lived in it (US-based).

Sorry for the long post, but trying not to dripfeed. Thanks for all advice.

I would pull out. That work is not just unnecessary, it's not going to work, and it may well be structurally damaging. I have experience in dealing with damp, and I woudn't touch a house with a barge pole if it had had that work done to it.

"in addition to the damp work, the current owner also covered the house in plastic paint and installed a new drive blocking the ventilation"
Oh ye gods and little fishes- yet more of a disaster area in addition to the injected DPC and tanking.
We had to have three layers of paint glass-blasted off this house, and ripping up the drive to get the levels low enough below the actual DPC is actually the last expensive 'biggie' on our list. At least in our case it's a gradual build up of tarmac, not done with malice aforethought. Luckily we knew what we were doing, the drive was knackered anyway, and that the brick was good enough to take the cleaning process.
If it had also had an injected PDPC or tanking, we'd have walked away and given it up as a bad job not worth taking on.
It's sad, but this is a house to walk away from now they have pretty much wrecked it. I have no idea why they wanted to do it- in our case here the silly things had been many done years ago when people knew no better. It will cost them a fortune to have the work done, it's completely unnecessary, and will leave them with a house nobody who has a clue about damp would consider buying. We were quoted 13K for similar work on this house, never did a stiver of it or asked for a penny reduction on the price for it, and the damp has gone.

We were once advised by a surveyor that we inform the HA that if the vendor did any more work to the property, the deal was off.
The surveyor said that the vendor had been trailing round the property with him, asking what he should do about this or that, and what the surveyor was going to say. The surveyor told me he had even followed him into the loft. To get rid of him, the surveyor pointed out some woodworm (which he told me wasn't actually serious) to scare him away to to the phone, ringing wood treatment companies the surveyor had suggested....!
All the work the vendor had done to date had made the property worse, not better, and it would cost more to fix for everything he touched. We told the HA to tell him to stop work or lose the sale. In the end, the survey was so bad we cut our offer and they refused to accept it, and boy did we dodge a bullet there.

In fact, reading all the OP's posts, it was actually all straightforwardly remediable with cheap and easily understood remedies until the idiot vendors paid out a lot of good money to get lousy work done which is wrecking the house.
The only thing I would suggest to the OP for the future to do differently is that you never, except in very special circumstances like underpinning on their insurance if you can accept those sorts of risks, put in an offer on any property on the basis that the vendors will -or can- do any work on it. If work needs doing, factor that into your offer. Then you know what gets done gets done right, because you do it. If they don't agree, walk away.

"Any property with a damp problem will have structural damage also."
Nonsense. Many old houses have not been properly cared for and have superficial damp, such as from blocked vents and condensation due to poor ventilation generally in the house. That's this house as it was, to a T. There isn't a structural issue in it anywhere, not even any cracks in the old lime plaster, and it's 100 years old. Doing the basics of ventilation etc which cost close to nothing, stripping the unbreathable wallpaper off and putting on proper breathable paint, and, ironically, removing the stupid tanked plaster layer where some moron had put it on one wall solved the problem.

If we'd have had that sort of rubbish 'damp proof treatment' done, as once of those 'damp proof specialist' companies suggested, then we would have had structural problems. (And it would have wasted about 13K too, and more, as it would have taken as much again to get all that crap off again, and we'd still have had the pointless and damaging injection stuff which we wouldn't be able to get rid of). And that's not just my opinion, that's the specialist heritage buildings surveyor's opinion as well......

No it's not. But depressing this is happening elsewhere too!

It's a lovely house. And I have lived previously in a house with damp issues that was relatively easy to treat (caused by leaking guttering) that was quickly fixed and the problem resolved itself. Not all damp problems are major.

When we viewed the house, it didn't smell of damp and it wasn't apparent that treating the limited visible damp would require such extensive work. It's now clear from the survey that it will require quite extensive work, not least to undo the completely unsuitable damp proof work that has been started.

Of course it's their house and they can do whatever they like to it. But if they actually want to sell it, which I think they do as it's just lying there empty and has been for some time, it makes sense for them to communicate openly and honestly about work they're doing on the property to the people who have agreed to buy it!

Well said. A lot of nonsense talked about damp and old houses on this thread from people who appear to know nothing about either.

Agree - definitely a takeaway from this whole experience.

That said, we didn't have the option to do this, on this occasion, as we were only one of several potential buyers (and not the preferred ones), when the estate agents told us about the plans to undertake some kind of damp proof work originally. As it was, the vendor went with the other, supposedly cash buyers initially, and would have been even more likely to do that if we'd tried to dictate what they did with the damp in their house.

Interesting that you had a similar experience.

It is so genuinely gutting that the vendor of the house we've offered on has literally done every single thing wrong to this house. Particularly when we look back at the Rightmove pictures from 2014 and can see how gorgeous and undamaged the house was just a few short years ago, before the current owner got his hands on it. 😭

Tell them to stop all work on the property or you will pull out; the go round & agree what your happy for them to finish …. Plastering / no painting over it stop him doing anything on the drive or at least make him put it right the rake the cost of putting the damage already done off tge asking price he’s got two choices like it or lump it x

I’d run! This is going to cost you a lot Of money and time to rectify!
The other buyer didn’t pull out because they couldn’t get a mortgage… they more likely used a surveyor and backed out

I think you've answered your own question - you don't touch this property with a very long bargepole!

tl;dr don't be too worried, go ahead if this is the house you want.

I have owned/lived in 3 victorian houses. For the 2nd and 3rd, we did complete renovations including damp and timber treatment, installation of kitchen, bathrooms, and rewiring. The worst problem by far to worry about is dry rot. We spent 6 months washing up in a bowl filled from the bath tub and placed on a table in what would become a bedroom while we had no proper kitchen

I have also lived in the USA and have experience buying and selling there too.

My take is:

1. it does not surprise me that the vendor decided to do work that he perceived would make the house better prior to a sale. In the USA, it is not uncommon for people to do a lot of work prior to putting the house on the market. A friend installed new kitchen counter tops and moved out his family while the house was being sold. I had to install new carpet and have a flat redecorated prior to sale because that is what the market - both buyers and sellers - in the US expects. In the UK, the equilibrium is that houses are sold "as-is" and the purchaser has the choice of what renovations to make. Personally, I prefer the UK model - but as I say, the vendor may be influenced by their own experience in the US.

2. When I sold the flat, I was living 600 miles away and I had my realtor arrange the redecorating and carpet installation. (Maybe that is why the standard realtor commissions is 6% in USA.). So agin, it wold not concern me that the work on your house of interest is being organized by the UK estate agent.

3. Maybe I am naive, but I would not distrust the damp proof work just because the estate agent is organizing it. There may or may not be a 'commission' involved, but recommending damp proof installers is not a one shot game. Reputation is involved. Look at the guarantee, maybe have an independent surveyor look at the quality of the work. It may well be ok.

4. No sale is certain until contracts are exchanged, but in US time between verbal offer and binding contract is a few days, in the UK it can be a few months. Perhaps a vendor with US mentality does not feel they can rely on your offer maturing and wants to get themselves better prepared for when/if your offer does not come to fruition for some reason.

If the house has generally what you are looking for, I would not reject it at this stage. Though you must be the judge of whether the other ways in which the house has been damaged make it worth pursuing - specially plastic paint.

Now, some might suspect that house prices are generally going to be stationary or declining in the next couple of years and that it is not a good time to be buying anything. But since you are already invested in housing and are not considering selling up and renting, such price moves are arguably irrelevant. Yes, the house you buy may go down in value, but if you do not buy it, the house you are living in may similarly go down in value. Overall, it's a wash.

Good luck - moving is upsetting!

Put simply - walk away. If they bodged that, what else HAVEN'T you seen.

We had this buying our house. We were buying for the first time so the delay didn't affect us. Our solicitor was an expert at this sort of thing and demanded the work be done by Rentokil with full guarantee certificates etc. I suspect the work cost quite a bit and we doubt we'd have got the same off the price of the property. Just insist the work has guarantees and you should be fine.

I feel this is going to end up being a huge money pit.
Walk away is my advice.

Indeed. The mind boggles....
With every old house you are likely to uncover idiocies and Things That Need Doing Again, But Properly This Time, but this property has the potential to be an utter disaster area.

I don’t think you should automatically pull out as you obv like the house - but it may come to that. Remember this is a purchase and the numbers have to stack up. I’m interested in what your own ea is saying as you’re paying them to protect your interests. I think selling agent is having you on and is not to be trusted. I’d call the damp contractor and ask them about the work, why this was chosen and if it’s suitable to remedy the situation, you’ll also get a feel for the quality of work from the contractor. If the ea is instructing the work they know the problem will have been moved on (to you) if they’ve selected this just to tick the box and have the house ready for sale. Same with the decorator, who chose this paint etc, do they have something more suitable.
Once you’re armed with more facts, call the ea and tell them you’re reducing your offer, detail the fact the work was not instructed as advised and is unsuitable. If you need to get quotes to establish the costs and make your offer fair then do so. The vendor isn’t your problem, neither is the estate agent. But saddling yourself with an unsellable home (worst case scenario), or making a loss due to the work to be completed and living on building site come a close second and that’s before you factor in if the house looks bad but the damp persists and it affects your health. Don’t be nice, this is business, be firm but fair. The ea will put pressure on because their perspective is to make money and sell the house, not to repair damp or worry about your problems later.

The thing is, the OP knows that the work isn't 'suitable'. It's not a question of the quality of the work, it's that this particular work should not be being done regardless of the 'quality' of it. That's the real problem.
It's a positive scandal what's going on in the 'damp proofing' industry. It's high time some journalists exposed it for what it is.

We once rented a recently renovated old house that an old lady used to live in. The plaster fell off after a couple of months.

Honestly just pull out. Apart from the serious damp and other issues which make this sound like a never ending money out, the vendor has been messing you around. Walk away please.

If two buyers have pulled out, and you know one was refused a mortgage on the property warning bells should be ringing loudly. It seems to me that the problem is a lot worse than you have been led to believe. In your place I’d pull out, otherwise you may be paying top whack and be faced with a huge bill correcting botched work, and having the work done properly.

Perhaps vendor is having work done to get property to sell. Of course the advice he's has may be bad, there's whole websites on damp in older houses and opinions on how to deal with it vary widely.

Either way, if it doesn't feel right, pull out, quit, go the other way. Etc etc

Agree with you about period properties being breathable - my previous cottage C1610 (Sarsen Stone and brick) was like this, you had to heat and ventilate at the same time) But it was fine and had just a bit of damp underneath the stairs, so I had a few holes drilled in the door, and when I did a mould test it was all 'normal'. However, my neighbours sold to someone who bought the adjoining cottage, who bought it to rent out. They bought it in September, and put new flooring in covering the majority of the downstairs (laid on top of a concrete floor. It was vinyl.) The property didn't get rented out until the spring, by which time they had locked the house up with no heating and no windows open, and by the spring, the walls were 'running'! (I did suggest that they had the heating on low and opened a window, but they knew best!) I had a knock on the door one day asking me how I dealt with my damp - I didn't have any, but when I moved my sofa which was against the adjoining wall, I found that my plaster was falling off! (They did pay for that to be redone fortunately!)

So the moral of this story: period properties can be fine unless you cover them in plastic, leave them cold and do not ventilate! I think it was a costly mistake ...