quote:

---

Originally posted by MP3C
Can send it to me if you like, will be able to have a look for you, however home buyer surveys aren't my specialty, however I am visiting my parents this Easter and I am very good friends with a FRICS surveyor who is in the area and will defiantly be able to have a look if I can't advise.

Matt

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by franky

quote:

---

Originally posted by MP3C
Can send it to me if you like, will be able to have a look for you, however home buyer surveys aren't my specialty, however I am visiting my parents this Easter and I am very good friends with a FRICS surveyor who is in the area and will defiantly be able to have a look if I can't advise.

Matt

---

Hi

It wasn't a home buyers survey, done by a FRICS type person. I'm happy with his service, just that my mortgage company have put a 10k retention on the mortgage till I have a damp and timber survey done. This is the D+T section of the report, basically I read it as about £2.3k's worth of work needed? Anyone had a retention put on a mortgage before!?

I am pleased to report:-
Woodborer infestation
Roof

This originally thatched property has been re-roofed in modern times, probably in the 1980’s
The roof covering is concrete interlocking pantiles on modern breathable roofing underlay.
The structure of the main roof comprises newer rafters in tantalised softwood carried on the original kingpost roof truss structure. The reason that a new higher structure was necessary is that the original thatch would have been considerable thicker than the new pantiles and it would have been required to maintain the roof line.
The remaining original structure is very strong with large section king post trusses carrying large purlins. The plaster lath ceilings are carried on ceiling joists which span from the trusses to the perimeter walls.
An examination of the new roof timbers suggests that this is tantalised timber and therefore not vulnerable to wood worm attack. I did not find any flight holes in the limited inspection that I made. I therefore concluded that it is unlikely that this newer timber is at risk.
I did find flight holes in the older timber. I found the holes generally accepted to be the furniture beetle. I did not find the larger holes associated with death watch or long horn.
The level of damage is of this order: Trusses and purlins Minimal
Ceiling joists more extensive and widespread. The ceiling joists looked to have been less seasoned than the more finished trusses and purlins.


My advice is that this roof void should be treated.

Prior to treatment the residue of thatched material should be removed.
This is a large roof space and I would estimate that the cost of remedial spraying would be of the order of £1,250.00.
Upper floors.
The house was generally carpeted and therefore a full examination of the top surface of the floor boarding was not possible, in the scope of this survey neither was an examination of the floor void. Lifting carpet at the edges revealed a minimal outbreak of furniture beetle attack in a sporadic set of outbreaks.
I concluded that the effect on the floors was minimal. My understanding is that you propose to carry out rewiring and installation of heating pipes in the course of a refurbishment programme. My advice is given in the context of that information.
The infestation in the floors is minimal and would sensibly be dealt with in conjunction with your proposed works. The recommended procedure for treatment of upper floors is to take up every fourth board and spray the underside of the floor boards so exposed and the sides of the exposed joists. In practise a heavy spray into the floor cavity and soaking the top surface of the floor boards has the desired effect. Most treatment firms will operate on an adhoc basis, coming in to spray to suit your programme. I would estimate that the cost of this should be no more than £750.00 for the whole operation to the upper floors. This work could be done on a DIY basis as guarantees are generally more appropriate to the roof .
Staircase.
I noted that there was a moderate outbreak in the under stairs compartment and would recommend that this is cleared out and sprayed during the course of the upper floor visit.


Damp Penetration

The construction of this house is generally a stone foundation (visible at the road end of the property) possibly bearing onto the underlying rock surface. This was not an invasive survey so I cannot be sure of that statement but I detected very little movement in this house which is unusual in basically a medieval structure.
The stone visible would largely be impervious.
I found only one area that had a hollow floor and floor boards on the ground floor that was the lounge. The whole of the house was carpeted at the time of my inspection and therefore only a minimal inspection by lifting carpet was possible. Generally I found trowelled concrete. I suspect that this is screed overlaying the original flagstones.
The wall structures are a combination of stone walling, brick and framed construction faced externally with render.
The house exhibited a high level of surface moisture on the walls and it suggests to me that much will be achieved by the introduction of heating and ventilation.
In relevance to damp testing, the house is basically in two sections: the main largely original house built in a combination of stone, brick walls and window surrounds with rendered exterior. Internal walls are stone and medieval studwork probably with brick infill. The second section is the rear single storey extension, which is much more modern. This extension contains the kitchen and bathroom which are both fully tiled. Where it was possible to take readings it was found to be dry and therefore ignored.
A standard protimeter test was taken at 1m centres around the ground floor walls. Readings were taken where possible and relevant. Readings are not relevant in tiled, dry lined or panelled areas.
The circumstances in which the test was taken are relevant. In this case there is not heating in the house and the house has been closed up for in excess of 12 months. There were no windows open on the day of my inspection

The main house

In a house of this construction, modern accepted forms of damp proofing would not be appropriate. For example, it would not be possible to introduce a damp proof membrane into the walls because of their form of construction.
It is possible that a vertical membrane system such as Delta could be used in discrete areas such as the sitting room. In the dining room, stripping off the rotten introduced timber boarding and exposing the base structure, combined with the recommended heating and ventilation would achieve positive results. A view could then be taken as to if anything at all would be necessary after that.

---