Jump to content

Recommended Posts

We have a just received our Homebuyer's report on a house (built c.1900), which red flagged high damp readings at various points in the walls of the ground floor and that at various points the damp proof internal floor is higher than the damp-proof course and should be lowered.


We will get a damp and timber report but have read that this is common with houses of this age and not necessarily a problem. The mortgage company have approved our loan without retaining any funds, which I have read they tend to do with cases of damp. Is it reasonable to infer that the damp issue may not be terrible, if they are prepared to lend?

Most houses of this age will have some damp spots. The survey is always going to flag up worst case stuff - they have to cover all bases. Unless the walls are visibly crumbling, you were wheezing, or the walls were wet with large visible patches you'll probably find you're OK.

You can never be sure of anything with houses of this age. Homebuyers reports don't even scratch the surface (both metaphorically and literally). But high damp readings are very very common and wouldn't put me off (unless there is evidence of rot to structural timbers).


I think normal procedure would be to get a quote covering all remedial works, then ask for the price to be reduced accordingly.

We had the same with our recent house purchase and took the risk. The valuation survey is bound to cover themselves. When we got a good damp company in, they said it needed work but not as much as the survey suggested, so for us it looks like the risk was worth it(touch wood)!


We're getting the work done and what we thought might be ?5-10k is going to be ?1500.

Thanks all for the good advice.


It's difficult to know what is a real problem and what we could live with for another 5-10y, e.g (not damp related) re:windows - double glazed plastic(!)of some age and some of the panes have failed and misted over. Windows are likely to require replacing at some point in the near future.

Ideally, we would rip them out and replace with wooden sash but we are uikely to be able to afford that for quite sometime and it may actually be fine for a while.


I suppose in reality, unless buying a new build or recent renovation (and even then), there will be a list of imperfections which we will have to prioritise from necessary to would-be-nice. I'm hoping for a similar outcome to yours, Edcam.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • https://www.facebook.com/labourparty/posts/when-your-family-and-friends-ask-you-what-labour-has-achieved-so-far-send-them-t/1090481149116565/    Do you mean going from rhyming with Message to rhyming with Massage?  Or was it really a hard g to start with, rhyming, say,  with Farague/Faraig or Fararg?
    • Why on earth is there so much interest, and negativity, after a 100 days of a Labour government when we had 1000s of days of dreadful government before this with hardly a chat on this Website?  What is it that is suddenly so much greater interest? Here's part of a list of what they have done in a 100 days - it's from a Labour MP so obviously there is some bias, and mainly new Bills so yet to deliver/put into law.  This reminds me of the US election where the popular view was that Biden had achieved nothing, rather than leading the recovery after Covid, a fairer tax system, housing, supporting workers, dealing with community unrest following high profile racist incidents,  So if we think Starmer is ineffective and Labour incompetent then we are all going to believe it? I do feel sick after seeing Clarkson on Newsnight, playing to the gallery.  Surely Trump must have a high profile role for him on the environment and climate change  
    • Hi looking for a shed for my allotment. Can pick up
    • But do you not understand how tough farming is, especially post-Brexit when some of the subsidies were lost and costs have increased massively yet the prices farmers can charge has not? On the BBC News tonight they said pig farming costs had gone up 54% since 2019, cow farming costs up 44% and cereal costs up 43%. The NFU said that the margins are on average 0.5% return on capital. Land and buildings are assets that don't make money until you sell them...it's what you do with them that makes money and farms are struggling to make money and so many farms are generational family businesses so never realise the assets (one farmers on the news said his farm had been in the family since 1822) but will have to to pay tax for continuing the family business. On another news item tonight there was a short piece saying the government has said that 50,000 more pensioners will be forced into relative poverty (60% of the average income) due to the Winter Fuel Allowance removal which will rise to 100,000 more by 2027. James Murray from the Treasury was rolled out on Newsnight to try and defend that and couldn't. You can't give doctors 20%+ and push more pensioners into poverty as a result.  The problem for Labour is the court of public opinion will judge them and right now the jury is out after a series of own-goals, really poor communication and ill-thought-out idealogical policies. And don't ever annoy the farmers.....;-)  
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...