Buying a house - No certificate of compliance with building regulations

As a small example, BER assessor's are required to hold min €250,000 PI insurance.

No BER assessor is paid a quarter of a million euro to carry out a BER assessment

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120190104#Comment_120190104

So why didn’t all the buyers in Priory Hall just sue their surveyors?

mickdw

Because firstly some would have bought off plans and just took what they got.

People who bought in later may have had a survey however the survey will exclude hidden or inaccessible items. A surveyor isn't a magician to be able to inspect closed up areas. Now if there were defects with visible items, they should be picked up in a survey.

Much of the fire issues would relate to lack of cavity barriers etc which is very much hidden work.

The people who signed off on these projects day one are the people with questions to answer.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120190130#Comment_120190130

Did anyone prove their surveyor was negligent?

For priory hall it was the builder who cut corners

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120190061#Comment_120190061

Your understanding is incorrect.

The simple law of Negligence is as follows:-

Does the Construction Professional (CP) owe a duty of care to the Client?
Was the duty of care breached?
How much €€ is the Client entitled to in damages.

Legal action Must commence within 6 years of the Negligence.

If a CP carried out Professional Services for a Client, say a home buyers Structural Survey Report of a house, and the Client purchases the house, and subsequently discovers subsidence in the house which will cost €150,000 to rectify. The Client is entitled to recover all of the costs from the CP’s Professional Indemnity Insurance Company.

Litigation must commence within 6 Years.

Solicitors usually request CP’s to furnish the Solicitor with a copy of the CP’s P.I. Insurance, together with a copy of the Survey Report.

CP usually have P I Insurance cover for approximately €650,000.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/89316440#Comment_89316440

this feels like a pertinent time to post this again:

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120190502#Comment_120190502

The builder cut the corners, but the surveyor was there to find the cut corners and protect their clients, which clearly didn't happen. What's the point of a survey if they can't be on the hook for getting the cut corners resolved?

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120190724#Comment_120190724

Are there any / many cases of surveyors PI paying out to cover the costs of rectification of building issues that the surveyor missed?

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120191051#Comment_120191051

Yes.

I have read many of the cases, which were reported in the various Construction Professionals Institutions magazines.

Many of these claims caused the Costs of Premiums for CP Professional Indemnity Insurance to escalate.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120191047#Comment_120191047

You are referring to incompetent Construction Professionals.

CP must be aware of all necessary inspections during construction stages.

You stated above:- “ What's the point of a survey if they can't be on the hook for getting the cut corners resolved?”

The answer to your query is:- That’s the reason that the CP must have PI Insurance. So the Client issued legal proceedings against the CP and their Insurance Company for the costs to rectify the sub-standard works.

I explained all of this in simple details above.

who what when

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120190502#Comment_120190502

As well as the architects / engineers who cut corners with poor or no oversight.

An inspection at any stage of the construction of the external facade would have shown up a complete lack of cavity barriers.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120191334#Comment_120191334

Would you care to share details of any such cases? Surely details must exist in the public domain in some forum or media.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120191047#Comment_120191047

when the "cut corners" are hidden, which was the problem with priory hall, its not within the ability of the surveyor to see within the construction. mickdw has already outlined this above. im talking about certs of compliance being carried out post construction, by visual non intrusive means only.

the "inspecting" professionals who were engaged during the build would certainly be at fault, but its possible there was none engaged (i dont know enough about the case to say this for certain). The building control section would also be partially at fault here for not enforcing the building regulations, but they did not provide oversight to 100% of projects back then, and obviously priory hall fell between the cracks.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120191594#Comment_120191594

Sure, and I get all that.

I suppose my original comment was to question the value of the surveyor's PI to the average client, when the survey will be couched in so many ifs and buts and conditions around not being able to open up. The client is never going to be able to take an action against the surveyor's PI to pay for any substantial defects that the surveyor missed, as far as I know.

I'm a bit distant from this area now, so I could be out of date. I'm very open to being corrected by those who are closer to the ground than me.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120192360#Comment_120192360

The client is never going to be able to take an action against the surveyor's PI to pay for any substantial defects that the surveyor missed, as far as I know.

the surveyor cannot "miss" aspects that are hidden to them. They can only carry out a "non obtrusive visual inspection", so if there are cavity barriers missing in a cavity, they cannot see that. If the foundations are missing reinforcement, they cannot see that. Hell even if the cavity is missing insulation they cannot see that.

you are essentially asking if these "non intrusive visual inspection" certificates are worth the paper they are written on, and to be honest as a practitioner in the business, no they're pretty much not. They will be qualified to the nth degree

now, if the surveyor misses something very obvious and serious like, say, bedroom windows not complying with fire escape requirements, then absolutely yes their PI insurance will be in trouble. But the main point is they cannot be held liable for things that they cannot see and are hidden from them.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120190724#Comment_120190724

"If a CP carried out Professional Services for a Client, say a home buyers Structural Survey Report of a house, and the Client purchases the house, and subsequently discovers subsidence in the house which will cost €150,000 to rectify. The Client is entitled to recover all of the costs from the CP’s Professional Indemnity Insurance Company."

Even if there was no visible signs of subsidence when the survey was done?

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120193073#Comment_120193073

You posed the following question above:-

“Even if there was no visible signs of subsidence when the survey was done?”

If the Surveyor cannot see or diagnose any signs of Substance in a house which is subsidising, then they should not be carrying out Building Surveys, and will be Negligent.

it is easy for an experienced Construction Professional (CP) to ascertain if a property is subsiding. Any movement in the foundations would be visible in the form of cracks.

There are many causes of cracks in buildings, some are very serious and some are irrelevant. It is necessary for a CP to make a diagnosis the cause of the cracks.

Firstly the CP must carry out a visual inspection of all the external and internal walls for Structural Cracking in the walls. Movements in the foundations usually cause Cracking at the weakest area of the walls which are around the door /window opes.

The ceilings in each room consist of a 3 mm layer of gypsum plaster on plasterboard, which is very brittle and which is contained within a parallelogram of 4 walls. Any structural movement in the foundations would cause some distortion/ movement in the parallelogram of the 4 walls which will result in the form of cracking in both directions in these ceilings, usually along the joints of the plasterboards of the ceiling.

The CP will check all internal doors and frames and door opes, because any movement in the foundations may cause rotation at the weakest part of a walls which are door opes, which will result in marks on the doors or frames or saddles.

There are many more methods which the CP will check for subsidence.

A Surveyor must check the drains for leaks by plugging the downstream outlets of all the drains, and filling up the drainage system to ground level with water. Photograph and mark the height level of the water in the highest manholes upstream. And check the level of the water in the manholes at intervals for at least 1 hour. If the drains are leaking - depending on the rate of the leak, the Surveyor will Specify in the Survey Report that a CCTV and a Hydrostatic test of all the drainage systems must be carried out, and that the test results MUST be given to the Surveyor for analysis before deciding to purchase the property.

Most subsidence of foundation are caused by leaking Drains adjacent to the foundations.

This is why the Purchaser should retain a CP to carry out a Survey of the Building and Site before completing the purchase.

All Architects and Civil Engineers and Building Surveyors carrying out Surveys of buildings would be experts in all of the above, and may have covered it in their Degree in the Building Surveying modules.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120194007#Comment_120194007

"If the Surveyor cannot see or diagnose any signs of Substance in a house which is subsidising, then they should not be carrying out Building Surveys, and will be Negligent."

You misunderstood the question, there were no visible signs for the surveyor to see when the survey was done. They may not have appeared for a year or so subsequent to buying the house.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120194183#Comment_120194183

In Reality, then the house should be covered by the 10 year Structural Guarantee and the CP who prepared the Certificate of Compliance with the Build Regulations and Planning for the new house.

mickdw

If the signs were not there at time of survey, it would be unusual for something to occur without reason within a year's time frame assuming the property was there for 5 10 15 ..... 50 years previous.

If such a scenario were to arise, it might be easily shown that some external event resulted in the sudden subsidence such as extreme water leak adjacent or something like that.

I always keep in the back of my mind when photographing a property that I'm showing cracks that are there as well as showing typical trouble areas to be in good condition so that the report itself should provide some backup to show that the defects were not there at date of survey.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120194276#Comment_120194276

Homebond wasn’t much use for those who found that their homes had been built with pyrite rocks.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120194183#Comment_120194183

I did not misunderstand your questions.

You stated as follows:-

1. Even if there was no visible signs of subsidence when the survey was done?
2. You misunderstood the question, there were no visible signs for the surveyor to see when the survey was done.
3. They may not have appeared for a year or so subsequent to buying the house.

You described a hypothetical scenario that a CP Surveys a house in good condition and furnished a Structural Survey Report which does not report any structural damage to the house.

You indicate that they were no signs of Subsidence on the day the CP carried out the Survey, and that signs of Subsidence appeared subsequently after approximately 1 year.

This confirms that there was no Subsidence to the Building on the day the survey was conducted. No visible signs of subsidence means no subsidence.

I described what an experienced CP would do.

The CP will have many high resolution photos of each elevation and window/door opes etc. This will be indisputable photographic proof that there were no visible cracks in the house and no evidence of Subsidence on the day of the Survey.

The CP will have many photos of the water level in the manholes of the drains, which include his wrist watch to show the time intervals. Therefore the drains are not leaking on the day of the Survey.

The CP will be able to prove that there was no visible signs or possible cause of subsidence, by leaking drains, on the date of the Survey.

The CP is not negligent and can prove same.

A CP must protect himself by taking photographic proof of the building at the time of the Survey. The CP is legally obliged by the PI Insurance company to retain all the photos etc for at least 6 years.

You never describe what caused the Hypothetical Subsidence subsequent to the Survey of the house which had no visible signs of cracking and watertight drains etc.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120194713#Comment_120194713

Homebond was not responsible for faulty pyrite materials used in the Construction.

The High Court held the supplier of construction material was liable for damage caused by pyrite rather than the developer. This was upheld in 2014 by a subsequent Supreme Court decision.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120195428#Comment_120195428

@mickdw had explained it succinctly enough in plain English, but thank you.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120195478#Comment_120195478

Indeed, I was just pointing out the limitations of Homebond.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120195562#Comment_120195562

mickdw succinct explanation never identified the most important fact of all - “the cause of the rapid Subsidence”.

Perhaps your good self or mickdw can now explain to me - what caused a mature house in a good structural condition, and with watertight drains to end up with subsidence within 12 months.

What caused the hypothetical subsidence????

Please inform me.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120195812#Comment_120195812

Nah, you'd only respond with your usual repetitious, over-explaining, mostly irrelevant waffle that you clog up every thread with.

mickdw

A hypothetical scenario could perhaps be a major water main burst adjacent to house, washing out foundations.

My point was that for such damage to occur in a short period of time would almost certainly require external event and that this event would be known and documented and therefore not a case of negligence on behalf of the surveyor.

You are slightly preoccupied with watertight drains I feel.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120197620#Comment_120197620

ive seen something similar happen previously.

an established estate had a new development commence on the adjoining filled. the developers piped all the existing drains, drains which had been allowed to become blocked, overgrown, filled in etc. which had kept the lands artificially wet.

when the drains were piped and the lands dried out there was substantial subsidence / movement within the established estate, all pretty much became apparent within 6 months.

edit: isnt "watertight drain" an oxymoron ?