You are reading a single comment by @hugo7 and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
-
I guess the difference here is that they already know that the survey has a relatively high chance of making them bail.
On that basis it seems worth saving some money.
Depending on cost etc. I'd say go for it.
Our survey didn't reveal anything useful. But the water flood risk area map was large enough to include another property that we looked at, and it showed that house was in a danger zone. If we had gone for that house that info probably would have made us pull out.
hugo7
No, though I've tried to sell one to a buyer after I declined on a house subsequent to getting it done. We were unable to agree on their valuation of the complete survey I'd had done (£30? Wtf!)
I suspect the issue is that the surveyor is no longer covered by his liability insurance - i.e. if there's something really bad in the house that the survey missed, it's your problem not his.
I honestly don't know if that's an issue, or a significant difference to whatever cover you would normally get from a survey.
I personally wouldn't buy one this way. I know in this thread full surveys often get dismissed as a waste of money, but they're not a lot relative to the cost of the house you're buying.