Buying a House? - Look beyond the decorations!

No matter what the condition or quality of the decorations and other finishes, most people will usually re-decorate to their own taste anyway.  It is important that your mind is focused on looking beyond this, which will allow you to focus on the condition and layout of the building

Source: Google Images

Throughout my career as a Building Surveyor I have been lucky enough to have undertaken many different types of surveys of all types of buildings both large and small and in varying degrees of condition.  This experience has given me the ability to identify 'possible issues' in a building without undertaking an intrusive inspection. In simple terms if you know where to look and what to look for, you can quickly establish issues that may need much closer attention.

Whilst house hunting recently and viewing properties for the first time you may be surprised to learn that even as a Chartered Building Surveyor I am in the same boat as everyone else. Most properties that my wife and I recently viewed were both occupied and furnished and for a first viewing most sellers would expect a quick tour of the building followed by few questions. I think they would be a little shocked if I walked in with my surveying equipment and then started to systematically take their house to pieces so that I could decide if it was worth returning for a second visit!  Something tells me that even if I wanted a second viewing the seller is unlikely to want me back! Even though my natural instinct is to be more intrusive I have to extend the same courtesy as anyone else.

When undertaking the viewing (notice the term 'viewing' and not 'inspection') there are some key things that I look for which will give me a good idea of the general condition of a building.  Although I would always advise anyone to have an inspection carried out by a qualified surveyor I also thought it would be worth sharing some tips, so that those with limited or indeed no knowledge of buildings may at least be able to identify issues that they could question and bring to the attention of their advisers.  This basic knowledge could also be a deciding factor which may lead to a decision not to pursue a particular property and to focus your attention on others.

Externally, I will always look at the condition of the external walls for signs of cracking, distortion (possibly bulging) and also the condition of the materials generally.  Cracking and/or distortion can occur for many different reasons and the consequences can sometimes be very serious.  It is however worth noting that if cracking or distortion in an external wall is noted that it could be historic and less significant than the damage may suggest.  There is a natural reaction by many people to panic when they see cracking in a building, however in many cases the problem can be rectified reasonably quickly and cheaply.  If you do identify cracking in a building it is always worth obtaining professional advice to establish an accurate prognosis.   Also, look out for signs of 'new' pointing.  Pointing refers to the horizontal and vertical mortar joints that 'bond' the masonry units together.  If you see a slightly lighter (in colour) or a different colour, area of pointing, particularly if this is in a vertical/stepped position, this would suggest that recent cracking may have occurred and the cracking has been infilled.  Again, bring this to the attention of your professional advisor.

External ground levels should also be looked at closely, particularly at the junction of external walls.  A damp proof course is installed in external perimeter walls to prevent moisture rising through masonry by capillary action and into a building.  Current Building Regulations require the damp proof course to be installed 150mm above external ground levels. The importance of the damp proof course is often not appreciated and you will often see raised flower beds installed abutting external walls, new driveways installed at a higher level that previously and render being applied to walls.  All of these have the potential to 'bridge' the damp proof course and provide an easy path for moisture and damp to find its way into a building.

When viewing internally it is important to look beyond the internal decorations and furnishings.  Everyone has different tastes and often the conversation after the viewing can focus on 'that hideous room' or 'those awful carpets'!  This however is missing the point.  No matter what the condition or quality of the decorations and other finishes, most people will usually re-decorate to their own taste anyway.  It is important that your mind is focused on looking beyond this, which will allow you to focus on the condition and layout of the building.  Try to focus on the potential of a house and this will open your mind up to think about what you can do rather than what you do not want to do.  In the whole process of buying a house, decorations and furnishings should be the least of your concerns, given that there are so many other serious problems that could arise.

Source: Google images - Damp present to internal wall

Internally, you should look closely at the internal wall surfaces for signs of dampness.  This will include visible damp patches, peeling or flaking paint or possible peeling wallpaper. Dampness can occur in a building in many ways such as rising damp, penetrating damp and also condensation.  In ground floor rooms pay particularly close attention at low level especially on the inside surface of external walls.  Any damp identified above a metre and a half above ground level, will not be rising damp and may be a result of leaking plumbing or possible damp penetration from poorly maintained gutters and downpipes.  It is not uncommon for condensation mould to be present, especially in kitchens and bathroom.  This is due to the activity and subsequent high concentrations of water vapour in these rooms.  Condensation could suggest poor ventilation, poor thermal insulation to external walls or possibly inadequate heating, or a combination of these.

If you identify dampness or cracking during your visit then bring these to the attention of your professional advisers.  Hopefully the above information will help those who are unfamiliar with buildings to identify some warning signs that would suggest further investigation.  A Surveyor will undertake a detailed and comprehensive survey, if instructed, and this will provide you with an explanation of the condition of a building together with the likely cause and recommended remedial works.  So if you undertake a viewing and you identify some of the issues discussed above you may decide not to pursue a particular house any further or maybe to seek further professional advice.

Please feel free to share this article and other articles on this site with friends, family and colleagues who you think would be interested

Information/opinions posted on this site are the personal views of the author and should not be relied upon by any person or any third party without first seeking further professional advice. Also, please scroll down and read the copyright notice at the end of the blog.

Asbestos - Will new amended legislation result in higher removal costs?

Guest article from Joe Malone BSc(Hons) ICIOB

Group Investment Programme Manager - WM Housing Group

There are already noises coming from the industry that costs are set to increase but in real terms, how should these changes affect the client? Are we now going to see a massive increase in asbestos removal costs? The potential is there but so long as clients have an awareness of the product then rising costs should be contained.

I have very recently written an asbestos management plan, which was an incredibly complex and lengthy piece of work requiring a great deal of research. If I may, I would like to share some of the key issues uncovered in the process of writing this document. I’ve split the article into two parts, part one will deal with legislative changes whilst part two (which will be published in a few weeks) will deal with competency and product awareness.

Part One

Recent Changes to legislation

Source: Google Images

Actually, a not so recent change in legislation is the move from MDHS100 to HSG264 Asbestos: The survey Guide. HSG264 replaces and expands upon MDHS 100 yet despite being around for a couple of years now I am convinced that the vast majority still do not understand its implications. We have seen the obvious changes in terminology introduced so, the Type 1 and 2 survey are now replaced with the ‘Management Survey’ and the Type 3 survey is replaced with ‘Refurbishment and Demolition Survey’ (RAD).

Competence is a key issue that will be discussed in part two but HSG264 also  defines the wider obligations and provides guidance in situations where surveys may be carried out for other purposes, e.g.,  for ‘managing’ asbestos in domestic premises under wider health and safety legislation and for meeting the requirements of the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2007 (CDM). It compliments and supports other guidance on managing asbestos and details the asbestos survey requirements and best practice. It is important to note that prosecutions for asbestos related offences are generally brought under the Sections 2, 3 or 4 of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 or the Control of Asbestos Regulations 2012.

The document also establishes the levels of survey compliance that should be achieved by registered providers and establishes parameters for collecting housing related data and this is one of the more poorly understood areas. There is an old chestnut kicking around that dictates that housing providers must survey 10% of their stock but this was never a legal requirement. What you must do is carry out a desktop evaluation of the stock to assess the commonality of the stock. Similar properties based upon design, construction and age should be placed into archetypal groups for further consideration. Once you reach this point you should then undertake sufficient RAD inspections to ensure that variability in asbestos use has been established across all archetypes. ‘Sufficient’ will in my considered opinion mean a minimum of one RAD survey per property archetype.

Control of Asbestos Regulations 2012

Source: Google Images

The '2012' bit of the heading should tell you that there have been some very recent changes to this particular legislation but why?  The ugly truth is that the asbestos industry has been lobbying for these changes for a number of years. Some years back textured coatings were downgraded in risk and became a 'non-notifiable' product. The asbestos industry have been trying to recoup massive losses incurred as a result of that decision for some time and what you'll find within COA 2012 is that some types of non-licensed work have now become notifiable.  There are already noises coming from the industry that costs are set to increase  (Click here for news article),  but in real terms, how should these changes affect the client? Are we now going to see a massive increase in asbestos removal costs? The potential is there but so long as clients have an awareness of the product then rising costs should be contained. Granted, the industry will receive more work in being awarded this newly notifiable work because many non-licensed contractors will not want the additional burden of responsibility, however minor, but the major concern has to be that costs will increase for removing product that was previously regarded as non-notifiable and therefore low risk.

It is a fact that notifiable product costs more money to remove than non-notifiable product and the illustration above highlights some of the additional safeguards and management procedures required for removing notifiable product. However, the HSE guidance for removing these products has not to my knowledge changed and there are no plans to change this guidance, therefore the control measures on site remain the same and should not cost more money. You can review HSE guidance on working with asbestos by following this link. As always, you need good knowledge of the product and the removal guidelines to ensure costs are controlled. Factually, the only immediate change for notification of non-licensed products is a requirement that brief written records are kept, this was not a previous requirement but should incur nothing more than negligible costs. From 2015 non-licensed workers need to have regular health surveillance by a Doctor,  criteria that currently applies to licensed workers.

Joe Malone BSc(Hons) ICIOB

Group Investment Programme Manager

Information/opinions posted on this site are the personal views of the author and should not be relied upon by any person or any third party without first seeking further professional advice. Also, please scroll down and read the copyright notice at the end of the blog.

 

Squatters - Evicted + Convicted = Problem Shifted!

Owners of a non-residential building should be very concerned about the increased potential for squatting, and must think very carefully about securing their buildings or possibly trying to dispose of it 


Source: Google Images

Section 144 of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 creates a new offence of squatting in a residential building, which applies throughout England and Wales.  The offence came into force on 1st September 2012. 

A Ministry of Justice Circular,  issued as guidance to Law Enforcement Authorities, provides clarification of the offence:

'A person can only commit the offence if they have entered and remain in the residential building as a trespasser. This means the offence will not apply to a person who entered the building with permission of the property owner, such as a legitimate tenant. This is so even if a legitimate tenant subsequently falls behind with rent payments or decides to withhold rent. Such a person is not a trespasser for the purposes of this offence. A property owner would be expected to pursue established eviction processes in the county court (or High Court where appropriate) if they wanted to regain possession of their property in such circumstances' 

It is therefore clear that the purpose of this new law is not aimed as a vehicle to help landlords to deal with problematic tenants.  The new law has been introduced to try to re-balance the rights of residential property owners who for many years have needed to use the civil justice system to remove squatters from their buildings.  For many years it has always seemed unfair that a person can claim 'squatters rights' for unauthorised occupation of a building.  The term 'squatters rights' is well know and regularly used, and demonstrates by its very nature the unfairness it allows.  Why should a squatter be allowed any rights for a building that is owned and paid for by someone else?  This new law attempts to address this injustice.

Prior to the introduction of this new law the unauthorised occupation of a building was still an offence.  The difference now however is that the offence becomes criminal and not just civil.  As a criminal offence the police now have powers to remove squatters and also prosecute. The offence of squatting in a residential building carries a maximum penalty of six months' imprisonment, a fine of up to £5,000 or both.  The Ministry of Justice Circular identified above also identifies a range of other offences which might arise in connection with squatting, depending on the circumstances of the case.  'If doors or windows of the property have been broken to gain access or items inside have been used damaged or removed, the offences of criminal damage, theft or burglary might be relevant. There is also an offence of ‘abstracting electricity’ under section 13 of the Theft Act 1968, which is committed when somebody dishonestly and without due authority causes to be wasted or diverted electricity'. One would argue that the days of forcibly entering a residential building and occupying without permission are now coming to an end.

Surprisingly, the new offence only relates to residential buildings.  It seems strange that the new law did not cover all buildings.  The Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 provides the following definition of a residential building:

'Subsection (3) defines the meaning of residential building. This includes any structure or part of a structure which has been designed or adapted for use as a place to live. This includes temporary or moveable structures to ensure the offence covers homes such as park homes, caravans or residential pre-fabs. The building must have been designed or adapted before the time of entry, for use as a place to live. This will ensure that where, for example, a barn has been converted into a country house or offices into flats, such buildings will be protected by the offence. But a trespasser who modifies a non-residential building by placing his bedding and personal effects in it would not be committing this offence because the building had not been adapted before the point he or she entered it.'



Source: Google Images

A recent article in The Guardian Online (31st August 2012), claimed that an end to squatters rights could lead to a large increase in homelessness.  The article suggests that the introduction of this new law could result in the displacement of over 20,000 people.  In July 2012 the housing and homeless charity, Shelter, reported 12,830 homeless applications were accepted between October and December 2011 - a rise of 18% since the same time the previous year.  The law change will undoubtably increase these figures further once the police start to exercise their new powers and start removing and prosecuting squatters.  So where will all of these people go?

Well, as the new law only applies to residential buildings, which as the definition above states, 'have been designed or adapted for use as a place to live'.  Any building classified as a non-residential building under the terms of the Act is not covered and it is still possible to claim squatters rights in these types of buildings.  Before legislation is passed it goes through numerous stages in Parliament.  It will have a number of readings and be debated thoroughly including being passed to the House of Lords before it eventually gets Royal Assent. You would think that somewhere along this process somebody would have questioned why the law would not apply to all buildings, not just residential.  It seems strange that the law can be 'tightened up' in one area, but literally leave the door wide open (pardon the pun), for the problem to be shifted to another.  What is there to stop a squatter being removed from a residential building under the powers of the new Act, and then literally moving down the road to find themselves a nice little vacant shop, industrial unit or other non-residential building?  Surely, this law change has the potential to shift the problem, not solve it!  

If I were an owner of a non-residential building I would be very concerned about the increased potential for squatting, and have to think very carefully about securing the building or possibly trying to dispose of it.  In today's economic climate, disposing of a non-residential building will not be easy, as the UK has a vast amount of vacant and unoccupied stock.  I am sure that the impact of the law change will make many non-residential building owners think very carefully about their assets.

Information/opinions posted on this site are the personal views of the author and should not be relied upon by any person or any third party without first seeking further professional advice. Also, please scroll down and read the copyright notice at the end of the blog.

Construction Site Health & Safety - Is Legislation Enough?

Over the years, if I had a £1 for every time I have heard somebody say 'health & safety is just common sense', I would be a very rich man.  Sadly, particularly when it comes to the UK construction industry, common sense is a commodity in very short supply.

Source: Google Images

The issue of construction site health & safety and in particular the poor health and safety record of the UK construction industry is well documented.  Over the years, the government have introduced numerous pieces of legislation, guidance and initiatives in order to try to address this poor safety record, which has resulted in the UK construction industry becoming one of the most heavily regulated industries in the world. Yet, even in today’s economic climate with reduced levels of output, accident, serious injuries and fatalities continue to occur at unacceptable levels.  A recent news article entitled  The cost of an unsafe construction site increases' identified a particularly alarming situation following inspection of 22 construction sites in London:

'Mr Slade was responding to news that, when inspecting 22 London construction sites recently, the UK's Health & Safety Executive (HSE) took formal enforcement action against almost half of the firms. In most cases, the problem was simply that basic precautions had not been taken, but one site was actually shut down because the working environment was simply too hazardous.

Calling these figures "nothing short of staggering," Mr Slade said,  "In simple terms all you have to do is follow the guidance available and plan things properly; so it's extremely disappointing to see that the number of fatalities in this sector has remained static at around 50 for the second year running. So many of these deaths are wholly avoidable.

"Regulations relating to this kind of work are prescriptive, which means they tell you what you've got to do. That's why it's so unacceptable that a simple lack of planning can put people's lives at risk as well as the future of many businesses.'

The Health & Safety Executive (HSE) produce annual safety statistics for the construction industry which show a downward trend in respect of accidents and fatalities over the last twenty year.  The latest available statistics show 50 fatalities occurred in the construction industry in 2010/11, which was an increase from the previous year and at a similar level to the year before that.   If the scenario described above is typical of the situation around the UK and health & safety statistics are take into consideration it is clear that legislation is not having the impact it was introduced for.

Source: Google Images

The Construction Skills Certification Scheme was an initiative that was introduced in the mid 90's to raise awareness and to try to improve the general health & safety competence of construction site operatives. The Construction Industry Training Board (CITB) state: 'CSCS cards list the holder’s qualifications and are valid for either three or five years. It also shows they have health and safety awareness as all cardholders have to pass the appropriate CITB-Construction Skills Health and Safety Test'  In order to pass this test a visit to an assessment centre is required where a multiple choice 'examination' is taken. The test will vary depending upon whether the operative is a trainee, construction site operative, or in management etc.  The pass mark is 29/35 for the operative level and 34/40 for supervisor/manager level.  Whether this test demonstrates sufficient health & safety competence is highly questionable. Having taken this test personally as a site operative I can tell you that the level of questions is not exactly challenging.  The test allows 45 minutes to complete, I took just 15 minutes and past the test!  In order to make a real difference the level of questions needs to be radically reviewed, so that when an operative passes the test, that it actually means something. The video below provides a brief explanation of the purpose of CSCS.

Legislation is prescriptive and will state exactly what is and what is not required.  Although legislation is often difficult to read and sometimes to understand the requirements will actually be there. Numerous codes of practice and guidance notes are available to 'draw out' these requirements in more simple terms. One problem however is that legislation assumes that people will understand and follow it (because they required to do so), what is not accounted for is the 'human factor'.  I have worked on construction sites as a labourer, a bricklayer and visited sites as a consultant.  During my early years on site I witnessed some serious health & safety breaches, where operatives for some unknown reason would  pay little regard to their own well being or to the well being of others, and would often take short cuts just to 'get the job done'. The attitude to health & safety of most of the operative on site at the time was that health & safety was a hindrance that got in the way of them doing their jobs.  Although, I have seen a marked improvement is health & safety procedures on construction sites over recent years there still remains an 'ignorance' to health & safety by many, particularly by some of the more experienced operatives who have been on site for many years.

Over the years, if I had a £1 for every time I have heard somebody say 'health & safety is just common sense', I would be a very rich man.  Sadly, particularly when it comes to the UK construction industry, common sense is a commodity in very short supply.  Whilst it is clear that legislation has made some improvements, the level of fatalities, serious injuries and accidents continue to occur at unacceptable levels. In isolation legislation will never be fully affective without integrating improved knowledge and training to try to change attitudes. It is creating a self desire for those working in the construction industry to want to be safe rather than having it imposed on them.  This has to be the key and is really the only thing that will make a real difference. This will not be easy and rather than playing lip service to health & safety, as demonstrated by the CSCS test, why not provide a competence assessment that will actually provide a 'test'  rather than just a rubber stamp for anyone who wants to work on a construction site.

Information/opinions posted on this site are the personal views of the author and should not be relied upon by any person or any third party without first seeking further professional advice. Also, please scroll down and read the copyright notice at the end of the blog.