About the seller/agent
About the property to be surveyed:
Submit your request
General notes about our exceptional service
All of our reports, unlike many of our competitors, are based upon a full building inspection and undertaken to the same level of care. This does, perhaps, make our fees slightly less competitive than our rivals on our shorter reports, but consider this carefully when comparing our fee proposal with any other offer you may obtain. The difference you should be considering then relates only to the level of detail we include it the final report. If there is something wrong, we will have noted it, and if we feel that you simply do need to have more information given to you in the report you receive, we will advise you before we publish it, and we will adjust our instructions with you to enhance the report features from Level 1 to Level 2, or from Level 2 to Level 3 for a small additional fee.
For instance, here is how we would report a defective front door in each of the formats -
Level 1 - RICS Condition Report
The timber front door is binding to the frame. Adjustment is required to prevent this.
Level 2 - RICS HomeBuyer Report
The timber front door is binding to the frame. The door appears to be misaligned in the frame and adjustment is required to the hinges to relieve this. However, a replacement door may be required.
Level 3 - RICS Building Survey
The timber front door is misaligned in the frame and binding. This is most likely caused by easement in the hinges which can usually be easily rectified by adjustment but in so doing, the alignment of the locks and lock-keeps can also become a further problem. Older timber doors may never be satisfactory after they have been allowed to come out of alignment or have been previously subject to adjustment in size.
Options for repair include
Option 1 is only effective if the door furniture (hinges, locks, keeps etc) are in serviceable condition. It would be advisable to try this option first to minimise costs. Option 2 could be quite effective if the door furniture can be replaced on a like-for-like basis. If adjustments are needed to fit alternative sizes, the result could be unattractive. Option 3 is better than option 2 if the door furniture cannot be directly replaced with similar fittings in terms of size and operation since the new door can be adapted without scars. Option 4 eliminates all uncertainty about the condition of the door but is undoubtedly an expense that may be avoided if option 1 is successful.
Note: The text shown refers to an actual example of a defect observed in a real survey. The examples of text show the differences in reporting of the same defect, All the information in the background of the Level 3 version was gathered during a Level 2 survey and, had it been necessary, we could have revised our report to Level 3 without having to reinspect.
See General Notes Below for assistance