Property Surveys and Party Wall Advice in Newmarket

We recently dealt with party wall matters relating to the extension of a property in a village to the west of Newmarket. The rear extension was set back from the boundary but still within 3.00m of one of the adjoining properties. For the works to fall within the scope of the Act, the new foundations would have to be deeper than those to the adjoining property. The foundations to the adjoining property are obviously hidden so we could only make an educated guess regarding the depth.

The adjoining property was a 1980s build so probably had 1.0m deep foundations but, as we could not be sure, it was decided to serve a Notice of Adjacent Excavation. The alternative is that the adjoining owner requests a notice when works start on site and that would cause a delay.

Fortunately, the adjoining owner consented to the notice. As there was a risk of damage, albeit small, we recorded the condition of the adjoining property prior to the works commencing.

Cracked cement fillets to verges and below ridge tiles is an issue that comes up regularly on surveys. Ridge tiles are bedded in mortar and the gap between the tiles and the under-cloak to the edge of a pitched roof are pointed but both a particularly prone to thermal movement.

Our surveyor Justin Burns highlighted the issue on a recent Level 3 survey of a semi-detached bungalow close to the village of Swaffham Bulbeck to the west of Newmarket. The roof had been renewed and part of a major refurbishment just a couple of years earlier but cracks had already opened up in the cement fillets. The issue was probably caused by the mortar being allowed to dry out too quickly when the roof covering was renewed. As with any external building element, once a crack appears, it will worsen overtime as moisture enters and freezes.

It’s a good example of a defect which will require attention in the future but would not yet be considered urgent.

It’s common for chimney breasts that are no longer used to be removed in small houses to gain valuable floor space. Unfortunately, it’s also common to find that the stack above has not been properly supported following their removal. The typical scenario is that the chimney breasts are removed to just above the upper-floor ceiling joists.

The remaining upper section should be supported either with gallows brackets or a steel beam but on a recent survey of a Victorian end of terrace property on the outskirts of Ely, our surveyor Justin Burns found that it had been left supported only by the ceiling joists. The chimney breasts had been removed some years earlier and the upper section had remained in place but was no showing signs of stress. The advice in this scenario will always be to introduce properly designed support and have the work signed off for Building Regulation compliance.

Our client appreciated the advice describing the Level 2 report as “comprehensive” and “extremely helpful”.