A house with 18% moisture in the base plate that was replaced 9 years ago, to buy or not
Hello!
We have won a bid on a house and signed a contract with what is called an inspection clause. Anticimex conducted the inspection and found moldy air in the bedroom under the baseboard. Further investigation was required, which we have also paid for...
He then sawed open the wall and reached the sill with moisture content at 18%. The company that replaced the sill in 2004 used a plasterboard instead of something called "asphalt...something," and when the inspector felt it with his finger, which is oriented towards the brickwork, he clearly felt that the plasterboard was damp on the outside towards the brick... The moisture meter showed 22-23% when he checked from the inside...
However, the mold smell did not come from there. A fairly large amount of humid air came up from the ground through the crack between the wall and the slab cast in the room...
We have not received the inspection report yet, but we feel we should pull out...
What options do we have? We have never owned a house... Our knowledge is limited...
Anyone with similar experience or situation?
To add, I have myself, as the prospective owner...called and talked to BRC-platcon who replaced the sills. The person I talked to said loudly and clearly that you shouldn’t move into such a house... and he thought the brick needs to be replaced. What does it cost to replace the brick panel on a gable side?
Thanks in advance!
T
We have won a bid on a house and signed a contract with what is called an inspection clause. Anticimex conducted the inspection and found moldy air in the bedroom under the baseboard. Further investigation was required, which we have also paid for...
He then sawed open the wall and reached the sill with moisture content at 18%. The company that replaced the sill in 2004 used a plasterboard instead of something called "asphalt...something," and when the inspector felt it with his finger, which is oriented towards the brickwork, he clearly felt that the plasterboard was damp on the outside towards the brick... The moisture meter showed 22-23% when he checked from the inside...
However, the mold smell did not come from there. A fairly large amount of humid air came up from the ground through the crack between the wall and the slab cast in the room...
We have not received the inspection report yet, but we feel we should pull out...
What options do we have? We have never owned a house... Our knowledge is limited...
Anyone with similar experience or situation?
To add, I have myself, as the prospective owner...called and talked to BRC-platcon who replaced the sills. The person I talked to said loudly and clearly that you shouldn’t move into such a house... and he thought the brick needs to be replaced. What does it cost to replace the brick panel on a gable side?
Thanks in advance!
T
It can certainly be fixed, at great cost. I haven't heard about changing the brick facade.
But the problem with a mold-infested house is that you can never know how much needs to be fixed. Apparently, they have already done quite a lot that doesn't work. Admittedly, it also sounds like it was done incorrectly.
I would back out.
But the problem with a mold-infested house is that you can never know how much needs to be fixed. Apparently, they have already done quite a lot that doesn't work. Admittedly, it also sounds like it was done incorrectly.
I would back out.
What demands can I make? I mean reasonable demands for action.
One more thing, the inspector (Anticimex) thought I should hydrophobize the facade to reduce moisture ingress. This can indirectly suggest that the facade is old and lets too much water through.
One more thing, the inspector (Anticimex) thought I should hydrophobize the facade to reduce moisture ingress. This can indirectly suggest that the facade is old and lets too much water through.
Last edited:
I would back out! I have been on many construction sites where problems with mold and moisture were the issues to be addressed. In almost all cases, the problem has been bigger than initially thought. It can be fixed at high costs but tends to recur, and since it has already happened just a few years after they changed the sill, I would back out!
The question is whether we can find a house here in Vallås in Halmstad that won't have some kind of "moisture damage" or a house that is flawless... We will always find something. All these houses here were built in the 70s... no new houses have been constructed since then... And we want to live here... If we hadn't done a further investigation, we would "never" have known that the sill had a bit too much moisture in it...
Now I hope that your inspection clause is open, i.e., that you can withdraw without having to justify that the defect is of this or that magnitude?tiborric said:
But IF you choose to proceed with the purchase when defects are discovered in the inspection, then there is a good way and a bad way.
The bad way is to request that the seller rectifies the defects before the handover.
The good method is to negotiate a price reduction that covers the costs of rectifying it yourself.
In a case like this, the best is to withdraw.
The flaw in the first method is that there is a significant risk that the seller will remedy it in the simplest possible way, or even not at all. Then you find yourself on the day of handover bound by the contract. In that situation, you may possibly sue the seller for breach of contract, as the remedy is not sufficient (but you likely have to complete the transaction despite the seller's breach). After 3-5 years of litigation, you might eventually receive compensation that covers the legal costs.
It is so much easier to just say no, by virtue of the inspection clause.
You were glad to find out about the mold issue in advance! If you decide to proceed with the purchase, I strongly recommend that you carefully familiarize yourself with the costs and interventions needed in the house to remediate mold and moisture, as well as the potential health consequences for you if the problem is not resolved.
Construction veteran
· Åland
· 2 067 posts
Do NOT buy!
//Experienced inspector with a hundred transfer inspections as reference.
There are more houses.
//Experienced inspector with a hundred transfer inspections as reference.
There are more houses.
Above 15% moisture in the sill, mold starts to grow and about 18% corresponds to 75% relative humidity. 18% is not little and there was even 22-23 in the plasterboard.mlkjhr said:
There are surely more houses to choose from with a better starting point than mold smell and moisture problems; I can't imagine that all have the same problem!
Construction veteran
· Åland
· 2 067 posts
Sorry, I wrote it wrong, it should be thousands!seniorkonsult said:
Not all 70s houses have moisture damage and mold. However, many have construction errors that can cause odors, clad basements with sealed surfaces, facades without air gaps, etc. These errors are usually quite simple (even if they can become costly) to assess and form a picture of how to solve or estimate the cost. I think the house you're looking at shows damage that can't be assessed. I would wait until a 70s house with the "usual" faults comes up.
You wrote that BCR-Platcon replaced the sill plates and installed a drywall in 2004. The company claims that they are experts in sill replacement specifically and according to their website, they offer a 20-year warranty. Isn't this then a warranty issue with this company?
Placing a plasterboard under the sill is a completely pointless measure. As the person above mentions, BCR should reasonably have a warranty commitment to the current owner, but this commitment disappears if you buy the house.
You have three or possibly four options:
Either you try to get the current owner to push for BCR to rectify their shoddy work. This will surely be difficult to achieve and will take time.
You agree that it should be fixed by the current owner before purchase. The problem with this is that you have no control over how the work is done, and there's a significant risk that it will be sloppy.
You request a price reduction to cover your costs. The problem with this is that it's very difficult to estimate this cost, as there may be issues in many more places.
You withdraw. The simplest, and in my opinion, best option in this case. If you're buying your first house and have limited knowledge, you should make it easier for yourself than buying the first best option. It's very possible that there are more houses with the same moisture issues as this one, but many 70s houses have replaced sills and still function today.
You have three or possibly four options:
Either you try to get the current owner to push for BCR to rectify their shoddy work. This will surely be difficult to achieve and will take time.
You agree that it should be fixed by the current owner before purchase. The problem with this is that you have no control over how the work is done, and there's a significant risk that it will be sloppy.
You request a price reduction to cover your costs. The problem with this is that it's very difficult to estimate this cost, as there may be issues in many more places.
You withdraw. The simplest, and in my opinion, best option in this case. If you're buying your first house and have limited knowledge, you should make it easier for yourself than buying the first best option. It's very possible that there are more houses with the same moisture issues as this one, but many 70s houses have replaced sills and still function today.
Construction veteran
· Åland
· 2 067 posts
If the contractor has placed a drywall sheet under the sill, can that really be the case? If it's a regular drywall sheet, it completely contradicts all known physical knowledge. In this case, the inspector must have noted and condemned the solution. The drywall absorbs moisture and retains it, and if it's a regular drywall sheet, it will mold.