HI Technical Bulletin For registered members of the SAVA Certification Scheme
This month:
Welcome to Issue 7 of SAVA’s Home Inspector Technical
Masonry bees
Bulletin.
Health and safety issues the future of the residential sector—the debate continues
The bulletin focuses on Home
Do you agree with the Home Inspector?
July 2009 © National Energy Services Ltd 2009
Condition Reports and associated non-energy issues. We trust that you will find the bulletin useful for your day-to-day work and we welcome any feedback you have about what you would like to see covered in future editions. The contents of this technical bulletin may supersede certain scheme rules or requirements appearing in the Product Rules, Inspection and Reporting Requirements, Training Manual or elsewhere. Members must therefore ensure that they have read and understood this document.
Masonry bees Unlike honey bees, masonry bees are
build structures, the buildings
solitary creatures which do not swarm
themselves offered opportunities for
around a queen.
the masonry bee to build nests.
They do, however,
congregate in the same area.
This is
Although sometimes the stonework or
because they all search for a similar
brickwork might prove too hard for
habitat and, where one finds a
the masonry bee to use, the mortar is
desirable spot, others will join it.
often of the right consistency. Hence
Although their infestation can create
the alternative name of ‗mortar‘ bee.
considerable problems with structures,
The female masonry bee identifies a
in most cases it will not to be of any
suitable site in which to lay her egg.
great significance.
The sunnier this is the better and very often a south or east-facing wall will be favoured, although you should not ignore walls of any other orientation. She will excavate the hole to the required depth, smooth the walls of the chamber, lay her egg and then fill the area with pollen, creating an ovoid cell about 15 mm x 10 mm.
Photo 1: masonry bee infestation.
There are about twenty different species of masonry (or mortar) bees in the UK, the most common of which is the red masonry bee (Osmia rufa). The masonry bee‘s natural nesting environment is soft, firm soil so it is possible to find them in the ground, or more likely, in a cliff formed in a soft stone such as limestone or sandstone. With the advent of man‘s ability to
Diagram 1: excavated hole.
Issue 7 Page 2
HI Technical Bulletin © National Energy Services Ltd 2009
She then seals this and repeats the operation for another egg. One egg per hole—a very laborious process. Once the egg hatches, the lava consumes the pollen and subsequently pupates into the bee, eventually burrowing out of the nest using the mother‘s entry tunnel as the exit route in April/May of the following year, starting the cycle again. Photo 2: mortar washed away as a result of heavy rain.
Also look at the wall itself. Holes will be around 8 mm in diameter and around 30 mm deep. The female bee will often reuse a hole previously vacated rather than excavate a new one, simply making it deeper. There may be solitary holes but sometimes the damage is so intense that it looks like a careless exercise with an electric drill along a Diagram 2: excavated hole with
“Holes drilled by the Masonry bee
Male bees emerge first. They wait outside
may be around 8
the nesting area for the females to emerge
mm in diameter
and mate. Their job being done they die off
and around 30 mm in height.”
mortar joint.
bee egg.
and leave the females to prepare the nest and provide food for the future generation. Masonry bees are opportunistic using any crevice available, old fixing holes, cracks and small faults in the brickwork or mortar. As mentioned, the bees‘ natural habitat is soft
Photo 3: intense damage caused by
banks and light sandstone cliff faces and
Masonry bee activity.
when they find suitable material with the right exposure to the sun, they burrow into it.
Remedial action
They do not use their legs but their
Masonry bees emerge up to a month before
mandibles to break down the material thrusting it away from the hole.
How to identify the presence of masonry bees
honey bees.
It is well recorded that there
are a number of problems with honey bees and their numbers are in decline resulting in a commensurate reduction of the pollination which they perform. However, the earlier
Traditionally the bees were believed to favour
emergence of masonry bees allows for earlier
older walls using lime mortar but more
pollination and there are several bodies which
modern Portland cement mortar can also be
support their presence and, indeed,
affected if the mix is sufficiently weak and
commercial ‗nesting boxes‘ are available.
offers the correct consistency. Look along the bottom of south or east facing walls constructed in soft brick or stone using a soft
The general consensus, therefore, is that if the structure is not in a dangerous state the
mortar.
best thing is to leave it alone. However, on
The waste material may be visible if sufficient
wall may prove to be in a dangerous state.
attack has been made. But do not be misled, the presence of sand at the bottom of the wall may just be the result of heavy rain washing the weak mortar from the joint. (See Photo 2.)
occasions the infestation is so bad that the
In one 1950s house, the east-facing gable was so severely affected that the removal of one brick allowed two adjacent bricks on the course above to collapse and it was immediately apparent that their removal
Issue 7 Page 3
July 2009 © National Energy Services Ltd 2009
could instigate a collapse of a major part of
The best time is in late spring, after the bees
the gable. The only solution was to rake out
have emerged. It is also important that the
the affected pointing to a depth of about 25
bee is able to locate a new site at which she
mm and re-point using a medium hard mix.
can lay her egg and still have time to gather
In this particular case, the work was done in November and it was found that in the frog of
sufficient food thus maintaining the level of pollination.
one brick were over twenty capsules, each
From an ecological point of view, it is a
containing a bee living out the winter.
balance of preserving the building and the
If an infestation is found, the building owner should be persuaded to carry out the work at a time which is most beneficial, or least harmful, to the bees.
wildlife. It may be worthwhile indicating the availability of nesting facilities which are readily available. Many internet sites provide more information about the availability of ‗nesting boxes‘. Tony Herbert, July 2009
“[If feasible] the building owner should be
Photo 4: capsules containing over-wintering
persuaded to
bees
carry out work at a time
Health and safety issues the future of the residential sector—the debate continues In November 2008, Issue 5 of the HI
the Inspection and Reporting Requirements
Technical Bulletin carried an article by Phil
(IRR) would have a distorting influence on
Parnham written in November 2007 called
the status of older property in the market
‘Health and safety issues and the Home
place. Consequently, I designed a protocol
Inspector’. It presented a process of
that is within the spirit of the IRR, would
assessing health and safety hazards to
result in consistent condition ratings but
―...generate debate around what can be a
allow Home Inspectors some flexibility when
grey area‖. The article achieved this
assessing hazards that have existed for a
objective and amongst the feedback, Tim
long time.
Winsland, an experienced surveyor and Home Inspector submitted a detailed critique of
The response from Tim Winsland was
Phil‘s article.
particularly useful. Publishing his comments
Rather than printing the full response, we
not appropriate because:
in full together with my detailed response is
have asked Phil to review the topic taking on board Tim‘s main points.
it would be terribly tedious to read;
Placing health and safety hazard assessment in a market context
I agree with most of the points Tim
When I first produced my article I hoped it
the market place that my original
would generate a debate. As a Chartered
protocol is no longer relevant.
makes, and; there have been so many changes in
Surveyor and long time supporter of the Home Condition Report (HCR), I became
Tim‘s main point (and I hope he does not
concerned that the objective method of
mind my summarising his considered article
condition rating health and safety hazards in
so succinctly) was that my protocol did not
beneficial...or least harmful to the bees”.
Issue 7 Page 4
HI Technical Bulletin © National Energy Services Ltd 2009
conform to the IRR and so falls outside the
the Single Survey in Scotland, a
SAVA Certification Scheme. On this point, I
mandatory pre-sale condition report
am in total agreement. I aimed to produce a pragmatic decision making framework which introduced flexibility into the condition rating
the 3rd edition of the RICS Home
there is little to debate.
Buyer Report that uses condition
issue in context with recent economic and political developments in the residential sector.
used to including a broader range of health and safety hazards in their reports.”
ratings and a concise reporting style that is due to launched in July of this year. SAVA has also adapted the HCR and
Post credit crunch and recession
Surveyors, are not
(isn‘t that ironic), and;
process in a consistent way. Consequently
Instead, I think it is more useful to set the
“Many Chartered
carried out by Chartered Surveyors
developed its own product called the Home Condition Survey (HCS). Apart from the
The role and the status of the Home
Single Survey in Scotland, all of these
Inspector have changed since the HCR
products are designed for the buyer and are
became an optional document in the Home
not bound by the objective framework that
Information Pack (HIP). As background to
drives the HCR. Because they exist in the
this point, key players in the home buying
market place and are not protected by
and selling process (for example Estate
government regulation, their commercial
Agents, Intermediaries, Independent
success relies on striking a balance between
Financial Advisors, etc.) are not keen on
providing clients with clear advice and
condition surveys of any type (this is an
acknowledging the pressures of the home
understatement). They see them as negative
buying process. In this environment, the IRR
influences that can prevent sales early on or
is not relevant or appropriate and any
‗kill a deal‘ at a late stage and there is strong
product based on it will not survive.
anecdotal evidence that sellers and buyers are positively discouraged from getting one.
A ‘revised’ revised approach to
In this environment, it is not surprising that
assessing health and safety
few HIP providers have voluntarily opted to include a HCR in their packs.
hazards Over the past nine months I have assisted
This has resulted in few HCRs being produced
the Residential Practice Team at the RICS to
and although I do not have a crystal ball, it is
develop the new Home Buyer Report. For
unlikely the HIP itself will survive an election.
many Chartered Surveyors, condition rating
Although I find the IRR and resultant
represents a cultural change in their
accreditation schemes excellent quality
approach. Additionally, many are not used to
assurance systems, they have been left
including a broader range of health and
stranded by a lack of use. What is the point
safety hazards in their reports. To help
of rigidly adhering to standards that simply
develop a consistent approach, I dusted off
are not relevant in the market place?
the protocol described in the HI Technical Bulletin Issue 5, adjusted it to conform to
Building for the future
new the RICS Practice Notes and produced
You may think I have a low opinion of the
what I think is a simpler yet more robust
HCR but this could not be further from the
methodology. This is described below.
truth. The development of a clear, focused and objective condition report that uses
Initial assumptions
condition rating to communicate with the
This approach is based on two assumptions:
reader has been like a breath of fresh air in
safety hazards that are caused by
the residential sector. The HCR set a
physical defects are assessed within
standard against which other products were
the condition rating system. This is
measured. Consequently, it has been used
both logical and reasonable as a
as a basis for:
defect that could injure or kill must be
Colleys Property Check, an in-house
identified, assessed, emphasised and reported;
level two product offered by (formerly) one of the main lenders in
safety hazards that arise from
the residential market;
―deficiencies that have existed for a
Issue 7 Page 5
July 2009 © National Energy Services Ltd 2009
long time and cannot be reasonably
Action Two
changed…” should not affect the
If the hazard is not the result of a defect,
condition rating but should still be
but falls well below the ‗benchmark‘, you
emphasised in the report. This allows
should:
a balanced assessment of older property constructed before any
NOT include the hazard in the
coherent building codes existed.
condition rating process;
However (and this is very important), any client who does proceed to buy a property that includes hazards due to ‘deficiencies’
report the issue in the element to which it is primarily associated, and;
must understand it is not as safe as an
for the new HBR, report the hazard in
equivalent modern dwelling.
section J3 that summarises the
Assessing and reporting on health and safety hazards Based on the above assumptions, the revised protocol has been split into three stages.
hazards in the dwelling and for the HCR in C2. The only exception to this approach would be with what I call ‘services that can kill’. This dramatic phrase refers to gas, oil, solid fuel
Step One—Identify the potential
and electrical installations.
safety hazard
There are many properties with no obvious
To keep this simple, you should use the list identified in the original IRR and the new RICS Practice Notes.
Step Two—Does the safety hazard pose a direct threat to the users of the dwelling?
‗defects‘ but changing standards have left the services more dangerous than their modern equivalents. This is the exception that proves the rule and the assessment of building services will be driven by the existence of installation and maintenance documentation.
“A safety hazard has to present a clear and identifiable risk to the users of the
A safety hazard has to present a clear and
Examples
identifiable risk to the users of the building
One of the best ways to explain an
and should not be too remote. To make this
assessment methodology is to give an
judgment, you will have to be broadly aware
illustration and I have chosen two: one each
of the ‗benchmarks‘ for safety in residential
for Actions One and Two.
building and should not be too remote.”
dwellings but this does not have to be an indepth knowledge of the current building
Lack of safety glass
regulations. You should then go on to step
Photo 1 shows a door and window to the rear
three.
living room of an inter-war semi detached
Step Three—Making the decision There are two courses of action:
house. Both are single glazed and although not original, they have been installed for many decades.
Action One If a defect has created the hazard, you should: include the hazard in the condition rating process; report the issue in the element to which it is primarily associated; and for the new HBR, report the hazard in section J3 that summarises the hazards in the dwelling and for the HCR in C2.
Photo 1: single glazed door and window to the rear living room.
Article continues on page 8
Issue 7 Page 6
HI Technical Bulletin © National Energy Services Ltd 2009
Do you agree with the Inspector? A series focussing on the assignment of Condition Ratings for the HCR. This case study, submitted by James Land DipHI, focuses on the assignment of condition ratings using the SAVA protocol entitled "Applying Condition Ratings". Readers should refer to a copy of this protocol (available in NES one under ‗Useful Documents‘) in order to follow the logic used in applying the ratings. D1 Chimney stacks
Rating 3
The chimney stack is brick built. The flashing [weatherproofing between stack and roof] to the chimney is causing damp penetration.
D2 Roof coverings
Rating
The main roof is pitched and covered with plain clay tiles.
2
The pitched roof coverings are moss covered.
D4 Main walls (including claddings)
Rating 3
The outside walls are of solid construction. The holes which have been drilled (at the base of the main walls to the side and rear of the house) to allow a Chemical Damp Proof Course to be injected need to be filled with the appropriate material. This is considered serious and in need of urgent repairs or replacement.
E1 Roof structure
Rating 1
The main roof is constructed using individual timbers in a traditional manner. No repair is presently required. Normal maintenance must be undertaken.
E9 Dampness
Rating
There is evidence of penetrating dampness in the property.
3
Penetrating dampness is affecting the roof structure and is likely to have been caused by defective flashings [weatherproofing]. This may affect other parts of the property. This is considered serious and in need to urgent repair or replacement.
Rating 3 in D1
Does it have a significant detrimental
The issue: there is water penetration in the
effect on the structural integrity of the
loft space at the junction of the roof and the chimney breast. Start in box A—No hazard—Move to box J
property?—Not currently Is a further investigation required?— No
Move to box P
Box J—is a repair needed?—Yes—Move to box L Box L—is it cosmetic/minor repair—No— Move to box N Box N—is the defect serious?
Rating 3 in D4 The issue: the holes that have been drilled to allow the Chemically Injected Damp Proof Course to be added have not been filled following the application. This could allow water ingress into the main walls.
Would undertaking the repairs be at a considerable cost?—No
Start in box A—No hazard—Move to box J
breast with damp patch at
Does it spoil the intended function of
top.
Box J—is a repair needed?—Yes—Move to
the building/service—Yes
box L
Photos 1 & 2: chimney
Issue 7 Page 7
July 2009 © National Energy Services Ltd 2009
Box L—is it cosmetic/minor repair—No—
Would undertaking the repairs be at a
Move to box N
considerable cost?—No
Box N—is the defect serious? Would undertaking the repairs be at a considerable cost?—No
Does it spoil the intended function of the building/service—No Does it have a significant detrimental effect on the
Does it spoil the intended function of
structural integrity of the
the building/service—Yes
property?—No
Does it have a significant detrimental
Is a further investigation
effect on the structural integrity of the
required?—No
property?—Not currently Is a further investigation required?— No
Move to box P
Move to box O Is the defect urgent ? Might the defect develop rapidly
Photo 3: chimney stack front face.
into a serious defect if not
Rating 3 in E9
repaired/remedied now?—No
The issue: there is penetrating dampness in
Might the defect cause a structural
the property.
failure or serious defects in other
Start in box A—No hazard—Move to box J Box J–is a repair needed?—Yes—Move to box L
building elements if not repaired now? —No
Move to Box R rating 2 Photo 4: unfilled drill holes
Box L—is it cosmetic/minor repair—No— move to box N Box N—is the defect serious? Would undertaking the repairs be at a considerable cost?—No
Rating 1 in E1
from work carried out to inject
The issue: water ingress into the roof
a chemical DPC.
structure, from defective flashing at the chimney/roof junction. Several of the timbers that make up the roof structure are damp due to the water ingress. Once the flashing has been repaired (and assuming it is carried out promptly) the inspector
Does it spoil the intended function of
believes that the timbers will ‗dry out‘ with
the building/service—Yes
out the strength of the roof structure being compromised.
Does it have a significant detrimental effect on the structural integrity of the
Start in box A—No hazard
property?—Not currently
Move to box J Is a further investigation required?— No
Box J—is a repair needed?—No (not in this
Move to box P
Rating 2 in D2
element)
Move to box K
The issue: considerable build up of moss on
Do you agree with the Home Inspector?
the roof tiles.
Contact the Editor with your views and opinions (see page 8 for contact details).
Start in box A—No hazard—Move to box J Box J—is a repair needed?—Yes—Move to box L Box N—is the defect serious?
Issue 7 Page 8
HI Technical Bulletin © National Energy Services Ltd 2009
‘Health and safety issues’ continued from page5 The door and window are otherwise in a
Step Two—it clearly falls below the
satisfactory condition.
benchmark for safety and is a direct threat to the users of the building.
The revised protocol results in the following
Step Three—the safety hazard has been
outcomes:
caused by a defect in the ceiling. Therefore ‘Action One’ is appropriate:
Step One—the low level glazing is clearly a safety hazard.
condition rating three under E2
Step Two—the glazing is below the
the new RICS HBR;
Ceilings of the HCR and F2 Ceilings of
benchmark for safety and is a direct threat
the threat to safety would be reported
to the users of the building.
under these elements, and;
Step Three—the glazing is not defective
the safety hazard would also be
and is secure within its rebates, both in the
included in section C2 of the HCR and
door and in the window. Therefore ‘Action
section J3 of the HBR.
Two’ is appropriate: condition rating one under D5 and D6 of the HCR and E5 and E6 of the new RICS HBR; the threat to safety would be reported under these elements, and; the safety hazard would also be included in section C2 of the HCR and section J3 of the HBR.
Collapsed ceiling Photo 2: collapsed ceiling.
Photo 2 shows a collapsed lath and plaster ceiling in a corridor within a converted dwelling. Assume that the flat is unoccupied and you have to assess ‗as seen‘. The revised protocol results in the following outcomes:
Conclusion I had hoped this article would provide ‗closure‘ on the safety hazard debate enabling a stronger and more robust methodology to be produced, but this was not possible. So much has happened since I wrote the original article that big questions have to be posed and answered. It is no longer relevant to debate the nuances of redundant codes of practice. It is more important to incorporate the many positive characteristics of the HCR into new products that are better suited to the changing economic, political and commercial environment within which we have to survive. If we do this effectively and quickly, not only will the home buying public be better served we may also get some return on the time and
Step One—the ceiling is still in an unstable condition and so is a safety hazard.
money we have invested in this initiative. Phil Parnham, July 2009
We welcome your feedback and comments. Please email: bulletins@nesltd.co.uk Registration Services : 01908 442 277 registration@nesltd.co.uk Compliance: 01908 442288 compliance@nesltd.co.uk Technical Support Helpdesk: 01908 442105 support@nesltd.co.uk Training enquiries: 01908 442254 training@nesltd.co.uk NES one Credit Top up line: 01908 442299 To download electronic copies of the bulletins, login to NES one and go to ‗Useful Documents‘ The content of this technical bulletin is protected by copyright and any unauthorised use, copying, lending or making available of it, howsoever defined, which is not specifically authorised by National Energy Services SAVA, The National Energy Centre Davy Avenue, Milton Keynes, MK5 8NA Web: www.sava.org.uk
Ltd., is strictly prohibited. © 2009 National Energy Services.