Pete recently did an interview on BBC Radio 4 - You and Yours - which investigated a case history of failed cavity wall insulation.
We recently surveyed an old house, for which the bank had requested a 'Timber and Damp Survey'.
The real estate agents got their local 'damp man' to survey and quote on the work needed.
The client suspected fraud - especially when there appeared to be very little damp in the house.
We surveyed the place, and found no problems, apart from evidence of a leak from a bathroom - which had been fixed long ago. The house is very old - solid walled, built with lime, and dates back to the late 17th C. In other words it is about 350 years old.
Midland Damp proofing tell us that it is 'Circa 1910', and has blue brick damp course, and a chemical damp course. Wow! So it's already been done, and we don't need to damp proof then? Bit of a bugger that they haven't a clue how old the house is, or how it's built...
Ah well - here we go with the usual PCA fraud starting with this lot:
" A visual inspection with an electronic moisture meter revealed high levels of damp to the walls indicated by the attached sketch plan - the pattern of readings would indicate the presence of rising damp"
Really? So a building that has apparently already been damp proofed, and which our 'surveyor' admits had already been damp proofed, apparently now has rising damp again. So this damp proofing stuff ain't very successful is it? Have a look down the page at these pictures of the 'survey' which is your typical sales pitch to flog useless chemicals:
First, on page 1, we've got all the lovely logos that attempt to give the company some form of credibility. You'll notice there is the GPI logo - now thats the one I'm talking about elsewhere in the site, where the PCA boys all got together and started another company to collect even more fraudulent money together for guarantees they flog - remember - they are curing rising damp (apparently), and every guarantee claim is answered with "condensation, love - that's not covered - we cured the rising damp.." These logos are covered here: More about the Con
Note on the last page, it quietly introduces the bit about condensation: "The damp proof course does not prevent condensation" - erm - that's what 'rising damp' actually is you morons. But they don't want you to know that - they want your money, and the guarantee money, then when you complain, they blame.... condensation :-)
So - on the first page of the quote / survey, we've found damp in an already damp proofed house, we've got the age and type of house wrong, and we've used a 'damp meter' that doesn't measure damp.
Doing well aren't we!
Have a look at the plan - most of the house is now going to get injected, and plaster ripped off and replaced. Well now - funny that - our thermal imaging shows that most of the house already has this, so why are we doing it again? ER, well - um - we're trying to defraud the client of the grand sum of £1700 plus the cost of a dodgy guarantee, that's why. Now our dodgy 'surveyor' has amazing qualifications too - he's got all the usual PCA rubbish - CSRT and all that - looks impressive, but not a single academic qualification that even reaches NVQ Level 1 here. And he's got the BS6576 thing on Page 2 wrong too - it actually says that you can't use a damp meter to diagnose rising damp in that. Amazing that the BS system now has a much newer one called BS7913, in which damp proofing is dismissed as not required.
In the section under the photos, I'll show a bit more of the building - but the bottom line: This is a fraudulent quote for 'damp proofing' that is not required.
The house is bone dry.
A fraudulent piece of equipment was used to diagnose a non-existent phenomenon.
It has already been 'damp proofed' so why do it again.
Real Estate agents referring these guys all the time - more fraud - its quite simple really - Fraudulent misrepresentation to the client "Oh - this is our damp man - he'll solve all your porblems.. (and we get a nice kick back too)"
This is the damp industry in full sway.
Flogging fraudulent rubbish that is never needed.
So we got the building type wrong. The 'pattern of readings indicates rising damp'. The PCA teach them to say that in every report. The wording never varies.
We used an inappropriate piece of equipment to 'diagnose' something that wasn't there - that is called fraud. Fraudulent mis-selling actually. The Courts take a very dim view of it.
... And here is the 'Get Out of Jail' clause. Note that it says 'The Damp proof course does not prevent condensation'..
So we screw you for a fraudulent damp course that isn't needed, using a fraudulent diagnosis using a bit of cheap electronic rubbish that doesnt even measure damp, and we cover our arse in the paperwork for the guarantee by saying that the real cause of damp in walls is not covered anyway - so we just eliminate a mythical process that doesn't happen and make sure you can never claim on the guarantee....
Clever con merchants these people.