The correct diagnosis of any potential problem - be it in connection with a house, a washing machine, a car and even your health is essential otherwise the remedial measures taken to rectify the problem could be a waste of time and money. In very many cases and in particular with damp related problems in houses, it is not unusual for repair work which resulted from an initial diagnosis to be repeated if the problem still persists. Why does this happen? The main reason is that people usually believe it is the repair work that has failed – they tend not to consider that perhaps the original diagnosis was incorrect and therefore the wrong repairs were carried out. The problem is sometimes compounded by the fact that the person who made the original and perhaps incorrect diagnosis is called back again and still may not be able to recognise or diagnose the actual cause. On the other hand with the benefit of hindsight they may now realise their mistake but are reluctant to admit it because it has cost their client unnecessary expense and disruption.

Condensation or Rising Damp – Who Knows?
The so called ‘condensation season’ is usually between November and March and during these cooler winter months it is not unusual for a householder to confuse condensation with rising damp. The property owner does what he believes to be correct thing, obtains a specialist opinion and is told that a new damp proof course will cure the problem. Twelve months later the same problem is back but this time the same specialist, using the same equipment, announces that the new damp course is fine but the problem is now condensation. In these circumstances one has to ask how was condensation considered, evaluated and dismissed at the time of the original inspection and where are the recorded details? One should also consider that from the specialist point of view this time it is likely to be a potential guarantee claim whereas previously the opportunity for work existed.

Electric Moisture Meters - What Do They Tell You?
A popular instrument used as an aid in the diagnosis of a damp problem is a surface electric moisture meter. These instruments are simple to use and cause virtually no damage. They are in fact calibrated for establishing the moisture content of wood when but when used correctly they are extremely useful as an aid in the diagnosis of other damp problems. It should be remembered however that they are very sensitive and perhaps more importantly they do not tell the user where the moisture detected actually comes from. They do not have different coloured lights that tell the user that the moisture detected is caused by condensation, rising damp or penetrating damp - they just tell the user that dampness is or is not present - the interpretation of the pattern of readings obtained is down to the skill and experience of the user.

In addition to surface moisture meters there are other instruments and procedures that enable a check to see if condensation is taking place. Whilst acknowledging that such tests are a photograph in time, during the ‘condensation season’ it is always sensible to undertake and record the results of such a test thereby demonstrating that the possibility of condensation being present was considered. Despite condensation being acknowledged as the most common form of dampness in domestic dwellings in the UK it is a fact that not many remedial treatment surveyors undertake such a test during a survey and many would not even know how to.

There are many other ‘signs’ that an experienced surveyor will absorb whilst undertaking an inspection all of which will help build up a picture of the problem being evaluated and hopefully enable the correct diagnosis to be made. Sometimes a more in depth investigation is necessary, which requires wall/plaster samples to be taken for a laboratory analysis to enable moisture and salt profiles to be plotted. This course of action will obviously cause a certain amount of damage and will have cost implications but the result will be correct.

What price a correct diagnosis?
A property in the south of England was suffering dampness on and adjacent to a chimney breast in a first floor bedroom. The owner called in a roofer who renewed the flashing and soakers around the chimney stack but alas the damp problem persisted. Other builders were consulted which resulted in the flaunching being renewed and the stack re-pointed but still the dampness persisted. Eventually out of shear frustration the property owner paid for the stack to be demolished and rebuilt. Some £14,000 and eighteen months later the damp problem still persisted. Distraught the owner engaged the services of a damp consultant who identified very heavy hygroscopic (moisture attracting) salt contamination in the areas of dampness. These salts are present in large quantities in chimney flues when fossil fuel is burnt. As a result of previous moisture penetration they had leached through to the internal face of the chimney breast and contaminated the plaster surface from where evaporation took place. However being hygroscopic the damp patches appeared worse when it was raining giving the appearance of an ongoing leak whereas the moisture was in fact being absorbed from the atmosphere due to the salt contamination. The actual chimney breast was found to be dry which one would expect after having £14,000 lavished on it!

This was an extreme problem and everyone at the time did what they believed to be correct. Very probably the original diagnosis and work (renewing the flashing and soakers) was correct but unfortunately neither the original roofer nor any of those that followed had the experience or knowledge to foresee the consequences of moisture leaking into a property via a chimney. It is very difficult to protect ourselves from this type of situation as we tend to accept people at face value and if they claim to be good at what they do then who are we to challenge this?

What other factors could influence a diagnosis?
One should always remember that if a company or individual making the diagnosis predominantly earn their income undertaking work that they consider to be necessary then perhaps their inspection may not be as objective as you would hope. The building industry has various self imposed qualifications covering a variety of trades, but does it mean that you will get a correct diagnosis from someone who is qualified? It is more likely that you will but unfortunately not necessarily so. It should be remembered that in most cases qualification is not compulsory and anyone is able to set themselves up in business offering to perform a service. Whilst examination based qualifications are very good it should be remembered that an individual’s qualification does not exonerate the holder from commercial pressure that might be applied by their employing company. Commercial pressures exist in many forms. Some companies for example set their ‘surveyors’ monthly sales target figures to be achieved – in other words the surveyor must sell a minimum amount of work to be undertaken by his company over a defined period or his job could be on the line. Another pressure is where all or part of a surveyor’s salary is made up of a commission on the sales that he achieves – the more he sells the more he earns. Of course the most fundamental commercial pressure for all, especially for the smaller companies and sole traders is the need to earn a living. Whether we like it or not commercial pressures where livelihoods or pure business survival rely upon finding work and obtaining the order to undertake it has the potential to create what some may regard as an over zealous diagnosis of a problem.

It is not a perfect world
The building industry is not unique in the way that it operates. We are all vulnerable to varying levels of diagnostic competence during everyday life - be it a washing machine repair man, a garage, a dentist, a blocked drain company etc. etc. So how do we protect ourselves from these situations? There is no simple answer. It is always sensible to get more than one opinion but this is not always practical. When several opinions are sought it often leads to two or three totally different recommendations’ leaving you not knowing which one is correct.

Another option is to consult a professional who has no vested interest in the outcome of the diagnosis. The problem here though is that a professional opinion will cost money and the public are very reluctant to pay the going rate for a truly independent professional opinion even though in many cases it will save them money. It should be remembered that not all professionals are infallible and you will have nothing against which to judge their ability but this is probably the best course of action to take in what is after all not a perfect world. Before engaging a professional it is always worth checking that they have professional indemnity insurance as this will give you recourse should you discover that they got it wrong and it cost you money as a result.

The reluctance of the public to pay for a professional opinion is strange especially in view of the fact that numerous TV consumer programs show a professional locked away somewhere whilst unsuspecting ‘specialists’ are secretly filmed misdiagnosing and prescribing all sorts of unnecessary and expensive work. Surely it is better to pay for a professional opinion and then obtain quotations for what the professional considers necessary rather than risk carrying out unnecessary, costly and disruptive work. This way everyone quotes for the same work and you have someone to blame if the diagnosis is wrong.

Visitors online: 2 | Site Map