Cowtown

I wouldnt want this house either now or once the stuff is removed. Either now or ten years from now. That is what I was getting at when I asked if you would have to inform potential buyers in the future.

Cheap is cheap for a reason. Good luck if you do decide to go for it. Please just think it through carefully.

hot wasabi peas

Something else to consider... what is the value of the land versus the house on it? In my case, my asbestos-sided house is not what is of value but the land it is built on is. Asbestos siding tiles are found on many, many houses in the area of that house and it has not stopped developers buying them up at top value.

iaink

I guess I just dont get it. If its professionaly removed I dont see any problem at all. There would be nothing to inform buyers about? Its nearly a benefiit now as its leverage to put in a lower offer or to have the seller deal with it first.

At this point noone even knows if they are asbesdos or not, and if they are, its really not the "bad" kind and would be relatively easy to deal with. Its not like asbesdos fibre insulation or friable ceiling tiles.

Bsidebaby

thanks for your support on this one iaink - we are of the same thinking as you!

MarkG

As I understand it, the problem with removal is that it throws lots of asbestos dust in the air... which is precisely what you're trying to avoid. But that shouldn't bother someone who's buying the place years later as any dust should be long gone, and from what I've read most people who got asbestosis were exposed to it in significant quantities for long periods.

The fact remains, though, that asbestos-phobia is probably widespread enough that it would put off at least some buyers in the future even if it was removed years ago.

iaink

Maybe I should have emphasised professionaly more.

Asbesdos is an old problem now, and there have been many techniques developed for dealing with it in a relatively safe way, if you know what you are doing.

Novocastrian

OK. If the stuff is removed by professionals at the sellers expense before BsB moves in with her kids, that's fine. Otherwise not.

(Honest, Ian, it's spelt asbestos, not -dos)

Cowtown

Because worrying about the effect it might have on my children if the removal had been botched would not be worth it for me. It seems to me that most staff are unable to do a good job these days so why would I think differently on this job.

iaink

Im an engineer

and honest, its spelt Iain

MarkG

That would be my biggest concern, to be honest. Maybe Canada is better, but the line between 'professional' and 'cowboy' seems pretty narrow in the UK these days.

iaink

Can you imagine how much a licensed removal contractor in North America would be sued for if it was found they were cutting corners. They really dont want that to happen, and its too easy to come and test after the job is done for them to take a chance.

But it is a specialist job, and maybe its better to get an estimate and have that cost removed from the buying price, rather than trust the vendor to get it done right. They after all really have nothing to gain from that and might be tempted to cut corners that the new owner certainly wouldnt.

dbd33

I, of course, would find out the cost and try to get it knocked off the price of the house. I'd then lay a new floor over the tiles and forget about them.

iaink

Presumably you would forget about them when filling out the sellers declaration when you came to sell it in a few years too

Souvenir

Which is why we have the "vice cache" system. At a later date, on selling, your knowledge of the asbestos can be tracked, as can your move to hide it. Rather a risky business, I would have thought.

dbd33

There's no such question. Urea formaldehyde is mentioned but not asbestos.