Vagueness and the Aftermath - A sporadic diary

[outragous76]

We are starting to touch on the beauty of my profession!

I still find it amazing how you can show someone 3 seemingly similar things and yet they can have 3 very different reasons/causes for being defective, and more importantly remedial costs can vary wildly depending upon the correct repair.

I worked for a firm of surveyors (when i was 22-27) who essentially reinventing building surveying (from an acquisition point of view) and very quickly everyone "wanted to be like CNP". We cleaned up the survey work from all of the financial institutions and investment funds, and I (or anyone else from that golden era) could walk into most jobs today, just by saying we worked there. It was such an exciting time being part of a company who were obviously leading the way.

In short, surveyors were renowned for saying "it might", "there is a possibility", "we didnt open up however" etc etc. CNP decided that the best way to win work was to provide actual advice. There was a possibility we might occasionally be wrong, but not very often (sued once in 12 years, and that is probably less than most others doing a tenth of the surveys we did). Its amazing how your confidence grows when you are forced to identify an actual reason. More-so, if you couldnt (as a younger guy), to ascertain as much information to enable your superiors to do so.

We did of course recommend testing where it was required (it would be negligent not to), but we never hid behind caveats. It amazes me that  a good proportion of professional building surveying practices still believe this is a reasonable approach.

Infact having written the above, it very much reminds me of what I am trying to achieve with my current loss adjusting of highways claims, just in a different way.

[tikay]

Next up with concrete, or more accurately, plaster - "rubbed up with a pineapple".

Guy will know it, I imagine, as an artex type finish.

Classy & cultured Diary, this.

I remember Anaglypta. It was like walpaper with bits in. Usually painted in magnolia emulsion.

You have the "rough" idea, yes. See what I did there?

Something like this for RUWAP......

 

[RED-DOG]

We are starting to touch on the beauty of my profession!

I still find it amazing how you can show someone 3 seemingly similar things and yet they can have 3 very different reasons/causes for being defective, and more importantly remedial costs can vary wildly depending upon the correct repair.

I worked for a firm of surveyors (when i was 22-27) who essentially reinventing building surveying (from an acquisition point of view) and very quickly everyone "wanted to be like CNP". We cleaned up the survey work from all of the financial institutions and investment funds, and I (or anyone else from that golden era) could walk into most jobs today, just by saying we worked there. It was such an exciting time being part of a company who were obviously leading the way.

In short, surveyors were renowned for saying "it might", "there is a possibility", "we didnt open up however" etc etc. CNP decided that the best way to win work was to provide actual advice. There was a possibility we might occasionally be wrong, but not very often (sued once in 12 years, and that is probably less than most others doing a tenth of the surveys we did). Its amazing how your confidence grows when you are forced to identify an actual reason. More-so, if you couldnt (as a younger guy), to ascertain as much information to enable your superiors to do so.

We did of course recommend testing where it was required (it would be negligent not to), but we never hid behind caveats. It amazes me that  a good proportion of professional building surveying practices still believe this is a reasonable approach.

Infact having written the above, it very much reminds me of what I am trying to achieve with my current loss adjusting of highways claims, just in a different way.

I just love to hear someone speak/write enthusiastically on any subject.

The principles you outlined would stand any business in good stead.

I used to specialise in felling difficult or dangerous trees, and I ran an advert which guaranteed that my quote wouldn't be the cheapest.

[tikay]

We are starting to touch on the beauty of my profession!

I still find it amazing how you can show someone 3 seemingly similar things and yet they can have 3 very different reasons/causes for being defective, and more importantly remedial costs can vary wildly depending upon the correct repair.

I worked for a firm of surveyors (when i was 22-27) who essentially reinventing building surveying (from an acquisition point of view) and very quickly everyone "wanted to be like CNP". We cleaned up the survey work from all of the financial institutions and investment funds, and I (or anyone else from that golden era) could walk into most jobs today, just by saying we worked there. It was such an exciting time being part of a company who were obviously leading the way.

In short, surveyors were renowned for saying "it might", "there is a possibility", "we didnt open up however" etc etc. CNP decided that the best way to win work was to provide actual advice. There was a possibility we might occasionally be wrong, but not very often (sued once in 12 years, and that is probably less than most others doing a tenth of the surveys we did). Its amazing how your confidence grows when you are forced to identify an actual reason. More-so, if you couldnt (as a younger guy), to ascertain as much information to enable your superiors to do so.

We did of course recommend testing where it was required (it would be negligent not to), but we never hid behind caveats. It amazes me that  a good proportion of professional building surveying practices still believe this is a reasonable approach.

Infact having written the above, it very much reminds me of what I am trying to achieve with my current loss adjusting of highways claims, just in a different way.

I just love to hear someone speak/write enthusiastically on any subject.

The principles you outlined would stand any business in good stead.

I used to specialise in felling difficult or dangerous trees, and I ran an advert which guaranteed that my quote wouldn't be the cheapest.

You never told me you were into arboriculture? (Just an excuse to use a word I rarely get chance to.....).

[RED-DOG]

We are starting to touch on the beauty of my profession!

I still find it amazing how you can show someone 3 seemingly similar things and yet they can have 3 very different reasons/causes for being defective, and more importantly remedial costs can vary wildly depending upon the correct repair.

I worked for a firm of surveyors (when i was 22-27) who essentially reinventing building surveying (from an acquisition point of view) and very quickly everyone "wanted to be like CNP". We cleaned up the survey work from all of the financial institutions and investment funds, and I (or anyone else from that golden era) could walk into most jobs today, just by saying we worked there. It was such an exciting time being part of a company who were obviously leading the way.

In short, surveyors were renowned for saying "it might", "there is a possibility", "we didnt open up however" etc etc. CNP decided that the best way to win work was to provide actual advice. There was a possibility we might occasionally be wrong, but not very often (sued once in 12 years, and that is probably less than most others doing a tenth of the surveys we did). Its amazing how your confidence grows when you are forced to identify an actual reason. More-so, if you couldnt (as a younger guy), to ascertain as much information to enable your superiors to do so.

We did of course recommend testing where it was required (it would be negligent not to), but we never hid behind caveats. It amazes me that  a good proportion of professional building surveying practices still believe this is a reasonable approach.

Infact having written the above, it very much reminds me of what I am trying to achieve with my current loss adjusting of highways claims, just in a different way.

I just love to hear someone speak/write enthusiastically on any subject.

The principles you outlined would stand any business in good stead.

I used to specialise in felling difficult or dangerous trees, and I ran an advert which guaranteed that my quote wouldn't be the cheapest.

You never told me you were into arboriculture? (Just an excuse to use a word I rarely get chance to.....).

Yes I did. You've just forgotten.

[tikay]

We are starting to touch on the beauty of my profession!

I still find it amazing how you can show someone 3 seemingly similar things and yet they can have 3 very different reasons/causes for being defective, and more importantly remedial costs can vary wildly depending upon the correct repair.

I worked for a firm of surveyors (when i was 22-27) who essentially reinventing building surveying (from an acquisition point of view) and very quickly everyone "wanted to be like CNP". We cleaned up the survey work from all of the financial institutions and investment funds, and I (or anyone else from that golden era) could walk into most jobs today, just by saying we worked there. It was such an exciting time being part of a company who were obviously leading the way.

In short, surveyors were renowned for saying "it might", "there is a possibility", "we didnt open up however" etc etc. CNP decided that the best way to win work was to provide actual advice. There was a possibility we might occasionally be wrong, but not very often (sued once in 12 years, and that is probably less than most others doing a tenth of the surveys we did). Its amazing how your confidence grows when you are forced to identify an actual reason. More-so, if you couldnt (as a younger guy), to ascertain as much information to enable your superiors to do so.

We did of course recommend testing where it was required (it would be negligent not to), but we never hid behind caveats. It amazes me that  a good proportion of professional building surveying practices still believe this is a reasonable approach.

Infact having written the above, it very much reminds me of what I am trying to achieve with my current loss adjusting of highways claims, just in a different way.

I just love to hear someone speak/write enthusiastically on any subject.

The principles you outlined would stand any business in good stead.

I used to specialise in felling difficult or dangerous trees, and I ran an advert which guaranteed that my quote wouldn't be the cheapest.

You never told me you were into arboriculture? (Just an excuse to use a word I rarely get chance to.....).

Yes I did. You've just forgotten.

You have to argue, don't you?

No culture, no class.

[tikay]

Actually, now I think about it, you may have done, but I was reading The Times, or texting at the time. You do rattle on a bit sometimes.

[outragous76]

Here is a good example of how easy it is to get caught out in my world, especially when you are busy/under pressure/not concentrating enough

3 buildings with large uninterupted expanses of brickwork, relatively defect free to the initial observation, no visible defects internally all look essentially fine

However one of these buildings has an issue which no surveyor should miss and the remedal works to which would be (im just going to say significant in relation to property value so not to give it away)

feel free to take a shot, im just going for dinner, reveal at 8pm (ish)



to central tower, cavity brickwork, steel framed building

Click to see full-size image.

to main lift core stariwell to front of building, cavity brick(and block), concrete framed building

Click to see full-size image.

to gable, solid/traditional brickwork cast iron/steel framed building

[RED-DOG]

I'm away from home. I demand an extended deadline.

[kinboshi]

Asbestos in one of them?

One of them listed?

[outragous76]

I'm away from home. I demand an extended deadline.

granted

[outragous76]

Asbestos in one of them?

One of them listed?

Just to clarify, the defect is visible (so not asbestos).

As for listing, not really a defect and im not sure about all 3

[Woodsey]

The building looks like shit and is not pleasing on the eye in the least? 

[RED-DOG]

Here is a good example of how easy it is to get caught out in my world, especially when you are busy/under pressure/not concentrating enough

3 buildings with large uninterupted expanses of brickwork, relatively defect free to the initial observation, no visible defects internally all look essentially fine

However one of these buildings has an issue which no surveyor should miss and the remedal works to which would be (im just going to say significant in relation to property value so not to give it away)

feel free to take a shot, im just going for dinner, reveal at 8pm (ish)



to central tower, cavity brickwork, steel framed building

Click to see full-size image.

to main lift core stariwell to front of building, cavity brick(and block), concrete framed building

Click to see full-size image.

to gable, solid/traditional brickwork cast iron/steel framed building

OK. I give in.

[doogan]

is it the trees in building 2, im sure that being that  close the roots could cause problems to foundations at some point