Pre-Purchase Building Surveys

Property ownership is a diverse and complicated process and probably the largest single investment anyone will commit to. Whether you are purchasing your first home or fortunate enough to be moving up the property ladder, or building a property portfolio by investing in a residential, commercial or industrial property you should take independent advice. There are several types of surveys offered, the majority of which do not fully assess and report upon the structural integrity of the building. Whatever your situation proceeding without the benefit of independent professional advice is therefore extremely risky and foolhardy.

APA’s pre-purchase structural Building Survey is the most in-depth and comprehensive report on the market. It provides detailed advice on the construction and condition of the external and internal roof coverings and structure, chimneys, facias/soffits and surface water guttering, external walls, floors, ceilings, door and windows. The survey will assess the structure for evidence of deflection, subsidence, settlement, rising damp, potential wood rot and if possible, we will lift manhole covers to report on drainage. APA will also comment on any structural alterations and additions that may have been undertaken. All APA surveys include photographs (on average 150) crossed referenced within the report to illustrate the issues identified.

You can enhance your survey by agreeing to a drone survey through APA.

The report is professional and structured whilst written in understandable language without using technical terms that the purchaser may not fully understand. The survey will include a list of significant issues that require attention that may impact on the structural integrity of the building advice and value.

Request a Callback

Judges Comments and Opinions regarding Dr. Antino

Miss Recorder Rowlands H01CL719 in Moore v Ahmed 2023

I accept Mr Antino's (as he then was) evidence that Mr Tugby had sought instructions form Dr Ahmed as to the lien of the boundary.
Dr Antino - Managing Director
The party wall world is relatively small, the stage of this world contains a number of well-known players, Mr Antino is one of these well-known players and so are his owners instructing solicitor Mr Ashley Bean of Thirsk Winton
HHJ Bailey - [2016]
The Claimants have a very experienced legal team comprising Mr David Mayall of lambchambers & Mr Ashley Bean of thirsK winton and their surveyro Dr. Philip Antino. The evidence in particular of the Defendant’s plans for both the Accessway and the plans and how it impacted upon the Claimants business was important information that The Defendants ahd not provided when requested.
HHJ Freedland QC - [2021]
"Mr Antino is a palpable witness, Mr Antino's explanation of the unique attributes of the "Thompson Plan" greatly assisted the Court to understand the location and extent of the claimants’ boundaries” (Best & Best v Perkins & Dennis in the County Court at Luton).
HHJ Hildyard - [2015]
The appeal was a preliminary hearing of two points in respect of an Award served by Mr Antino and a surveyor appointed by Mr Antino under s.10(4) on behalf of the Building Owners the Appellants. HHJ Luba QC sitting in the Central London County Court held "In my judgment the Award is valid, the use of s.10(4) was the appropriate procedure given the Building Owners refusal to appoint a surveyor. A dispute had arisen that satisfied s.10 procedures, The Award is an impressive piece of work". Schmid v Hulls and Athananasou).
HHJ Luba QC - [2016]
“Mr Antino is an acknowledged expert in the field of party wall issues.”
HHJ Murfitt QC 2013 - [2015]
“I have known Philip for many years as a surveyor, he is a very good surveyor, as this book shows he is a very good author and this book can only advance his reputation”
HHJ Philip Bartle QC - [2012]
“In the appeal of an ex-parte Award served by Mr Antino on behalf of the respondents, in my judgment the respondent is correct. Mr Antino’s contention that it is not a matter for negotiation directly between one surveyor and the other surveyor’s client. Since I have determined that the ex-parte Award was valid the court is still able to determine the Award and under the statutory powers to modify the Award if appropriate. I am grateful to Mr Antino suggesting that I now determine the Award issue “I accept that Mr Antino’s hourly rate is not in my judgment unreasonable. It follows that the fee set out in the ex-parte Award had been properly justified and I therefore award Mr Antino’s fees”. (Bansal v Myers Romford County Court).
HHJ Platt - [2007]

RICS Surveyors abuse or do not understand dilapidations

The RICS promotes themselves as an organization that “everything we do is designed to effect positive change in the built environment”. Given this statement it is not unreasonable to expect their members to understand the very subjects that they ...

Why fight a party wall claim for damages? Court of Appeal (Civil Division) on appeal from the County Court at Central London CA-2023-000624 and CA-2023-000626.

Building Owners liability for damagesThe moral of the story isWhere there is a liability to pay ...

Ongoing Party wall misuse/abuse

This follows my LAST blog having thought things could not get more bizarre this gentleman outshines himself.The BOS having taken a unilateral decision that the Act does not apply bec ...