Supporting purlin to original state where supports removed

[neomxl]

Hello,

Straight to the point! I've just bought my first property and I've stripped the loft back and uncovered what I think is inadequately supported purlins in the center (where they meet) where the previous owner has cut away structure to open up the space.

https://imgur.com/a/A5BAEMR

I think this looks flimsy at best. In fact, this supporting post is not even fully touching and is in poor repair:

https://imgur.com/a/fMa4DTQ

The double timbers that come out from the rafters I believe once went all the way across to the other side which fortunately is supported by a wall built up on a load bearing wall, the bad news for me is the load bearing wall does not run all the way to the other side - underneath the purlins in question is nothing.

What is somewhat difficult to see pictured is a diagonal timber (that has been partially cut off ) that ran from the rafter, behind the purlins, through the horizontals and into the floor - which originally would have run into the load bearing wall (Also pictured is our attempt to put some timber in just for now to ensure that the purlins are at least supported on the 4x2 more flush than the current 'solution'):

https://imgur.com/a/64KoqGp

Not being one to gamble I've had quite a lot of people in but I've had the full spectrum of opinions from very very cautious to indifferent so I'm looking to see if anyone can give their opinions on this and hopefully myself understand more the possible solutions so I can make an informed decision.

Thanks for reading!

 

[KenGMac]

neomxl, good evening.

Must admit I do not like what i am looking at.

You mention this property is one that you have just purchased? if so how long ago?

Would it be possible for the valuation Surveyor to have seen the cut timber during even a cursory inspection?

Ken

 

[neomxl]

Good evening, thanks for commenting.

I had a homebuyers survey (the one above valuation, but below structural survey) and have already contacted them since some of this was on show.

Basically, they are saying that as the work was not done to building regs and they advised me to look into that, that they are not liable and to be honest, I have enough stress with the house as it is (had to have a full rewire done amonst more) that I'm opting for not pursuing it.

I've had two structural engineers in to assess, one says put it back to how it originally was (not sure how) and the other to put multiple RSJs in (seems overkill).

 

[KenGMac]

neomxl, good evening again.

OK the Valuation Surveyor has obviously directly viewed the cut away roof tie.
You mention that this Surveyor has advised you that such work was not "done to building Regs."

IMO the Surveyor is selling you short, in that the Surveyor should have advised you that the cut away roof tie was a possible Structural issue and further advised you to have a Structural Survey undertaken, and the sheer implication of such a removal? I believe there is a lack of duty of care, OK some advise was tendered, but not the full implication.

As an aside was the Survey passed on to your Lender? normally a Mortgage Company would react to such a comment?

The diverging remedial proposals promulgated by the two Structural Engineers does not really surprise me at all. As an aside? did the Structural Engineer who wants to install loads of RSJs suggest a firm that he trusted to undertake the work???

What are your intentions for the roof space?

As for replacement? it would require [somehow] maneuvering a length of timber through the house, up into the attic Via. the hatch and cutting to dimension to fix.

Ken.

 

[neomxl]

Hi Ken,

Thanks for your support, I'm starting to get rather down in the dumps about this whole situation.

Perhaps I can try my hand again with the surveying company. The property was mine on July 20th. Only the valuation was passed on to the lender, but they were aware of a lack of building regulations for a loft conversion and didn't seem to care.

Neither structural engineers suggested any companies when I asked, is that unusual?

There is a space-saver set of loft stairs so I think getting timber up there shouldn't be too problematic, and between my Father and I we certainly have the tools to cut the timber to size and install it diagonally.

One thing I can't quite picture is just how the diagonal beam running from the rafter, under the purlin, to the load bearing wall supported the roof. It's the fact it runs underneath the purlin to support it that I am struggling with. If it ran from the end of the purlin I could understand.

The analogy I have been explaining to people is like standing on the top of a fence post to support your body weight vs laying it down horizontally and standing 3/4 of the way on it. Is there something I am obviously missing in my understanding of how the weight is distributed? Especially as the angle is quite close to 45 degrees and not more vertical. Perhaps the previously installed horizontal timbers accounted for this?

Below is a rough idea I was toying with for a possible solution, I'd open anyone to comment on it (especially if I'm being naive in my approach) noting this is just a rough idea for layout of the wood and not meant to be to scale, have correct angles or deal with how timber will be joined to walls or other timber etc. On the right hand side the wall already exists.

[https://imgur.com/a/TtQZDaN]

Thanks for reading