On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 07:22:29 +0100, Tony Williams
wrote:

In article ,
MM wrote:

On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 16:19:19 +0100, Tony Williams
wrote:
Question: How did they find the "traces of asbestos"?

No idea *how* the surveyor arrived at this conclusion.
[snip]

Perhaps he didn't. Perhaps a bum-covering statement like;

"There is a shed with an asbestos roof that *may* result in
traces of asbestos *on* the property."

Was eversoaccidentally converted into the apparently
authoritive statement;

"There are traces of asbestos *in* the property."

I don't see how anyone can make an authoritive statement
unless they did a proper sampling and chemical analysis.

Oh, I fully agree with you that this is most likely what happened.
Especially since the surveyor cove who came to inspect the property
relaxed a bit once he realised that not all residents of ex-LA houses
carry knives and are prepared to use them. He asked how many viewers I
had had and I told him quite a few, and he said the reason it hadn't
sold was 'certainly nothing to do with the house'.

MM