Sewer scope for an older Oslo apartment: sensible extra or overkill?

S

StillPage

First-time buyer
Founding Member
The general inspection is booked for a 235 m² apartment in Oslo, but it excludes the private sewer line. The building is older, with mature trees near the street. A separate camera scope costs far less than the NOK 428,000 estimate I received for full replacement.

Would you add the scope without obvious drainage symptoms, or reserve it for slow drains, smells or previous blockages? I’m also trying not to drain the emergency fund before moving costs, the first mortgage payment and any immediate repairs.
 
I would add it, provided the plumber can identify which section serves the apartment and give you usable footage or a written finding. The combination that changes the calculation for me is an older line, nearby roots and a NOK 428,000 downside. No symptoms today would not tell you much about buried pipe condition.
 
Before paying, establish whether this is genuinely your private line. In an apartment building, some drainage may be shared or handled through the owners’ association and service charges, depending on the documents and layout. What exactly does the replacement estimate cover: one branch, excavation to the street, or a larger shared section?
 
I’m less convinced that trees alone justify it. Roots matter if there is already a route into a damaged or poorly joined pipe; their presence does not prove a defect. I’d first ask for maintenance history, previous blockage reports and the route/material of the line. If those answers are missing or worrying, then scope it.
 
The scope also needs to affect your decision. Decide beforehand what findings would make you renegotiate, request further assessment or walk away. Otherwise it can become another inspection cost that produces ambiguous footage. Ask whether access is available and whether the inspection can cover the full relevant length rather than just the easiest section.
 
That’s fair—I wouldn’t treat the trees as evidence by themselves. My concern would be budget sequencing. Keep money aside for the insurance excess, moving, the first mortgage payment and urgent findings; furniture can wait. If the scope fee fits without touching that reserve, it seems more defensible than accepting an unexplored potential repair of NOK 428,000.
 
Tariq’s ownership question should come first. Get the association or seller to clarify responsibility in writing, then give the plumber the line boundaries and ask what can actually be viewed. Also ask the general inspector to note any drainage clues during the main inspection. If responsibility is yours and meaningful access exists, I’d scope; if it is shared, investigate the association’s records and planned costs instead.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top