Is a sewer scope worth adding to the inspection in Paris at €437,000?

[hugo.linden]

I’m buying an older 240 m² apartment in Paris for €437,000. The general inspection is booked, but it excludes the private sewer line, and there are mature trees near the street.

A separate scope costs far less than the €39,560 estimate I received for a full replacement. Is the scope a sensible precaution, or mainly useful when there are warning signs? I’m trying to preserve cash for moving costs, immediate repairs and the first mortgage payment, so I’d start by verifying who is responsible for that line.

 

[dev_keys]

I’d pay for the scope only after confirming that the section being inspected is actually attached to your apartment’s responsibility rather than the building’s shared property. The age and nearby trees make inspection reasonable, but a clear video is most useful if you know what decisions you can make from it before completing the purchase.

 

[sailsAndQuill]

Where did the €39,560 replacement estimate come from? Was it based on an identified defect, or just a worst-case quotation without a camera inspection? Also ask the managing agent or seller whether there have been blockages, repairs or related service charges. Those answers may tell you more than the headline replacement figure.

 

[WildPorch]

I’d push back slightly on treating the scope as automatically worthwhile because replacement is expensive. If the relevant pipe is shared, the financial exposure could arrive through service charges rather than a private repair bill, and the scope may not cover the whole route anyway.

Get the pipe boundaries and access points confirmed in writing, then ask what the inspection report will show and whether it includes recorded footage. If those answers are satisfactory, this seems a better use of contingency money than buying furniture early—but keep enough aside for the insurance excess and defects found in the main inspection.