Timber decay and woodworm
A wattle-and-daub panel between timbers is soft and the oak posts beside it are hard. Why should the posts not be condemned with the panel?
The posts should not be condemned with the panel. The wattle-and-daub panel between the timbers is soft, and the oak posts beside it are hard. Softness is in the infill: the daub, and perhaps the wattle that holds it. The oak the surveyor found hard is a different material doing a different job. Condemning the posts would take a failure of the panel and paste it onto timbers the inspection did not find decayed. The survey separated them. The panel is the soft element. The posts were not.
Last reviewed 24 October 2026. Written for buyers in England and Wales unless this answer says otherwise. No named surveyor has signed this page. It is general guidance, not a report on your house, and not legal advice.
What is the fuller explanation?
Wattle and daub is an earth and timber infill, not the structural frame. It gets wet, loses its key, and goes soft while the oak beside it stays firm. Repair, when it is needed, is about the panel. Frame repair is a different instruction and needs decay, shake, or movement in the timber itself. None of that was the finding beside this panel. The survey did not sentence the oak because the daub crumbled.
Ask a timber-frame specialist to look at the soft panel as infill, and to confirm the posts only if something in the oak itself is in doubt. Tell the solicitor the report has not condemned the frame with the panel. Do not let a quote for replacing oak posts be built on softness that sits between them. The inspection felt a soft panel and hard posts. It did not merge the two.
What should you ask your surveyor?
- Which panel was soft, and which oak posts beside it were hard?
- Did you record the posts as not condemned with the infill?
- What of the frame was hidden behind plaster or render?
What are the typical next steps?
- Keep the soft daub on the panel, not on the oak posts.
- Ask a timber specialist about the infill before any frame is written off.
- Do not accept a post-replacement quote based only on the soft panel.
Costs vary with the building and with who you instruct. Where this page does not cite a published figure, ask the surveyor, a relevant specialist, or your solicitor for a written quote. Do not treat a forum average as the price.
Also asked about this
If the daub has fallen out, are the posts now structural by default?
The posts were already the frame, and the panel was infill. Fallen daub does not newly condemn the oak, and it does not newly prove it. The survey found the posts beside this panel hard. Loss of the infill is loss of the panel. The posts were not condemned along with it.
Can hard oak still have decay on the hidden face?
Yes, it can, and the survey has not claimed otherwise. The posts beside the panel were hard where they were checked, which is why they should not be condemned with the soft daub. A hidden face that was not seen stays unseen. That limit is not a reason to write off timbers the inspection found hard.