Asbestos in the appraisal report: what you are really obliged to do
The word “asbestos” in an appraisal report triggers the same reaction in almost everyone: they move on to the next lot.
It is a misguided reaction. Of 13,474 auction properties with an analysis of the appraisal report, 852 have warnings about asbestos or environmental problems: 6%. Among the nine risks we track it is the second least widespread — only a donation in the chain of title is rarer. And when you actually read what is written, in the great majority of cases it is the same thing.
Two times out of three it is a roof
We read the appraisal warnings for 100 lots taken from the active ones with this tag. There are 111 sentences that trigger the warning, and 67 concern a roof: corrugated sheets, an asbestos-cement roof covering, the roof of an industrial shed, the canopy of an outbuilding.
The rest is split between flues, tanks and pipes, plus a heavier tail: land with dumped waste, contamination from hydrocarbons and heavy metals, in one case 2,280 tonnes of special waste never cleaned up.
These are two different worlds. The first can be quoted by a contractor in a morning. The second can cost more than the lot.
It is not peculiar to auctions: the 1994 technical decree already noted that asbestos-cement materials, “above all in the form of roofing sheets”, are the most widespread.
Only two appraisal reports in the sample put a figure on it: €5,000 in both cases. One concerns asbestos-cement “to be removed and disposed of”, the other the cleanup of contaminated land. They are two data points, not an average, but they help fix an order of magnitude — and show that the same figure covers two very different jobs.
What the law really prohibits
The asbestos law is Law 257 of 1992, and article 1, paragraph 2, says exactly this: “The extraction, import, export, marketing and production of asbestos, asbestos products or products containing asbestos are prohibited”.
Five verbs. None of the five is “keep”.
An asbestos-cement roof installed in 1978 is not illegal simply because it exists. The law stopped the supply chain; it did not order the demolition of what was already in place. There is no deadline after which the property becomes non-compliant, and the award does not create an obligation that did not exist before.
The exception that matters, and who pays for it
There is one case in which removal is ordered, and it is written in the same law, in article 12, paragraph 3: when fixing techniques cannot be used, and only if the diagnostic process makes it necessary, the Regions order the removal of materials containing asbestos “both sprayed and in friable matrix”.
Two limits to bear in mind. The first: it concerns friable material, which the 1994 technical decree defines as material that can be “crumbled or reduced to powder by simple finger pressure” — insulation, sprayed coatings, pipe and boiler lagging. Asbestos-cement sheets are classified as compact and do not fall under this provision.
The second limit is the sentence that closes the paragraph: “The cost of the removal operations is borne by the owners of the properties”. If the order comes, it comes to you. Not to the procedure, not to the debtor, not to whoever put it there in 1978.
The three routes, in the decree’s own words
The ministerial decree of 6 September 1994 is the technical text that explains what to do when asbestos is present. There are three routes, and it is worth reading how the decree describes them, because common sense ranks them wrongly.
Removal. “It is the most widespread procedure because it eliminates every potential source of exposure.” And it is also, in the decree’s words, “the procedure with the highest costs and the longest completion times”, because it produces hazardous waste to be disposed of and generally requires the roof to be redone.
Encapsulation. The material is treated with products that bind its fibres. The decree describes it as “the treatment of choice for poorly friable cement-type materials” — that is, precisely asbestos-cement roofs. It costs less and produces no toxic waste, but it has two drawbacks set down in black and white: the asbestos remains in the building, with “the consequent need to maintain a monitoring and maintenance programme”, and a later removal becomes more complicated because the treatment waterproofs the material.
Enclosure, of which the variant used on industrial sheds is over-roofing: a new roof is installed over the asbestos-cement one, which stays where it is. The decree sets a precise condition — the load-bearing structure must withstand the additional permanent load, and the calculation must be provided. And it warns that fixing requires drilling the sheets, an operation that releases fibres.
There is also a fourth route, which the decree calls repair: you simply fix it. It is intended for materials in good condition with damage “below 10% of the asbestos surface present in the area concerned”.
The scope trap
That decree does not apply to everything. It says so in its preamble: it concerns “civil, commercial or industrial buildings open to the public or in any case of collective use”.
And it expressly excludes industrial buildings “in which the contamination comes from the processing of asbestos or of products containing it”, citing in brackets the typical cases: disused sites, or sites converted to another production.
Pay attention to exactly what it says, because it is easy to read it more broadly than it is. The shed is not excluded as a shed: what is excluded is the one where asbestos was processed. A warehouse that produced furniture and has a sheet roof remains within the scope of the decree. A former plant that processed asbestos does not — and falls under the rules on site remediation, which is different legislation and a different budget.
That is why, for these lots, the property’s production history is not an archive detail: it decides which regime applies.
And sheds certainly come up at auction. In our data, 13.7% of the lots with this tag are industrial, against 2.7% of a control sample taken from the whole analysed catalogue: five times more frequent.
That said, 43% of the flagged lots are still residential. It is not a problem only for people buying sheds.
If you decide to remove it
Here the obligation shifts, and it is worth knowing onto whom.
The Consolidated Safety Act (Legislative Decree 81 of 2008, article 256) establishes that removal work may be carried out “only by companies” meeting the requirements of article 212 of the environmental code, and that a work plan must be prepared before starting. A copy of the plan “is sent to the supervisory body at least 30 days before the start of the work”: if within that period the local health authority (ASL) does not ask for changes or impose requirements, work can begin.
Those thirty days are not your obligation — they are handled by the company, which is the employer of those workers. But they are thirty calendar days, and they must be factored in if you are planning to renovate immediately after the transfer decree.
If, on the other hand, you leave the asbestos where it is, and the property falls within the scope described above, the 1994 decree requires the owner to appoint “a responsible person” to coordinate maintenance and to keep documentation of where the material is. The annual inspection with a report to the ASL applies to friable materials in place: a sheet roof does not trigger it.
For a small house that is neither open to the public nor of collective use, those obligations do not apply. That does not mean you can ignore the problem: waste rules apply regardless, and a crumbling roof exposes whoever lives under it.
The 14% nobody talks about
There is one category of warnings worth singling out, because it does not say what it seems to.
In 14 lots out of 100 in the sample, the appraisal report does not say there is asbestos: it says it has not been checked. “Presence of materials potentially containing asbestos not verified.” “No investigations into asbestos, soil pollution or compliance of the systems.”
It is a different warning and in some ways a more awkward one, because you cannot quote for what nobody has measured. A sheet roof visible in the photos can be assessed by a contractor before you bid. A “not verified” on a shed with a production history behind it is a hole of unknown size in the budget.
The countermove is simple: ask the custodian for a technical inspection before bidding, bringing along someone who knows what to look for. How viewings work is covered in the guide on what to look at when viewing an auction property.
Asbestos never travels alone
One last figure, perhaps the most useful of all. In the 100 lots we read, none had asbestos as the only risk flagged. The average is 6.2 problems per lot.
There is a simple explanation: properties with asbestos-cement roofs are old buildings, often never maintained, often with unauthorised works accumulated over the years and certificates never obtained. Asbestos is a symptom of the property’s age, not an isolated feature.
Which means the real bill is never “how much it costs to remove the roof”. It is how much it costs to remove the roof, plus everything else the same appraisal report lists below.
Frequently asked questions
Am I obliged to remove the asbestos after the award? No. Law 257/1992 prohibits producing and marketing asbestos, not owning an item installed before the ban. The obligation arises only if the Region orders removal in the cases provided for by article 12, paragraph 3.
Can I leave the asbestos-cement roof if it is intact? Yes, and the 1994 decree describes encapsulation as “the treatment of choice for poorly friable cement-type materials”, that is, precisely the sheets. The material, however, stays in place, and with it a monitoring and maintenance programme.
Who pays for the cleanup if I am ordered to do it? The owner of the property. Article 12, paragraph 3, of Law 257/1992 says so expressly.
Can I do the removal myself to save money? Article 256 of Legislative Decree 81/2008 says that such work “may be carried out only by companies” meeting the requirements of article 212 of the environmental code. If you have heard of simplified procedures for small quantities, have them confirmed by the competent ASL before touching anything: the general rule is the one above.
How long does it take? Leaving aside the work itself, you must allow for the 30 days’ notice to the supervisory body provided for by article 256, paragraph 5, except in urgent cases.
The appraisal report says “not verified”: what should I do? Ask the custodian for an inspection with a technical professional before submitting your bid. It is the only way to turn an undetermined risk into a number.
Data as at 15 September 2026, on active properties with an analysis of the appraisal report available. The percentages on the warnings come from a sample of 100 lots read one by one; the comparison by category from two samples of 300. The filter by appraisal tag returns “the lots where our analysis flagged asbestos or environmental problems”, not all those that have them. What emerges from the appraisal report and technical assessments always prevails.