Help - subsidence worry. Am i not covered by my buildings insurance?

FIVEINAROW

Hope it goes well twiglets. Interesting to see how your insurance company handle the situation , if you feel like keeping us posted.

elvis_girl

Twiglets I was in a similar position myself last year. I couldn't get a remortgage because the bank surveyor said there had been "structural movement" (still not sure if this is the same as the dreaded S word!) I commissioned my own engineers report & was told that unless the building is monitored for at least 6 months no one can tell if it is still moving or not. I was able to get a remortgage with another bank but one of the conditions was that I had to send the insurance company a copy of the engineers report which did say that there had been "historical movement" which like yourself was news to me( I also bought about 4 years ago). My insurance has now shot up by a couple of hundred quid a year, but at least I've been honest if I ever do need to make a claim

twiglets_2

Another update......I have been holding off taking any action either way for the moment as I kept changing my mind and really wasn't sure what to do for the best - it was all too emotional with the house sale falling through and I couldn't really think clearly.

As a first step I've now managed to get a copy of my buyers survey. On the positive side, there is no mention of the word subsidence. It seems that it was a bit of a case of chinese whispers going on between the buyers, estate agents and solicitors.

On the negative side however, the survey is worded in such a way that I can understand why my buyers were scared off buying my house - the surveyor is non-committal in the report and appears to just be covering himself from all eventualities!

I'm still thinking about what action to take next but will keep you updated.

twiglets_2

Final update for anyone that is interested. I sent off all the paperwork to my current insurers and they are happy to continue cover under the same terms.

They agree with me that it isn't "subsidence" in the true sense of the word. The damage to the house was minor and caused by defective drains that have been fixed.

I may still have trouble selling a house with this 'defect' but hopefully now that the insurance is sorted it should be a bit easier!

imfedup

Twiglets - thats great news, I have only just picked up this thread, but I would have said that although the survey report stated movement from defective drains, at the time of the drain being fixed the previous owners may have made a claim for Escape of Water and NOT subsidence. Some Insurance companies used to have policies which said that if the EOW caused the property to move and without it the property would have been stable then the claim could be dealt with under the EOW peril (which also carried a lesser excess). This isnt always the case now with a newer policy.

If you get another buyers survey that is querying the movement, ring your Insurance Company and ask them to get a structural engineer to attend the property to check that there is no current movement. They should then provide you with a report that says no current movement which you can send to the surveyors.

Good luck:o

Debt_Free_Chick

I've only just spotted this thread and wanted to post a word of warning to all others.

If you are EVER in this situation, talk to your insurers immediately. If you don't, your entire policy could be null and void.

one of the principles on which a contract of insurance is struck is that of "disclosure", meaning that you have to tell the insurance company anything you are aware of, if it could possibly have an effect on the insurance. You don't assess how serious the effect might be - you simply tell the insurer and they make that assessment. It's exactly why you are taking out insurance - to have the insurer take on the risk and to do that they need to assess (underwrite) it.

If you fail to disclose something, then the entire insurance contract could be invalid. In this case, not just the part about insurance for subsidence ... but the whole policy.

So .... for heaven's sake .... disclose anything that you think might be relevant. Don't guess what might be relevant and what might not be - or if you want to do that, then become an underwriter

imfedup

So .... for heaven's sake .... disclose anything that you think might be relevant. Don't guess what might be relevant and what might not be - or if you want to do that, then become an underwriter

Wise words from Debt Free Chick, entirely right, its not for you or I to decide what is "material" or "relevant" but the Insurance Company and their underwriters.

Debt_Free_Chick

twiglets wrote: »

Final update for anyone that is interested. I sent off all the paperwork to my current insurers and they are happy to continue cover under the same terms.

They agree with me that it isn't "subsidence" in the true sense of the word. The damage to the house was minor and caused by defective drains that have been fixed.

I may still have trouble selling a house with this 'defect' but hopefully now that the insurance is sorted it should be a bit easier!

What a lucky escape! (See my other post as your entire policy could have been void!!!). You did exactly the right thing and it just goes to show that insurers underwrite the risk - they don't simply slap on an exclusion or put the premiums up when you disclose a particular issue. (I work for an insurer, but in HR, not "in the business" as such).

I sold a house in exactly this situation. Movement, insurance claim, structural engineer, kitchen dug out to 3m, underpinned, drains fixed, completion certificate, on the market, sold in 5 weeks at asking price (but this was 6 years ago).

Many insurers will describe this as "subsidence" as will many surveyors and many, many buyers. Subsidence is only a label, however, for certain "movement". One has to look to the cause of the movement. If the cause can be remedied then the subsidence can be halted. Insurers are really only concerned with future movement/subsidence. Historic subsidence is not an issue if the cause has been dealt with.

But too many buyers simply panic at the mention of "movement" let alone the word "subsidence" :eek: Any buyer should look further, unless they simply will not consider any property that's never had any movement of any description. In which case, they'll be struggling to find a property to buy and even if they find one without historic movement, that's no guarantee of no movement in the future

All you can do is keep all the paperwork, especially the structural engineer's report and hope you find reasonable buyers in the future.

Glad it all worked out for you :T

An interesting thread for others.

hethmar

When we bought this hous 17 years ago the surveyor mentioned "minor movement of some age" - when we questioned him about it he said nothing to worry about. The crack was across the top of the upper bay window and it still remains the same size - occasionally we paint over it Im assuming this wouldnt be classed as subsidence?

Debt_Free_Chick

hethmar wrote: »

When we bought this hous 17 years ago the surveyor mentioned "minor movement of some age" - when we questioned him about it he said nothing to worry about. The crack was across the top of the upper bay window and it still remains the same size - occasionally we paint over it Im assuming this wouldnt be classed as subsidence?

All houses move when they're first built - they dry out and "settle" into the foundations, although this settlement is less likely in newer builds as the foundations are now constructed differently. Older houses are more likely to settle and that's probably what you have. No - it's not the kind of subsidence that an insurer would be interested in and you shouldn't be worried either - particularly as the crack has never widened