Subsidence/Red Ash

marshallka

We purchased a property some years ago and had the usual mortgage valuation which mentioned the house was of good standard blah blah blah and nothing more. On the report was a section for mining report and it is ticked "no" and brickwork is "good" etc.

Two years later we remortgaged with the same mortgage lender and had another report which then mentioned the builders in this area used red ash or sulphureous infill in the floors during contruction and they said it needed a mining report. It also had a section about the property prone to subsidence and this is ticked "no".

Onwards to 2001 we again stayed with the same mortgage and had another valuation done and this time nothing was ticked/crossed or anything.

In 2003 we changed provider and they also did a valution and this time it states "The property is situated in an area of past mining activity,The conveyancer should obtain a mining report from the Coal Authority to provide information as to historical and future mining activity and whether the property has been subject to any compensation claims.

The property is of an age and type where sulphate contaminated infill was often used below the floor slabs. The vendor has stated that a sub floor infill analysis has been carried out and sulphate levels are satisfactory.

And also in 2003 it mentioned for the first time "The property has suffered from previous movement but i saw no evidence to suggest this was ongoing."

Now not at any time did we have a red ash test as I can remember although we had a mining report done. I have never mentioned this to the insurers that we have as we did not know we had problems or could have problems. Its only since reading about damp low down and then the cracks in the walls etc that I have googled and found this out. Also does this now invalidate any insurance claim (IF we needed to) with regards to subsidence as I have never mentioned this to our insurer???


Now right from day one when we bought the house there was a crack down one wall and this was cemented by my husband and VERY noticable to ANY mortgage valuer but they never said it was susidence and we assumed it not. I know we have no comeback on any of the valuation reports as such but why would the same company mention it two years on about the red ash (which we had no idea of at all) and not when we purchased the property. Did they have a duty to do this?

We have now got walls which are sloping and damp outside and also more slight cracks appearing. The floors are all carpeted on top of a bitumen substance but I KNOW there is cracking underneath this. None of the door frames are straight and ALL floors actually slope and looking at our house from the front there is a dip in the soffits where it is bowed considerably.

I think we are going to have to pay for a structural engineer to come and look at this but where do we stand with the coal board. Our garage floor is left in concrete and is cracked to high heaven and also we had to have the drive redone a few years ago cause of the same problem and have now got it tarmaced. The garage floor was mentioned in our latest valuation of 2004.

Is there anything we can actually claim for in all of this. All around the windows and door frames outside there are cracks which suggests subsidence is ongoing. How can valuers miss this when I am not a professional and would not know what to look for but after reading up it all seems to suggest it.

Do we have a claim against the coal board if any of this damage stems from the red ash? How do we go about all this? Do they have to dig up floors if it has got a problem arising from red ash? I really cannot cope with all this at the moment but we have been trying to rid this damp problem for years. I have spoken to our next door neighbours and they had their floors dug up some years before we moved here but it seems from a problem with a water pipe. She is elderly and I don't want to go into too much detail with her but I am thinking now that theirs was actually red ash.

Or can we claim against any insurance we have to remedy the walls from the damp which could be cause of subsidence OR will they say "you knew you had subsidence as you suffered in the past". (although no mention of it when we bought the property or for years later and three valuations later??)

MY main problem is damp and I was looking up damp and it can come from the floors holding damp and this is how I came to be looking up the floors and remembering the valuation all but the FIRST one mentioning this.

Would this have been mentioned on a coal mine report as I have found one of those from when we bought the house and it states that no mining was done etc etc... but would they have had to mention the infill of the floors??

Forgot to mention the neighbours behind us have a Willow tree which is lined up against our fence (and right where the "foul sewer" is are according to the plans of our house whatever that is). I have read that too can cause a problem with subsidence??

maxdp

marshallka wrote: »

We purchased a property some years ago and had the usual mortgage valuation which mentioned the house was of good standard blah blah blah and nothing more. On the report was a section for mining report and it is ticked "no" and brickwork is "good" etc.

Two years later we remortgaged with the same mortgage lender and had another report which then mentioned the builders in this area used red ash or sulphureous infill in the floors during contruction and they said it needed a mining report. It also had a section about the property prone to subsidence and this is ticked "no".

Onwards to 2001 we again stayed with the same mortgage and had another valuation done and this time nothing was ticked/crossed or anything.

In 2003 we changed provider and they also did a valution and this time it states "The property is situated in an area of past mining activity,The conveyancer should obtain a mining report from the Coal Authority to provide information as to historical and future mining activity and whether the property has been subject to any compensation claims.

The property is of an age and type where sulphate contaminated infill was often used below the floor slabs. The vendor has stated that a sub floor infill analysis has been carried out and sulphate levels are satisfactory.

And also in 2003 it mentioned for the first time "The property has suffered from previous movement but i saw no evidence to suggest this was ongoing."

Now not at any time did we have a red ash test as I can remember although we had a mining report done. I have never mentioned this to the insurers that we have as we did not know we had problems or could have problems. Its only since reading about damp low down and then the cracks in the walls etc that I have googled and found this out. Also does this now invalidate any insurance claim (IF we needed to) with regards to subsidence as I have never mentioned this to our insurer???


Now right from day one when we bought the house there was a crack down one wall and this was cemented by my husband and VERY noticable to ANY mortgage valuer but they never said it was susidence and we assumed it not. I know we have no comeback on any of the valuation reports as such but why would the same company mention it two years on about the red ash (which we had no idea of at all) and not when we purchased the property. Did they have a duty to do this?

We have now got walls which are sloping and damp outside and also more slight cracks appearing. The floors are all carpeted on top of a bitumen substance but I KNOW there is cracking underneath this. None of the door frames are straight and ALL floors actually slope and looking at our house from the front there is a dip in the soffits where it is bowed considerably.

I think we are going to have to pay for a structural engineer to come and look at this but where do we stand with the coal board. Our garage floor is left in concrete and is cracked to high heaven and also we had to have the drive redone a few years ago cause of the same problem and have now got it tarmaced. The garage floor was mentioned in our latest valuation of 2004.

Is there anything we can actually claim for in all of this. All around the windows and door frames outside there are cracks which suggests subsidence is ongoing. How can valuers miss this when I am not a professional and would not know what to look for but after reading up it all seems to suggest it.

Do we have a claim against the coal board if any of this damage stems from the red ash? How do we go about all this? Do they have to dig up floors if it has got a problem arising from red ash? I really cannot cope with all this at the moment but we have been trying to rid this damp problem for years. I have spoken to our next door neighbours and they had their floors dug up some years before we moved here but it seems from a problem with a water pipe. She is elderly and I don't want to go into too much detail with her but I am thinking now that theirs was actually red ash.

Or can we claim against any insurance we have to remedy the walls from the damp which could be cause of subsidence OR will they say "you knew you had subsidence as you suffered in the past". (although no mention of it when we bought the property or for years later and three valuations later??)

MY main problem is damp and I was looking up damp and it can come from the floors holding damp and this is how I came to be looking up the floors and remembering the valuation all but the FIRST one mentioning this.

Would this have been mentioned on a coal mine report as I have found one of those from when we bought the house and it states that no mining was done etc etc... but would they have had to mention the infill of the floors??

Forgot to mention the neighbours behind us have a Willow tree which is lined up against our fence (and right where the "foul sewer" is are according to the plans of our house whatever that is). I have read that too can cause a problem with subsidence??

Marshallka

On your insurance have they said that they would not insure for subsidence? Did the insurance company have copies of the valuation report.? You may perhaps be best to talk to the insurance company and also ring up a Structural Engineer and ask their advice.

Treacle1983

Sounds like you have tree root problems from your neighbours more than subsidence.

Call your insurer and explain the most recent report has worried you a bit and about the tree roots etc.. and they will send someone out.

It will only cost you money if there is subsidence. As if the tree is on the neighbours property their insurer will be contacted and have to most likely foot the whole bill with regards to the root problem.

Only if it is subsidence will you have to pay the excess - which is normally £1000 for subsidence.

You won't have to pay the excess for the tree roots - or if you do it will be minimal and you can claim it back.

dacouch

a) How exactly are the neighboors Insurers expected to pay for root or subsidence damage to a neighbooring house

b) How do you propose they recover their excess from the neighboors?