Anxious about subsidence history (from autumn 2004)

nervousnewbies

Hi all,
We are in the process of buying a home and some of the paperwork has revealed that the house had an issue of subsidence in 2004. The paperwork suggests that the issue was dealt with (extract from letter below), but we do not know how to be sure!

Here is the extract from the letter that highlights the problem:
"Following discovery of cracking to your property during autumn 2004, [ABC] carried out an inspection and prepared a report advising that your property was suffering from subsidence of the site and as such as you should notify your insurers.
Following notification your insurers appointed XXX as loss adjusters to investigate matters. XXX arranged for site investigations to be carried out following which they confirmed that the crack damage to your property was due to subsidence of the site.
A period of crack width monitoring ensured for 18 months including tree mitigation action carried out around spring 2005.
The mitigation works demonstrated stability and a scheme for super-structural repairs were then prepared.
Works were carried out and completed towards the end of 2005 and the claim was settled in early 2006."
Does this indicate the end of the problem?? The property was first on the market in 2007... we're hoping to buy it now, in 2010.

We are now concerned mainly about:
1. Should this history affect our building and contents insurance?
2. Will it affect the resale value of the house?
3. Should we be worried about the recurrence of subsidence? Do we need to get a structural survey done before we can be sure?

Any advice much appreciated!

Milliewilly

nervousnewbies wrote: »

Hi all,
We are in the process of buying a home and some of the paperwork has revealed that the house had an issue of subsidence in 2004. The paperwork suggests that the issue was dealt with (extract from letter below), but we do not know how to be sure!

Here is the extract from the letter that highlights the problem:
"Following discovery of cracking to your property during autumn 2004, [ABC] carried out an inspection and prepared a report advising that your property was suffering from subsidence of the site and as such as you should notify your insurers.
Following notification your insurers appointed XXX as loss adjusters to investigate matters. XXX arranged for site investigations to be carried out following which they confirmed that the crack damage to your property was due to subsidence of the site.
A period of crack width monitoring ensured for 18 months including tree mitigation action carried out around spring 2005.
The mitigation works demonstrated stability and a scheme for super-structural repairs were then prepared.
Works were carried out and completed towards the end of 2005 and the claim was settled in early 2006."
Does this indicate the end of the problem?? The property was first on the market in 2007... we're hoping to buy it now, in 2010.

We are now concerned mainly about:
1. Should this history affect our building and contents insurance?
2. Will it affect the resale value of the house?
3. Should we be worried about the recurrence of subsidence? Do we need to get a structural survey done before we can be sure?

Any advice much appreciated!

1. YES
2. YES
3. YES but don't waste your money on a structural survey run away now, doesn't 3 years on the market tell you the alarm bells should be ringing?

nervousnewbies

1. YES
2. YES
3. YES but don't waste your money on a structural survey run away now, doesn't 3 years on the market tell you the alarm bells should be ringing?

** Can anyone tell us how to check if the property actually stayed on the market that long?

And is it naive to read that letter as indicating that the issue was satisfactorily examined, invstigated and fixed, especially since all the paperwork seems in order and it was processed through insurers at the time? Doesn't that usually mean the work would have been carried out with due diligence?

marcg

The letter indicates the damage was due to tree roots. The letter also says they did something about it that worked for at least 18 months. I wouldn't be worried about it unless the tree is likely to damage the house again - how big is it? Does it have a Tree Protection Order on it?

The subsidence in question is not the horrific kind you should run away from - being unstable soils/mine works/underground watercourses. These are uncurable problems - a tree isn't.

That said, it will affect your insurance and, unless you have the tree removed, will affect future resale.

nervousnewbies

Thanks Marcg, that sounds much more reassuring! Should there be such a piece of paper as a 'Tree Protection' with the set of papers indicating they made an effort to fix it? As to the tree in question, we can't even see one on or around the property!!!

And wouldn't tree mitigation action mean that the tree was 'dealt with' and therefore we can't really see it? Shall we ask for particulars regarding the mitigation? And will it still affect insurance and resale or is there some kind of certificate that shows it was dealt with till a real end of problem?

Thanks for replying!!

Milliewilly

nervousnewbies wrote: »

Thanks Marcg, that sounds much more reassuring! Should there be such a piece of paper as a 'Tree Protection' with the set of papers indicating they made an effort to fix it? As to the tree in question, we can't even see one on or around the property!!!

And wouldn't tree mitigation action mean that the tree was 'dealt with' and therefore we can't really see it? Shall we ask for particulars regarding the mitigation? And will it still affect insurance and resale or is there some kind of certificate that shows it was dealt with till a real end of problem?

Thanks for replying!!

The insurance and resale WILL always be affected as the spectre of subsidence even though its fixed will always linger in the minds of buyers and lenders. If you are getting the property at a bargain price then its not a problem as you will pay more for your insurance (and will have to use the existing provider most likely) and will get less when you come to sell but this will be negated by what you originally pay.

I am speaking from experience here. I personally would look for another house.

G_M

When you go online to compare buildings insurance you are always asked about subsidence history. As soon as you say yes, 99% of companies will either decline insurance or make you phone for a specialist (more expensive) quote.

Future buyers will ALL ask the very questions you are asking. 90% will walk away.

it's up to you whether you want to be one of the 10% willing to buy.

Will it recur? Probobly not, but who can say? That's what is so exciting about the future. It's unknown!

nervousnewbies

As you can probably guess, Milliewilly, we are sort of tied in to this deal - for one thing, we really do like the property a lot (I know, always a mistake!!) but also the paperwork has progressed to a point where - after over six weeks of back and forth, with sackfuls of paper traded - we are nearly close to exchanging contracts, so quite reluctant to start all over again...

Of course, if it is a totally bum deal - or a red hot risk - we can probably ill afford it as first time buyers, but if the risks are some we can either mitigate through more paperwork, or be reassured about (as in, perhaps there is no risk anymore?) we would really like to keep it rolling. (Also, we've already spent a fair amount of money on all the payments & fees that would of course be a loss)

But your advice has certainly made us think a lot about cutting our losses if need be, or - and we like this better - pushing for a more 'fair' settlement, where perhaps they pay for the structural survey, since surely it is up to them to reassure us at this late stage, that all is indeed well and truly 'mitigated'??

surreybased

We've recently had this situation - close to exchange when the subsidience issue raised. Did the vendors tell you about the issue during the price negotiation? If not then I think you need to revaluate the price..yes you've spent money so far (i know how that feels to write off money for a survey and solicitors fees) but what if the actual loss in purchasing this house was £5 or £10k (don't know the number involved).

At the minimum the building insurance will be 2 or 3 times the cost - please invesitigate this as your ongoing costs could be much more than you thought. Also the resale value will be affected..we walked away from the sale, had the vendors been upfront with the issue we would have negotitated a substantial discount to recoup our annual higher costs.

A structrual survey will be necessary, may actually be required for you to get ANY building insurance also your mortgage company need to be informed

marcg

Sounds like the offending tree was removed. Call a few insurance brokers and find out their view on historic tree root damage. Logically, I don't think they would all run a million miles - as I said, it's damage clearly caused by a tree which has now been removed together with professional repair of the damage. Do a few secret buyer quotes to see what happens.

Davesnave

If you look on Bing, you may get an aerial view of the property and the surrounding trees a few years ago....or you may not; it just depends on when the aerials for your area were last updated. Out here in the sticks, our aerial views are about seven and ten years old. I find it fascinating to see how the previous owner messed things up so badly in three years flat!:rotfl:

That won't solve your dilemma, but it might shed light.

I wouldn't bother asking neighbours. We were in rented last year on an estate blighted by subsidence, and when we mentioned it we were told, politely, but firmly, 'it is never spoken about here.':o