Property Underpinning/Subsidence

househelp3

We bought a house a year ago. After completion our solicitors sent us a pack of papers that included a building control certificate for the underpinning done 20 years ago. We were shocked - apart from anything else this is a chalk area where subsidence is unknown. We went to them to find out why we were not told before and they told us they would look into our file. After our meeting they advised us to get a solicitor as it was a possible complaint situation which we did. They have now agreed that they knew before we exchanged and they breached their duty of care but they (through their insurance's solicitors) are now saying that it will make little difference in value. So now I ask the question who would pay the same amount for an underpinned house as they would for a property with no underpinning/subsidence (and no reason that there should be any).

hazyjo

Couple of questions that might make a difference...

Did you get buildings insurance on it, and, if so, are they aware of the underpinning?

Did you have a survey done (not just a valuation)?

Jx

teneighty

If the underpinning was done 20 years ago and there is no evidence of any movement since I wouldn't worry about it.

For my own peace of mind I would want to read the original report to establish why the underpinning was required and what method of underpinning was used. Like you say chalk is normally very stable unless there was an isolated void or small sink hole. The local council might still have the old Building Regulations application in their archive which should have the information.