Structural Movement and Underpinning

Jonny_B_3

Hi all

Just had a phone call from our surveyor - he's going round to our prospective property later.

He's looked through his records and said the house had structural movement and underpinning in 2003.

Is this something to be overly worried about would you say? What insurance implication would this have?

Any advice gratefully received.

Doozergirl

As long as the movement has been stopped by the underpinning, then I wouldn't be particularly bothered. It's probably more steady than any other house in the street now. As your surveyor knows that it has been underpinned, they will hopefully be looking into the reasons it occurred for you. If you know the reason, then it can be easier to make a decision in whether it's for you.

You can be tied to the original insurers for some years after the event. I'd check how much the current owners are paying.

There's an opportunity to get a nice bit off the asking price as the vendors will probably be a bit nervous about how it will sell.

Jonny_B_3

Cheers. Might give the estate agents a ring and tell them I'm concerned, even before the surveyor goes round.

Might ring my current insurers as well to see their view on underpinning.

Anyone else have any experience of this situation?

Searcher2

When I bought my house (for cash) it had subsidence when it was built over 50 years ago. The owner refused to move out when the builders offered to underpin and rebuild... so they ended up with metal girders being slid in underneath. The house appeared to have stopped all movement when I bought it but the back wall was bowed. I had loads of different advice from builders which ranged from 'don't touch it' to 'it's done all the moving it's going to'. I had all the affected area knocked down and extended but the builder refused to build it unless I had it underpinned (as with this method he could give an accurate estimate of the cost). The house, although only a bungalow, probably could stand a block of flats on it.

However.... the problem came with the insurance. As soon as you say the area had a history of subsidence they don't want to know. In the end I went back to the insurer of the original owner and they didn't want to know. I explained that if they would not insure it because of previous movement then they should pay out for all the work I had had done as a result of the movement as they had been insuring it all of the previous years. I now have it insured by them at a normal rate - but I can't see that I can ever change insurers unless I lie and say it has never had subsidence. I am even happy to have insurance without cover for subsidence. My concern is what will happen when I come to sell - and I have potential purchasers such as the OP!

Jonny_B_3

Just spoke to current insurers esure and they wouldn't insure the house. Nor would Mastercare who they referred me too.

Arrrgh. We've been looking for a house for months and this was perfect for what we needed.

tstodart

We have just bought a house where a neighbouring property had some subsidence in the 1920's, and it is close to the Thames!

We had a major problem finding insurance - forget all the online players and main providers. With some help from the sellers estate agent, we got a deal with 'Bureau Insurance' (try on Google).

My suggestion is to get all the material you have on the situation and talk to them. They will probably be able to do something for you. However, it won't be cheap... You should consider this regarding the price you are willing to pay for the house.

For us, I was a bit annoyed at first at this 'special' insurance cost...but then remembered that the only reason we got the house was that the original buyer pulled out after the survey!

Jonny_B_3

Cheers.

I've rang the EA's and they sounded suprised and said wait for the results of the survey and go from there.

I'm a bit annoyed that this was never mentioned. Perhaps the vendors didn't realise it was such a big deal as they've had the work done but it always makes you think they were trying to hide something.

chouchoutan

Hi there.

We're in virtually the same position. We didn't realise the issues with insuring an underpinned property until we started looking into it more deeply. EA didn't mention it and neither did the vendor. Needless to say we are quite unhappy with both!

We are hopefully still going ahead with the purchase but have reduced our offer slightly to offset some of the additional insurance costs and the fact that we'll have the same problem when we want to move on.

My advice is - don't write it off yet. You need to contact the vendor and get the details of their current insurer. If they are one of the specialist insurers (BureauInsure as mentioned or Towergate who LloydsTSB refer customers to) they will probably allow you to contine the existing insurance without requiring a structural survey. If they were the ones that had the work done then their original (mainstream) insurance company will probably have continued to insure the property but will not allow you to do the same. You will need to contact one of the specialists mentioned and they will commission a survey on the property - costs about £150 - £200 but is usually refundable if you don't go ahead with the insurance.

For info you will be looking at between £600 and £1000 per annum for buildings cover depending on the value on the property. Not cheap but not completely unaffordable.

You might be able to get a bargain here but don't forget that you will need to resell.

Good luck!

Woby_Tide

you can guarantee the estate agent knew about the underpinning, if they didn't then they'll be telling the vendors to reduce their price immediately. As you are finding, despite the fact that underpinning leaves a house in a 'better' position, it's forever tainted in the eyes of the insurers and future purchasers. As long as you factor in that your house will always be costlier to insure and that it will be harder to sell in future(despite it being cheaper than surrounding properties). if you're happy with that go for it, you get a 'sturdier' house at a reduced price.

Jonny_B_3

Thanks again.

£1000 for house insurance - ouch. The property is £230k.

The house needs work and I'm sure it will be fantastic when its all done.

There is definitely a nagging doubt about the resale though. Equally, if we bought it anyway because we like the house, I'm sure someone else will.

I wonder what a realistic price to knock them down to is, from 230k? Suppose I'll wait and see what the survey says.

Searcher2

It is ridiculous really. An underpinned house (such as mine) is probably much more stable than any other house around. Mine is stood on 20ft piles in places. In fact mine has a 10 year warranty which is only 4 years in at the moment... so the insurance company has nothing to worry about anyway. I would check when the underpinning was done - there may still be a warranty and insurers may take this into account.

EDIT : Just reading your original post - the underpinning was done in 2003 so I would think that the work is till under warranty. I would ask about this and if so inform insurers. Why will the current insurers not insure the property? As I said I pressed the previous insurers of my house and they caved in. I pay about £300 for buildings and contents insurance.