Underpinning

cramg

House built 12 years ago on an established estate.

Double detached garage was underpinned just before Christmas 2012 as a result of the foundation not being deep enough when first built.

The house itself has been fully checked and is fine and relevant paperwork etc for the garage underpinning is present.

As a potential buyer, Is this of concern, would it affect mortgage etc?

Thanks

C_Mababejive

Where the house and garage built at the same time?

zzzLazyDaisy

I can't answer your question about mortgages, but I'm sure someone will be along soon.

But be aware that underpinning can cause problems with buildings insurance. Normally the insurer that the current householder uses will continue to insure the property, but then you have no protection against increases in premium and it can be difficult to shop around. I suggest that you try inputting the details into a comparison website, with and without the subsidence/underpinning and see what difference it makes.

EDIT - apologies - I read that as 'attached' garage :-( That may make it less of a problem but you should still be alert to the need to declare it.

cramg

as far as i know, the garage and house were built at the same. The detached garage sits off set to front / side of the house. David Wilson development

ruggedtoast

I have heard of this occurring before and insurers have decided it meant the property was underpinned, even though it was a separate outhouse.

The problem is that insurers want to not have to possibly pay out thousands on underpinning much more than they want your £300 annual premium, so they dont seem to be very understanding on the whole and as a result properties that have been affected by movement can be hard to insure.

That said why dont you call some insurers and see what they say, rather than asking us?

edit : it probably wouldnt affect a mortgage application but the buyer will need insurance to exchange contracts and it may affect how much they want to pay. You just never know, some people (like me) run a country mile on hearing about underpinning whereas some dont care at all.

cramg

thanks for info, will speak to some insurers and see what they say.

dacouch

cramg wrote: »

thanks for info, will speak to some insurers and see what they say.

Save yourself a morning of ringing around and being told no.

The options to insure an underpinned property are to take over the existing owners policy which is the normal and most sensible way as they will or to find a specialist Insurer who will require a structural survey and then work out a premium.

If you take over the existing policy they should continue offering cover forever and allow you to transfer the policy to any future purchasers.

Lazy Daisy has explained it well, to add to her post, the existing Insurer will load the premiums to recover some of their claims costs, cover potential future claims from the garage / main house and also because the cost of underpinning which is not cheap will be added to their database of claims for that area (Which may include other neighboors underpinned garages) which tends to make them increase their premiums for that postal sector.

Incidently you're unlikely to find an Insurer who will regard the main home as not being affected by subsidence as the main home will be perceived to be at risk and also due to Insurers definition of a "Home" in their policies typically defining it as "The main home and outbuildings within it's boundary".

Be aware that if you buy an underpinned property you should expect expensive building premiums in effect forever and subsequent problems if you ever decide to sell. Underpinned properties generally sell at a discounted price so if you decide to buy make sure the prices reflects it being underpinned

ruggedtoast

We once offered on a property that was a semi. The other semi in the building had been underpinned some years before which gave us very limited options for insurance.

It is quite dispiriting as as soon as you mention underpinning they are pretty much putting the phone down on you.

moneyistooshorttomention

The thing that always strikes me about the existing insurance company having to continue insuring the house is "What if it is a specialist insurer and not accessible to a new buyer?". I seem to recall that I asked this before and the answer was that the specialist insurer doesnt have to honour the obligation to continue the insurance if the new buyer doesnt fall into a category of being eligible to be a customer of theirs.

Hence, the reason why I, for instance, could never buy a house that was at risk of ever needing underpinning in the future - because I use an over 50s insurer and wouldnt be prepared to swop insurer to suit outside circumstances that were nothing to do with me.

Someone who just uses a "standard" insurer anyway would be able to take that risk - as they could pass their insurance company over to the next owner.