Survey done...dreaded words.."poss minor subsidence"

dacouch

poledancer49 wrote: »

Thanks again. If the sellers reduce the house price accordingly and we pay for the work whether it be to fix the drains or under pinning how would this effect our insurance policy with our current insurer...I guess what I am asking is I have to advise my insurance company of the work completed?

Your current Insurer will not entertain taking on a property with a history of subsidence / underpinning.

It would be best for the owner to either claim on their insurance and then you take it over or take over the existing (Owners) policy having declared the subsidence and the possibility of a claim.

Anything else would be madness

Tancred

dacouch wrote: »

Your current Insurer will not entertain taking on a property with a history of subsidence / underpinning.

It would be best for the owner to either claim on their insurance and then you take it over or take over the existing (Owners) policy having declared the subsidence and the possibility of a claim.

Anything else would be madness

I wonder why the current owner was not aware of the subsidence issue?

If it's a minor thing caused by leaking drains etc then there is no need for any underpinning work.

poledancer49

Possibly because owners decided not to renew their buildings insurance?

desthemoaner

Subsidence seems to be the get-out that surveyors use these days when they can't find anything wrong with an old property, whereas at one time they would have talked instead about the dampcourse.

My house was built in 1897, suffered some settlement during the first few decades of its life but has now stabilised and any minor cracks, when filled in, do not open up again. Prior to our arrival here the drains were replaced by the owner of the house next door whose property HAD suffered subsidence due a drains collapse, but my own house needed no remedial work except some superficial pointing. However...I was daft enough to take the honest option and inform my insurance company about the historical settlement, about ten years ago. They accepted the evidence of a structural survey that I had done for my own peace of mind in 1997, but my premium rose steadily and since then I've changed my insurer a couple of times. In the course of obtaining quotes I've found that so called "direct" insurers run a mile when you mention any movement of your property, and I find it ironic that your chances of getting insurance seem to diminish if you've actually had the problem fixed and had the house underpinned, like my neighbour.

In my experience, some of the smaller insurers take a much more sensible attitude to historical movement which is not indicative of a specific issue such as collapsed drains, or a wider problem with the properties in the vicinity.

poledancer49

Thank you Desthemoaner. Orginally I had not considered future insurance renewals. I think I may ask the sellers who they insure through and see what they say.

ruggedtoast

In my experience the insurers do not necessarily transfer the policy on to a new owner, if you don't meet their underwriting criteria they certainly won't cover you.

landgirl100

When I bought my current house in 1996, there was a history of subsidence at one corner of the house, and it was underpinned in the 1950's. There was no evidence of subsequent movement. I found that no-one would insure the house except for NFU Mutual, who had insured the previous owners. I've only made one claim, and they were brilliant. The price remains relatively steady, no big increases. I'd recommend trying them (no connection, just a satisfied customer!).

poledancer49

I will ring them up....many thanks landgirl100. I agree with a lot of the above comments...fully expect buying an old property to have a few issues etc but must admit have not had "possible minor subsidence" come up on a survey before and threw me in a bit of a tizz. Having had new properites too in the past still love the character and style of older properties so would love to progress with the purchase and the sellers have been very helpful so feel they are not hiding anything. Suppose what I need to do is wait for the CCTV survey and make decisions then.

dacouch

Tancred wrote: »

I wonder why the current owner was not aware of the subsidence issue?

If it's a minor thing caused by leaking drains etc then there is no need for any underpinning work.

A very significant percentage of subsidence claims are first discovered by the surveyor during a house purchase.

Insurers view the following two reasons as causes for an increase in claims, long droughts and housing booms

desthemoaner

poledancer49 wrote: »

Thank you Desthemoaner. Orginally I had not considered future insurance renewals. I think I may ask the sellers who they insure through and see what they say.

In my experience (and I stress that I'm not an insurance expert, only a householder who has faced some of these problems) some of the "direct" insurers will agree to cover you if you can produce a satisfactory structural survey which has been completed during the previous six months. OK, there's the initial cost of the survey (up to £500 in this locality) but then there's the peace of mind of having insurance, as well as knowing that your building is sound. As long as subsequent premiums don't rise excessively then you will have the cover you need. The problems start when their premiums rise to the extent where you have to start looking elsewhere, which is what happened to me, not least because then you could theoretically end up getting another survey just to obtain insurance, when the initial report is only a couple of years old.


I did suggest to one insurer that I would be willing to accept a higher excess on my subsidence cover to emphasise my confidence that there wasn't a problem with the building. However, on production of the structural survey, which gave the building a clear bill of health, I was given cover at the normal price with the standard £1,000 subsidence excess.

There are of course specialist insurers who will cover those risks that others won't touch, such as properties with a history of subsidence, but obviously they're likely to be more expensive.