Subsidence and Building Insurance

londonhousebuyer

Hi everyone

I had a homebuyer survey carried out a couple of months ago on a property I intend to buy of months ago. The survey stated that there was no evidence of any movement or subsidence. However, I asked my solicitor to try to find out from the vendor why the floors seemed wonky. My surveyor and some friends said it was normal in old houses (100 years old). Anyway, it transpired that the survey carried out by the vendor 20 years ago mentioned some "slight internal movement" and the door frames being slightly slanted due to probably world war 1 damage. It also stated that it was not serious and it has settled. Anyway, when I informed my insurance company about this, they said that they might not be ab,le to insure me, as they wouldn't insure any property with any historical subsidence.

I am now very frustrated, as I really want the house, but I am worried about whether an insurance company would ensure it (it's generally in very good condition) and whether I might have to pay for another structural survey. Am I justified in not being satisfied with the surveyor who carried out my survey and didn't identfy any subsidence and have I got any recourse for compensation to cover the survey cost?

If there's anyone out there with experience of this, I would be very grateful for your advice.

Many thanks

londonhousebuyer

Jonbvn

If there was any evidence of subsidence, your surveyor would surely have reported it.

Further details can be found at RIC's. http://www.rics.org/Builtenvironment/Buildingpathology/Subsidence/subsidence.htm

Of course 100 year old houses are a little bit wonky! If they were not I would be surprised.

You mention 20 year old reports of problems. If these problems are not evident now, then surely they will never be.

In my experience most houses in London have poorly constructed foundations, sometimes only consisting of bricks. Such foundations are acceptable, considering the house has stood for a 100 years.

Major issues that you must consider are as follows:

1. There is a tree very close to your house.
2. Something may have changed the moisture content of the London Clay.
3. You may have changed the structural layout of the building, modifying and/or removing load bearing walls.

HTH

londonhousebuyer

Thanks for your advice. I was also wondering whether possible extensive building work in the neighbouring property could have had an effect? I think they have made a fair bit of structural changes. (It's a terraced house by the way)

silvercar

Regarding insurance; your first port of call would be the current owners insurance company. They are highly likely to agree to continue to insure the property.

Doozergirl

Generally speaking, what will have occured is settlement, not subsidence. If the surveyor was even slightly concerned, he would have recommended further investigation.

I think you're either confused by what subsidence is, or you're possibly over-reacting. Houses move over time. You will not find a plumb wall in a 100 year old house. If you look at very old timber framed buildings, they are completely twisted! The ground will have moved and moved again over 100 years in your Victorian house and that is why there will be some movement in the structure, it doesn't mean it is collapsing - London is built on clay so it will experience shrinkage in very dry summers.

There could be possible damage from WW2, probably not WW1 :rolleyes: My ex bought a house that needed work some years ago and it had a crack across the ceiling, according to the old dear next door, caused by the shock of a bomb landing at the end of the street.

Rather that another full survey, if you are insistant upon looking further into this, you need to look in the yellow pages for a Structural Engineer. They will look specifically at the, erm, structure!

And you should be shopping around for buildings insurance anyhow. Why you would tell them it has possible subsidence when a surveyor said there isn't, I don't know.

courtjester

In older properties this is referred to as 'character'...

As far as I can see there is no evidence now or historically of subsidence - "slight internal movement" is not subsidence. In neither report I suspect has either surveyor referred to the word 'subsidence' and you have no reason to believe that the property has subsidence (except for your own surveyor stating there is none!), so you are correct to declare that you are not aware of any subsidence to the property on any insurance proposal.

I agree with Doozer, why did you take it upon yourself to advise your insurers that the property might have subsidence contrary to the expert who has inspected the property for you ???

Quote from your survey report:
" The survey stated that there was no evidence of any movement or subsidence. "

courtjester

Doozergirl wrote: »

There could be possible damage from WW2, probably not WW1 :rolleyes:

The likelihood of bomb damage during WW2 is much higher agreed, but London and other east coast towns *were* bombed (by zeppelin) during WW1.

Learn more ...!!
http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/FWWzeppelinraids.htm

maryjane01

We bought a house with previous 'possible subsidence', in fact it was so recent the previous owner had had a lot of crack repair work done by her insurer in the previous 18 months.

We were quite naive and just thought old house, cracks, it is still standing so so what! It was only when we realised after exchanging contracts that we might be stuck using her insurer at £800 a year I got worried.

Because of the crack repair work we got a full structural survey which gave the house a clean bill of health. Those decorators filling the cracks must have done a good job!

We ended up getting insurance through Halifax for about £270 house and contents. You can't get their cheapest online rates because you have to do it over the phone to declare the history of subsidence. What we did was send the documents provided by the seller that said the cracks were due to 'escape of water' (really I don't think anybody knows what caused the movement, they monitored drains and that didn't show up anything), and our full structural survey that said there was nothing wrong with the house and Halifax took us on.

I am sure a lot of insurers will ignore a report from 20 years ago if the house hasn't moved, but to properly cover yourself you should declare it. Also, if somebody does decline to insure you, you usually get asked if you have ever been turned down for an insurance policy before.

I can recommend Halifax because evem though they may not be the absolute cheapest they are very competitively priced and were happy to ignore previous (and very recent) crack repairs on our house.

To finish of the story, we have spoken to neighbours on both sides (terrace house in London, subsidence is apparently very common around here), both have cracks in their houses. Apparently the foundations are quite shallow, and the neighbours that have lived there for 50 years said every few years they fill in a few cracks. All the houses here are the same, Victorian terraces on the same soil, so by living in this neighbourhood we are going to live in a house with a few cracks!

courtjester

maryjane - the fundamental difference here is recent or ongoing movement or cracks appearing /opening. If there is any evidence at all of recent movement, then that is something which must be taken seriously and properly investigated.

However, the OP's situation is that the current expert reports *no* evidence of subsidence (or recent movement) and even the 20 year old report only commented on obvious condition, rather than indicating evidence of subsidence.

Nobody should buy a house if they are aware of cracks or movement, but do not have the knowledge to understand their relevance or have the structure properly surveyed.

Again, it is important to appreciate that you can't expect to resolve the issue of property condition and what cracks mean, by taking the answers of forum members who have not seen the damage directly. Property cracks and /or movement and /or subsidence can have many causes and ONLY an on-site inspection and investigations carried out by a relevant expert can provide proper guidance and explanation for what is really going on.