Selling .... underpinning

redsand451

Almost ready to exchange contracts and the purchaser has woken up after 4 weeks of silence and questioned underpinning on the house.

I bought the house 8 years ago after a builder had renovated it. I was aware it had some underpinning (10 year guarantee provided) but no detail as to why was ever provided (or questioned by my solicitor).

The house has been fine, with no sign of any problems the whole time I have been in it.

I have always had standard building insurance because they have never asked about underpinning specifically. The question is "Has the property ever been damaged by subsidence, ground heave or landslip?" to which I have no knowledge of it occurring. I am now concerned that I have naively responded to this.

I have declared the underpinning in the sale details and have provided building control certificate, which mentions underpinning, and the (remaining) 10 year guarantee.

The purchaser's solicitor is asking for "certificate of Structural adequacy which should be issued with all underpinning works by a Structural engineer.", plus is asking to look at my buildings insurance.

So my questions are:
- is the building control certificate sufficient? Why are they asking for the structural adequacy certificate?
- is my building insurance potentially void given it has been underpinned before I owned it (and therefore assumed some subsidence must have taken place)?

My solicitor, estate agent and even the builder who did the work originally are all saying the purchaser is being picky but I am now not so sure. How's this likely to play out?

Immers7

The buyer may need it for buildings insurance. I imagine its something majority of insurers will insist on.

I would also be surprised if your own buildings insurance covers this issue.

SplanK

Buyer maybe being picky, but at the end of the day they want to satisfy themselves that the work has been done correctly, any maybe dig to the reason why underpinning was installed. I very much doubt it would be done on a whim and there will be a reason one way or another.


As for your insurance, I think you could be invalidating your insurance by turning a 'blind eye' to the reason for the underpinning. The question is not "are you aware of X Y an Z", but is asking "Has the property ever suffered X Y or Z". In this case, I would advise the insurance company that the house has been underpinned BUT you do not know the reason why the action was take by a previous owner.


If you have contact with the original builder, why not ask them. Did they do the under pinning themselves, or was it a 3rd party contractor?


Before you start asking questions and un-earthing potentially unsettling news, I would be guided by my solicitor as to what to do, how to respond. I would expect they know the situation, building underpinned for unknown reason within the recent past.


If it was me, and you didn't provide a suitable answer to the question, I would be unsure about moving forward with buying a house with a questionable history. Underpinning isn't cheap and wont have been done on a whim, there WILL have been a reason for it.