Indemnity policy for potential contamination

Andymad

Dear Friends,

I am looking for some help and hope someone in the forum can put me at ease

We are buying a house and have hit a stumbling block with the Environmental Report. Due to past industrial use/filing in land we have not received a Pass certificate as it says further action is required which is basically get further information from local authority for any remedial action being taken. The proporty is recently built by developer around 2005 and environment search by some other search company was passed at that time when seller bought that newly built house. My seller lawyer proposing indemnity policy as a faster route as they don't want to add further delay. I have asked my friends and general suggestion I have got is to get further information from local authority or NHBC and get pass certificate as local authority should have taken care of contamination as part of planning.

I just want to understand from this forum whether I am thinking too much or I should go ahead with purchase with indemnity policy. I also bit confused as environment report done by some other company passed in past but the recent search done by my company failed so whats changed.

Options are;

1) Buy the house (with indemnity policy) which would cover us when/if the council ever decides to clean up the area
2) Pull out
3) Pay for further information request from local authority or Invasive land investigation

Would welcome comments from out across the Forums. How common is this? Do you have experience of this? What would you do?

Thanks in advance of any help you could provide

G_M

So this indemnity policy is going to ... what? Magically protect you from illness/death from gases rising from the ground beneath the house?

Transport a surgeon from the 22nd century who will cure you of the noxious illness?

Either the Environmental Report worries you - in which case either get further investigation done or buy a different property.

Or it doesn't, in which case save your money and forget the indemnity policy.

Andymad

Thanks G_M,
Environment report worries but the point I am making is, environment search was passed in 2006 but now failed so I am assumption is searches companies have got many historical data which might not be available in 2006 as technology is advancing so is this failed environment search in first attempt is common now days???

Anyway, thanks for your reply

teneighty

My understanding is that these environmental searches can be very general.

They have flagged up the site as being potentially contaminated due to previous uses so it is up to you to undertake more detailed local searches/enquiries to establish if the site was contaminated and whether any remediation work was required.

It could be built on the site of an old arsenic factory or it could have been something quite harmless. Personally I would be quite keen to know what I was living on. There have been cases of highly toxic substances turning up in peoples gardens.

davidmcn

Andymad wrote: »

environment search was passed in 2006 but now failed so I am assumption is searches companies have got many historical data which might not be available in 2006 as technology is advancing so is this failed environment search in first attempt is common now days???

Or the two searches have different criteria for their "pass" mark - have you read enough of both of them to work out what the difference actually is?

dc197

Similar story for me at last house. Search revealed potential contamination. I spoke to the LA who explained what remedial measures had been taken at the development time as part of planning permission.

Today's search may not have the same info as 2006's search. Old search may have considered the stuff I mention above, whereas today's might just be a dumb postcode search.


Like GM says, an indemnity policy isn't going to magic away any contamination. It won't pay for your health care. It may only pay if you are charged with cleaning up the old mess on your new land.

kerri_gt

Have you tried contacting Shanley assuming they were responsible for clearing the pit before the development. You prob know it was an unlicensed industrial waste landfill from the 1950's - 70's (if its the houses I'm thinking of?) Interestingly though, if it is those houses over Badnells Pit, the land wasn't cleared until 2010 so perhaps its a different development?

If it is the one I'm thinking of, they are still finishing the final stage of the development so Shanely still has site presence and must (should) be providing some kind of certification for the new homes they are still selling off via the EA (Roger Platt in this case)

stator

The indemnity policy pays the costs you would face if the local authority forced you to pay your share of decontaminating the site.
The searches I think are designed to throw up positives. Being within 500 yards of an old X does not mean it is contaminated.

If you are really worried about it then do the further investigation work, but that may come back inconclusive too.

If you just want to get the house purchased and the mortgage requires it, buy an indemnity policy or ask the seller to buy it.

If you're paranoid pull out.

moneyistooshorttomention

teneighty wrote: »

My understanding is that these environmental searches can be very general.

They have flagged up the site as being potentially contaminated due to previous uses so it is up to you to undertake more detailed local searches/enquiries to establish if the site was contaminated and whether any remediation work was required.

It could be built on the site of an old arsenic factory or it could have been something quite harmless. Personally I would be quite keen to know what I was living on. There have been cases of highly toxic substances turning up in peoples gardens.

I'd agree with that.

I know I'd have been devastated (as a gardener) to find that I couldnt use my garden as I'd planned to after all because "summat nasty in the woodpile" had been found to be there subsequently. Possibly a gardener that only intended to grow "decorative" stuff might not be concerned. But a gardener intending to grow food:eek: if there is a problem on the site.

All of which would mean - your potential pool of buyers if/when you sell the house on subsequently would be restricted if this hadnt been sorted out and the garden given the "all clear".

Andymad

Thanks All

I will be doing comparison of past eport with current one but when asked to current search provider why report from somebody else passed in 2006, the answer was it all depends on what data was available and criteria on which the searches was done.
I better carry out further investigation, I never though buying house is so stressful.

stator

What exactly did the search result say? Have you seen it? The solicitor should have sent you a copy