Subsidence on my conservatory - my insurance won't pay

isabelle_B

Hello
I have subsidence on my conservatory but my insurance won't pay, claiming that the foundations are not deep enough in relation to the soil condition and in comparison to how deep the foundations of the house are. They say it comes under general exceptions due to "faulty design, plan, specification, materials or workmanship.
However, the conservatory was already on the house when I bought it and my solicitor didn't highlight any issue as regard to building regulations, nor did the Homebuyer survey carried out which confirm the structure was sound.
Can I really be responsible for a fault I had no knowledge of and can I contest it?
Many thanks, Isabelle

SonOf

, nor did the Homebuyer survey carried out which confirm the structure was sound.

Was that a homebuyers report or a full survey? The former is not that good and often quite generic. A full survey is much more detailed but even that wont pick up everything. A structural survey is really the only thing that will.

EdGasketTheSecond

The standard depth for conservatory founndations is 1 metre. It should not matter what the depth of the house foundations are; they are holding up a lot more wieght.


You can complain to your insurer then if they won't budge, refer it to the FOS (ombudsman service). See:


https://www.moneyadviceservice.org.uk/en/articles/making-a-complaint-about-an-insurance-company


However if the foundations are less than standard; e.g. it is a poorly constructed conservatory, then you can't expect your insurer to fix the poor workmanship.

isabelle_B

The investigation into the foundations state that the foundations are 35cms deep, which sounds poor, but would a structural survey actually have highlighted this? Do I not have a leg to stand on despite the fact I was totally unaware of this?

garth549

Sorry to say but it sounds like you've got no comeback against anyone. If the original construction is faulty then liability is with the firm that built it. I'm guessing you've no idea who this is and you wouldn't have a contract with them personally anyway.

I'm not an expert but by any chance did your solicitor arrange an indemnity policy for the conservatory against it not conforming to building regulations? If it's below a certain age I believe the vendors would probably have had to prove it conformed to building regulations. If not your solicitor should have demanded an indemnity policy to protect you.

But to be honest I don't know if the above is relevant or would have protected you against this anyway.

EdGasketTheSecond

I can't say; it might have depended on the survey and surveyor. Even structural surveys are literred with get-out clauses. If there was no sign of subsidence at the time of the survey, I doubt they would have investigated the foundations at all.



35cms is too shallow. Its common for cheap conservatory companies to skimp on foundations. The end result looks OK and will probably outlast the warranty but after that its pot luck if it doesn't subside. I assume you have no guarantee for it?

isabelle_B

No, I don't know who built it and have no paperwork in relation to it.
As regards to building regulations, I thought they didn't apply to conservatories?

EdGasketTheSecond

Conservatories are normally exempt from building regs; no-one inspected mine when it was built except me.


I think you'll just have to see if it can be saved or taken down and rebuilt with better foundations.

pinkteapot

Conservatories are only exempt from building regs if they meet certain conditions. The one people usually fall foul of is the fact the conservatory must be separated from the rest of the house by an external door (i.e. you have to go through a back door or patio door to enter it). if you knock through into a conservatory then you need building regs.

There's other things too - for example, if it has a radiator that's on your central heating circuit then it needs building regs.

However... If the conservatory is old then there's virtually zero chance of the council coming along to enforce building regs.

Aretnap

isabelle_B wrote: »

Can I really be responsible for a fault I had no knowledge of and can I contest it?

It's not a case of holding you responsible for it - that's not how it works. It's a just question of whether or not the event is covered by your policy. Generally home insurance covers unexpected events which cause damage to your home. It doesn't cover the fact that your home was defective in the first place - whether or not the defect was one that you knew, or should have known about.


Assuming the insurer is correct then depending on the defect and the circumstances you might have some comeback against the vendor, the solicitor or the surveyor - but it would be up to you to make the case as to why. You don't have protection against everything that can be wrong with a house - there is a large element of caveat emptor with house purchases.

EmmyLou30

Take the opportunity to get rid of a poorly built conservatory and build a proper useable space with a proper roof and heating etc. But you won’t get the insurance to pay for it.