Historical movement - Edited to add what structural engineer's report says

skm1981

I posted on here previously about selling our house and the homebuyer survey flagging potential subsidence on the house.  So we had a structural engineer come to do an evaluation.  So the structural engineer said that there has definitely been some movement, but he can't see any evidence that this is ongoing and I think he said that whatever had caused the movement has obviously stopped, and I think he said that investigations would need to be done by digging into the ground or something like that to see what the cause was, but he said no action needs to be taken because it's not an ongoing problem and probably happened a very long time ago.  He said that he wouldn't lose sleep over it because he doesn't see a problem.

He is going to send me a copy of the report when it's done.  I've seen lots of threads on here about non-progressive historic movement, but I couldn't seem to find any where they'd actually had a structural engineer come and take a look.  Does anyone know if this is this likely to raise a problem with my buyers' mortgage lender or insurance?  I mean we've never had a problem with insurance, so I'm assuming not.  When we had our survey done when we bought the house 15 years ago, it was just a basic one, but it said the same thing, evidence of previous movement, but nothing to suggest it is ongoing.

E

davidmcn

There seems to be a contradiction between "no action needs to be taken" and "investigations would need to be done"?

Is the cause subsidence? Or just settlement? Non-progressive historic settlement is pretty standard for older properties, no need to declare it or get worried.

AdrianC

skm1981 said:

So the structural engineer said that there has definitely been some movement, but he can't see any evidence that this is ongoing and I think he said that whatever had caused the movement has obviously stopped, and I think he said that investigations would need to be done by digging into the ground or something like that to see what the cause was, but he said no action needs to be taken because it's not an ongoing problem and probably happened a very long time ago.  He said that he wouldn't lose sleep over it because he doesn't see a problem.

He is going to send me a copy of the report when it's done.

That's about as concrete a reply as you're going to get, I suspect.

The only way to be absolutely 100% sure there's no ongoing movement is by regular measurements over the course of years.
Take regular measurements to datum points marked on the building, or screw things like this across a crack...

I've seen lots of threads on here about non-progressive historic movement, but I couldn't seem to find any where they'd actually had a structural engineer come and take a look.  Does anyone know if this is this likely to raise a problem with my buyers' mortgage lender or insurance?  I mean we've never had a problem with insurance, so I'm assuming not.  When we had our survey done when we bought the house 15 years ago, it was just a basic one, but it said the same thing, evidence of previous movement, but nothing to suggest it is ongoing.

And now there's 15 more years evidence of no ongoing movement.

princeofpounds

I don't think this is going to cause you problems, unless it spooks the buyer psychologically. A structural engineer's report is about as good as you can get in terms of professional opinion. You will presumably disclose it to the buyer as part of the evidence on your reply regarding movement on the SPIF.

From what you say (which is rather tentative), it seems that what he is saying is that IF you wanted to determine the cause of historic movement THEN you would need to excavate further - presumably to find out what is going on with the foundation at that point. But it's not necessary. 

Anyway, none of the verbal stuff matters really, only what's in the report. So best wait for that. 

skm1981

davidmcn said:

There seems to be a contradiction between "no action needs to be taken" and "investigations would need to be done"?

Is the cause subsidence? Or just settlement? Non-progressive historic settlement is pretty standard for older properties, no need to declare it or get worried.

When he said that, I think it was more of a case of if I wanted to find out what had caused the previous movement, further investigation would need to be done like digging into the ground, but he said whatever caused the movement isn't happening now so no action needs to be taken.  I think it was more a case of if I wanted to know why, more than anything.

skm1981

davidmcn said:

There seems to be a contradiction between "no action needs to be taken" and "investigations would need to be done"?

Is the cause subsidence? Or just settlement? Non-progressive historic settlement is pretty standard for older properties, no need to declare it or get worried.

Erm, not sure if he said either subsidence or settlement to be honest.  I'm sure he just said 'movement'.  Hopefully I'll get the report through soon and that will clarify. Our house is a 1930s semi, so I guess oldish.

skm1981

princeofpounds said:

I don't think this is going to cause you problems, unless it spooks the buyer psychologically. A structural engineer's report is about as good as you can get in terms of professional opinion. You will presumably disclose it to the buyer as part of the evidence on your reply regarding movement on the SPIF.

From what you say (which is rather tentative), it seems that what he is saying is that IF you wanted to determine the cause of historic movement THEN you would need to excavate further - presumably to find out what is going on with the foundation at that point. But it's not necessary. 

Anyway, none of the verbal stuff matters really, only what's in the report. So best wait for that. 

I think the buyer is quite keen to progress with the sale from what I gather.  We decided to go halves on the cost of the structural survey, so she will receive a copy of the report as well.  

I have a terrible memory to be honest, but I feel that he didn't mention settlement or subsidence, just the word movement.  I'll see what the report says, but he did say he doesn't think I have anything to worry about because it's not an ongoing problem.  And yes, you are right, he said no action needs to be taken because the house isn't moving now, but if we did want to find out why it had moved in the past, then they would have to do more investigations but that it's really not necessary because whatever caused the initial movement isn't causing it now, and hasn't done for a long while.

skm1981

So this has what has been noted in the report:
On the balance of the evidence my view is that the back corner of the house has suffered from historic subsidence which is likely to be due to consolidation of fill material locally under the foundations. I have seen no evidence to suggest that this movement is ongoing and whilst there is some small risk of further movement occurring this is unlikely. 

10) This could be investigated further by digging a trial hole to examine the foundations and the soil below and by monitoring the cracks over a period of time but on the balance of evidence I believe it is likely that if the cracks are repaired and stitched with Helibars (see www.helifix.co.uk ) then no further problems will occur.

Do you think it would be likely that a mortgage lender would not lend against our house now (if obviously our buyers don't get scared off by the word subsidence)!