Would a shallow coal mine working under the (old) property put you off?

nodiscount

Just that really. Would you be put off if an old, late 19th century house you were buying had old shallow coal workings underneath one of which could be around 10m depth?

user1977

If I knew it was actually under the house, probably. 

andy444

Absolutely it would put me off but a full surveyor's or structural engineer's report will have to be produced to ascertain the full extent of the issue. 

weeg

What does the Coal Authority report say?

daveyjp

Probably not if its a single late 18th century adit confirmed at 10m down.  They were little more than passages just large enough for a child aged 7-11 to crawl along and dig out coal and ironstone.

I know of areas where similar adits exist, but the late Victorian builders weren't aware.  They have had railway sidings and huge buildings (6-8 storey woollen mills, foundries etc) on them over the years.

However the ultimate decision will be with any mortgage provider if one is needed.

Contact the Coal Authority if you want more advice.

Section62

nodiscount said:

Just that really. Would you be put off if an old, late 19th century house you were buying had old shallow coal workings underneath one of which could be around 10m depth?

Completely put off.

The problem with underground features is not being able to see them.  If you know something is there you can put in some boreholes to confirm the position and depth. But it is the 'unknown unknowns' you have to worry about.

10m is very shallow, to be confident it won't impact on the property you'd need to know the position relative to the property quite precisely (e.g. +/-1m if within 20m). You'll only get that if the workings have been accurately mapped and referenced to the surface.

But even if you know that the closest known feature is (say) 30m away, there are the unknown unknowns of shafts and adits which could still exist directly below the property.

Late 19th century builders didn't worry about that kind of thing. Building was relatively cheap - if the house started cracking or subsiding you would patch it up, or worst case knock it down and rebuild (likely re-using the materials). That was far cheaper than drilling boreholes and mapping out extensive workings, so they didn't bother. The economics of construction and regulatory attitudes have changed since then.

If there has been a fully comprehensive survey of workings in the immediate area I might give the property a second thought, but it would need to be really special for me to want to take the risk.

74jax

Yes totally 

nodiscount

Surveyor says no subsidence identified btw.