House underpinned 40 years ago

shanclover

Just wondering if anyone has any thoughts on a house that was underpinned 40 years ago? We are interested in a house and one of the neighbours mentioned that MAY have been the case. If we are going to buy it surely we will get a structure surveyor to check it. Just wondering if that is true, would that be any problems? Or should we walk away now.

Thank you 


update:  we talked to the seller and he is not aware of any underpinning that has taken place when he bought the house. He only bought the house two years ago but I suppose something like should be flagged up when he was buying? If he is not aware ( assuming that is true), maybe the underpinning is not on the official record?  Also he spends £35 on home insurance with AXA.

Pok3mon

Insurance will always be a issue, If the price is right and full structural comes back ok It would be your decision.

Remember when you come to sell people will be asking tthe same questions.

Slinky

Many insurance companies will not offer buildings cover on a property that has had ANY subsidance, even for example on a garage that has since been demolished. After 25 years the market becomes more open, we have the standard £1K excess on ours which we bought 27 years after it was sorted. We used a specialist broker.

There will always be somebody who will be put off or will question it, as you yourself are doing now, but if it's still standing and a surveyor says it's OK, whatever the original cause is unlikely to recur after 40 years.

shanclover

update:  we talked to the seller and he is not aware of any underpinning that has taken place when he bought the house. He only bought the house two years ago but I suppose something like should be flagged up when he was buying? If he is not aware ( assuming that is true), maybe the underpinning is not on the official record?  Also he spends £35 on home insurance with AXA.

Tiglet2

Perhaps the seller didn't get a survey done when they bought the property.  If the previous seller didn't disclose any underpinning work on their Property Information Form and didn't provide any warranties/guarantees, then how would anyone know and have evidence one way or another?  

It can be very difficult to tell if a property has been underpinned from a visual inspection, as the underpinning is concealed below ground and therefore can't always be seen during the course of a typical survey inspection.  Did you notice any obvious cracking on the brickwork outside and on the plaster inside?  If the underpinning work was done 40 years ago and there are no signs of further issues, I would think the property is very stable and probably stronger than its neighbours.  

Properties built many years ago did not have the depth of foundations that is necessary nowadays.  Therefore, properties built on clay or near large trees are at risk.

I think you need to decide whether or not to proceed with the purchase.  How long has the neighbour lived in their property because it doesn't sound like they really know either!

Section62

shanclover said:

Also he spends £35 on home insurance with AXA.

Is that per month, or per year?

£35 seems rather cheap for an annual premium, but on the expensive side for monthly.

shanclover

Tiglet2 said:

Perhaps the seller didn't get a survey done when they bought the property.  If the previous seller didn't disclose any underpinning work on their Property Information Form and didn't provide any warranties/guarantees, then how would anyone know and have evidence one way or another?  

It can be very difficult to tell if a property has been underpinned from a visual inspection, as the underpinning is concealed below ground and therefore can't always be seen during the course of a typical survey inspection.  Did you notice any obvious cracking on the brickwork outside and on the plaster inside?  If the underpinning work was done 40 years ago and there are no signs of further issues, I would think the property is very stable and probably stronger than its neighbours.  

Properties built many years ago did not have the depth of foundations that is necessary nowadays.  Therefore, properties built on clay or near large trees are at risk.

I think you need to decide whether or not to proceed with the purchase.  How long has the neighbour lived in their property because it doesn't sound like they really know either!

Thank you so much for taking the time to reply. The seller did a homebuyer report. We didn't see any large cracks. The neighbor we spoke to lived there 35 years and he did say the area is well known for building on clay. I suppose most of London is building on clay anyway? Now I'm kind of hoping the underpinning was done off the record lol
                                                                                                                                                                                           

shanclover

Section62 said:

shanclover said:

Also he spends £35 on home insurance with AXA.

Is that per month, or per year?

£35 seems rather cheap for an annual premium, but on the expensive side for monthly.

It is monthly but he said he didn't shop around this year yet and the previous year was 320 for the year. He said Santander approached him on building insurance because he has his mortgage with them. 

stuart45

My daughter bought a house 2 years ago that had been underpinned, but there is no known record of it. It's a terrace in a block of 4, and none of the other owners knew their houses had been done. I only realized when I dug out the foundations for her porch. You can see the depth of the original footing and the new concrete.

Section62

shanclover said:

It is monthly but he said he didn't shop around this year yet and the previous year was 320 for the year. He said Santander approached him on building insurance because he has his mortgage with them. 

So is the £35/£420 for buildings and contents ('home') insurance, or just the building?

It isn't a big issue, just that a high premium could be an indication the insurance company is pricing in a higher than normal risk.