Further home insurance and cracking help needed

owly11

I posted a few weeks ago about cracks that have opened up in our 17th century cottage.  We had a structural report done that said that the cracks, (which are historical as signs of previous repair can be seen) are caused by seasonal movement of the clay soil exacerbated by the long hot summer and by a blocked drain (now cleared) but that the wall also had an inherent weakness due to a narrow column caused by the positioning of the door and making weight distribution difficult.  The advice was therefore to brick up the door to strengthen the wall.

I don't wish to make a claim and did not notify the insurers of the cracking.  However, we are now at renewal time and the statement of fact says that there are no diagonal cracks or bulging walls.  I have therefore erred on the side of caution and disclosed the cracking - so far all I have said is that it is seasonal cracking and I don't wish to make a claim.  The insurers said they will get in touch with their underwriters and get back to me.

At the same time I have approached the broker who sorted out the previous owners home insurance as I figured that an insurer with a history of insuring this property might be happy to reinsure it knowing it's full history.  I have no idea whether the previous owner declared the cracks or not - he clearly had them repaired and he never disclosed them to us on the house purchase so suspect he may not have disclosed to the insurer.  I described the cracks as due to seasonal movement and the age of the property.  The broker said they are happy to reinsure subject to seeing the buyer's survey and completing a subsidence questionnaire.  I have completed and returned the questionnaire, but have not mentioned the structural engineer's report as it does not mention subsidence and the questions were aimed at reports mentioning subsidence.  However, the structural engineer's report does mention ground movement and also that we should monitor the cracks and so I am wondering if this brings us into the area of subsidence.  

So my questions are:

1.  Should I send the report to my current insurers.
2.  Should I send the report to the potential future insurers.
3.  If subsidence does turn out to be contributing to the cracking what are the implications of sending/not sending the report.
4.  If I wanted to make a claim for the bricking up the doorway - could I, or can i only claim for structural issues if they are caused by subsidence.  Is it the case that structural issues are not always covered by insurance?
5.  If the bricking up of the doorway doesn't solve the problem, and it becomes more serious, would I end up not being able to claim because i didn't disclose the report; or would I not be able to claim anyway as I could only claim if it was caused by subsidence.

I am feeling so stressed and confused by everything and it feels like a minefield.  My anxiety is saying just disclose the report to both current and potential future insurers to protect myself, but I want to be more fully aware of possible implications of both courses of action before taking them.

dunstonh

 I have no idea whether the previous owner declared the cracks or not - he clearly had them repaired and he never disclosed them to us on the house purchase so suspect he may not have disclosed to the insurer.

You are on clay and its an old house.  We are similar with 16th Century for a lot of it and on clay.    Every drought year, cracks open up.    Indeed, the upstairs bedroom in the south wing has walls that look like raspberry ripple.     Your house likely has ongoing movement most years and particularly bad in drought years.   In most cases, it would be repaired during routine decoration.  Every old house in your area is probably getting the same. 

 I have completed and returned the questionnaire, but have not mentioned the structural engineer's report as it does not mention subsidence and the questions were aimed at reports mentioning subsidence. 

Movement and subsidence are two different things.   On clay, when it dries, it tugs the house.   Weak mortar will go ping and the bricks get pulled apart.  Then when the clay gets wet, it pushes on the house and the gaps close up somewhat.   That is not subsidence.

So my questions are:
1.  Should I send the report to my current insurers.
2.  Should I send the report to the potential future insurers.
3.  If subsidence does turn out to be contributing to the cracking what are the implications of sending/not sending the report.
4.  If I wanted to make a claim for the bricking up the doorway - could I, or can i only claim for structural issues if they are caused by subsidence.  Is it the case that structural issues are not always covered by insurance?
5.  If the bricking up of the doorway doesn't solve the problem, and it becomes more serious, would I end up not being able to claim because i didn't disclose the report; or would I not be able to claim anyway as I could only claim if it was caused by subsidence.

I'm with NFU.  I sent them the survey and a structural engineers report that graded the cracks as 2 (cosmetic only) and it stated the routine maintenance and decoration should suffice and that it would be a fairly common occurance.  It recommended some old repairs were re-done.   NFU had both reports and photos of before & after on the work along with confirmation helifix ties were used and they were happy.   At no point was the insurer or the surveyor or engineer concerned about subsidence.

1 - Send the report
2 - yes.  If they have the detail and insure you then they cannot wriggle out
3 - if you send the report and they offer cover then you are safe.  if you dont send it they could say you withheld information.
4 - noting my earlier comments that subsidence and movement are two different things.
5 - Evidence of historic repairs on the property would leave you in a weak position if you didn't declare.

I am feeling so stressed and confused by everything and it feels like a minefield.  My anxiety is saying just disclose the report to both current and potential future insurers to protect myself, but I want to be more fully aware of possible implications of both courses of action before taking them.

Owning old houses on clay with hot weather movement does not concern insurers.   You need to stop referring to movement as subsidence.  It is not the same thing.    You could be creating an issue by using the subsidence term when it is not that.

Use the professional reports with the insurers.  It protects you and ensures you are getting covered.  

Don't be scared of movement.  Your house has been moving for hundreds of years.  It is frustrating.  We got a room decorated over the summer and that involved filling some internal cracks.   A number of those cracks reopened and were filled again and again and again as this year was a particularly bad drought year.  It is frustrating but you look at all the other old houses in your area and they will have evidence of repairs and anyone you speak too will mention internal cracks as well.

Just remember that old properties like ours should not be covered by comparison company providers.  Stick to the quality insurers that know about old houses and make sure they are aware of the history.

owly11

@dunstonh thanks that's helpful.  I think the broker has scared me because he is saying he asked around a few places and no one except the insurer who previously insured the place will touch it because of the cracks.  But perhaps he is just trying to get his commission on what was an eye watering quotation?  I have contacted NFU and will speak with them on Monday.

I previously owned a victorian terrace on clay soil and that had had subsidence, and i had to stay with the previous owner's insurance for many years.  But this is a whole new ball game - I have never owned a property as old as this and didn't quite realise how complex it is.  I went with Intelligent Insurance because they were happy to insure it and appeared to be open to non standard construction etc but I am pretty sure they are now going to drop me and I realise I should have used a proper company.

Is it the case that I will have to pay out of pocket for most repairs including structural ones, unless they are caused by a limited range of out of the ordinary events?  I am stressing about how much it will cost to brick up the door, remove the porch and all the associated costs including because of needing building regs will that mean I have to now update to current regs eg mains operated smoke alarms and fire doors throughout etc. (we are on 3 storeys).  I think initially I was thinking I would pay for it if affordable with a back up option of claiming on the insurance if it all got too expensive; but now I feel as if not only is it not possible to make a claim but that I may not even be able to find an insurer.

dunstonh

@dunstonh thanks that's helpful.  I think the broker has scared me because he is saying he asked around a few places and no one except the insurer who previously insured the place will touch it because of the cracks.  But perhaps he is just trying to get his commission on what was an eye watering quotation?  I have contacted NFU and will speak with them on Monday.

If its a high street broker then their experience of non-standard/old/unusual properties could be limited.  If its a specialist broker, then they should have more experience.  NFU are known for their coverage of rural properties and the the things that go along with them.  They are not known for being cheap though.

 I have never owned a property as old as this and didn't quite realise how complex it is.  I went with Intelligent Insurance because they were happy to insure it and appeared to be open to non standard construction etc but I am pretty sure they are now going to drop me and I realise I should have used a proper company.

They actually came up my search originally but the price they got was three times higher than NFU and that was without the reports being read and any potential rating or refusal applied. 

Is it the case that I will have to pay out of pocket for most repairs including structural ones, unless they are caused by a limited range of out of the ordinary events? 
 I am stressing about how much it will cost to brick up the door, remove the porch and all the associated costs including because of needing building regs will that mean I have to now update to current regs eg mains operated smoke alarms and fire doors throughout etc.

We pay for ours as do most of those locally that I know.   There are several firms in our locality that specialise in dealing with older properties and using historic materials sympathetically.  And they don't charge much for it.

As an example, we had a whole section of outside brickwork under a window taken out and new bricks used as replacement (about the size of a door on its side) and mortar repairs in another section covering a couple of metres and a corner section requiring a fair number of new bricks and helifix ties put in.  Came to £2100.     Get the wrong builder and you add a zero.

I may have got that covered by the insurance but after the excess, a reported claim etc then it wouldn't be cost effective and there is an expectation of ongoing maintenance with old buildings where issues are cosmetic rather than structural.

owly11

@dunstonh thanks so much that is all very reassuring.  I have to say that both the structural engineer and the builder who looked at the cracking didn't seem at all alarmed about it even though to me having external cracking that goes all the way through to the inside seems very concerning.  We will have to hunt around and get a few quotes for the work.  I have already had one bad experience with a roofer who tried to charge ridiculous amounts just to put a few roof tiles back and repair some guttering.  I got another quote that was a fifth of the price!  Having previously lived in London where competition for work is fierce and where you can always get a job done for a good price, I am having to get used to the wide variability in quality and price.

dunstonh

 I have to say that both the structural engineer and the builder who looked at the cracking didn't seem at all alarmed about it even though to me having external cracking that goes all the way through to the inside seems very concerning.

It is scary when you are not used to it.   It is routine with properties on clay and they were largely built in ways that allowed them to stretch and contract. e.g. lime mortar externally and plaster internally with lime, horse hair and sand.      In our case, the wing with the internal cracking came as a result of someone in the past removing that old internal plaster and putting more modern plaster up instead. That has no give and can result in two eventual outcomes.   1) the lack of movement in modern materials means more stretching occurs in other areas with the older materials, which will often result in a crack 2) when the modern plaster starts to die, it will be much more prone to cracks. as it is weak.     

The action recommended for us to strip all the plaster off the walls in that wing back to the brick.  Then repair the internal brickwork (replace broken bricks and remortar and again use helifix ties) but rather than replaster, put internal stud walls up with insulation behind them.  It was all matter-of-fact with the structural engineer and builder.

Find the cause, fix the cause, repair the damage correctly and you have probably put it to bed until the next drought year where a crack will appear somewhere else and you rinse and repeat.

owly11

@dunstonh we have a similar problem that someone in the past has used modern materials allowing for less movement.  It is all exacerbated by having a modern extension so we have differential movement too.  I am just worried that my current insurers will ditch us and no one will take us on until the full extent of the problem is known.  It's unfortunate that the cracking arose shortly before renewal.  Still, it's one step at a time.  At least I have a better idea of what is really involved in taking on a very old property.