House that has been underpinned

kjs31

[Deleted User] said:

That stigma is only held by people that don't understand that underpinning is foundations, for the more informed person that stigma won't be there.

Yes I get that, but any stigma, whether real or imagined, will reduce the pool of people who might buy the property which in term may impact the chance of selling in a challenging environment. 

kjs31

So if the seller had declared that the house had been underpinned when should the estate agent have mentioned that to me? Before first viewing? At time of offer? 

user1977

kjs31 said:

Catsacor said:

That stigma is only held by people that don't understand that underpinning is foundations, for the more informed person that stigma won't be there.

Yes I get that, but any stigma, whether real or imagined, will reduce the pool of people who might buy the property which in term may impact the chance of selling in a challenging environment. 

Have you had any professional advice about what impact (if any) it actually has on the market value?

lincroft1710

In theory a house that has been properly underpinned should be structurally more sound than one that has not been. At least that is what I was told by several chartered surveyors I formerly worked with

Tiglet2

kjs31 said:

So if the seller had declared that the house had been underpinned when should the estate agent have mentioned that to me? Before first viewing? At time of offer? 

On your opening post, you said that it was the neighbour who mentioned the subsidence, you then asked the Agent about it, who emailed the vendor to enquire about it (since the vendor ticked 'no' on the form).  The vendor then confirmed that the property had been underpinned shortly after it was built.

Sounds to me that the Agent didn't know about it until you queried it after speaking to the neighbour, so how would the Agent be able to declare it before that?

kjs31

Tiglet2 said:

On your opening post, you said that it was the neighbour who mentioned the subsidence, you then asked the Agent about it, who emailed the vendor to enquire about it (since the vendor ticked 'no' on the form).  The vendor then confirmed that the property had been underpinned shortly after it was built.

Sounds to me that the Agent didn't know about it until you queried it after speaking to the neighbour, so how would the Agent be able to declare it before that?

The agent had no idea until they quizzed the seller so I’m not criticising them at all. My question is simply theoretical. When should an agent mention subsidence or underpinning? 

MultiFuelBurner

In the UK underpinning may not surface until solicitors are involved. No laws covering it and even then if not known and depending on the level of survey you go for may never be known.

arrows123

I sold a house that had been underpinned. We purposefully told the agents that we wanted the buyers to know up front as we didn’t want anyone feeling like they had been deceived. The underpinning itself shouldn’t be a problem however personally I wouldn’t be happy that the seller had originally ticked no.. what else are they not telling the full story about?