Neighbours house subsiding. How should we approach potentially claiming for subsidence?

superlight

We live in a 1950's semi. We are the homeowners.  We purchased in 2013. A RICS homeowners report (survey) was issued at this time, clearly stating no signs of subsidence. Our house is number 23. 

We recently discovered the property adjoined via the party wall, house 21 is being investigated for subsidence. After doing some investigation we have now discovered that house 19 (next semi adjoined to house 17)  was underpinned 21 years ago. 

Both house 19 and 21 are owned by the local housing authority. The tenant in house 21 has been complaining to the HA about these issues for some time and unfortunately they seem to been dragging their heels and failing to deal with the issue.

House 21 has many exterior stepped cracks, many of which are 5mm or greater in width.  Most of these cracks are on the corner opposite house 19, along with other cracks along the front elevation and side elevation.  21's pathway in front of their house has sunk 25mm. Our house 23 is showing some hairline exterior and interior cracks only on the side towards the partition wall. There is no damage on our corner towards house 25. We're not structural engineers, but it seems quite clear that the subsidence to house 21 is effecting our house due to being adjoined or sharing a foundation.

The fact that 19 has been underpinned and 21 is being monitored (only since Nov 24, although the issue seems to have been going on for a lot longer) suggests there is a serious underlying problem. As soon as discovering this, We immediately contacted the HA with photographic evidence. We asked them for their structural engineer reports and their insurance company details. Neither have been obtained. We have stressed the importance of determining the cause of subsidence. We put it to them that their failure to deal with this situation, after knowing that house 19 was underpinned equates to negligence.

The HA is claiming that a RICS surveyor and structural engineer is overseeing the monitoring process of house 21. We pertinently asked have they made shallow trial holes to determine how deep the foundations are, what they rest on and whether nearby drains are leaking?

Have they hand-augered boreholes to determine the nature of the ground at depth and obtain samples for analysis?

Subsequently, they have not provided any of this information.

It is almost incomprehensible, it seems potentially they have not appointed a structural engineer. I am even considering that they may not have buildings cover?

We're not entirely sure how these HA's operate but they are being not forthcoming to say the least.

We are hesitant about contacting our insurers ATM as we think the responsibility should be with the HA to contact their insurers.

If one could offer any advice about how we should proceed, we would be very thankful

Annemos

(I am not an Expert. I had a bad Subsidence claim and have done a lot of research.)



Some questions for you: 

1    Is your street in a mining area, where there could be ground movement due to historic mines?  

2    Are you on Clay Soil?  Can you see a lot of trees and vegetation close to the houses? Could there have been trees next to the house 19 that was underpinned many years ago? 

3 Are you on more of a Sandy type soil, where drain leaks etc can wash the ground away? 


=====================

Some comments:   


4a    A case came up on here recently, where a Terrace of three properties near a railway had subsided due to Tree Roots of Railway Trees.  

The 3rd property furthest back was having an issue with their Insurance Company because of the following.....

Their Insurance Company was trying to say that their damage had been caused by "the pulling" of the building next door (which had subsided due to tree roots) and therefore this did NOT qualify as Subsidence Damage. 

When one looks at a Homeowner's Policy, it normally states that there has to have been downwards ground Movement under the foundation of the Homeowners Home itself. (Thus the fact that there has been Subsidence under the neighbour's home, may not automatically imply that Subsidence has also occurred under the homeowners home.) 


4b    Only a Structural Engineer can do the required investigations etc, to see if your own property's foundation is also actually Subsiding and if so, what is the cause. 

I feel you should try and stay with your current Insurer and not switch to another provider while this is going on......

One has to be careful with ones Home Insurance, because if they find out that they were not informed about cracking at an early enough stage, they might try and get out of the claim. (There are often exclusions in a policy for pre-exisiting damage etc.)    There have been Ombudsman's cases where they have taken the position, that as long as a home has been insured throughout, then a Claim for Subsidence should not be disallowed by an Insurance Company. 

But the additional issue is....., if you are asked at renewal if there is any cracking and you said No, then they might come back and accuse you of not answering questions properly and try and void the Policy, if you later do make a claim and they decide the cracking has actually been going on for some time. (They can even look at Google Earth photos etc!)  

5  Subsidence Claims can take a long time to investigate to find the cause. I suspect that you would not have any legal redress against the Housing Association, because they are apparently investigating Number 21 to try and find the cause. Therefore I suspect it would be hard to make a negligence claim against them. (If a cause is found for the Subsidence and then they do not act to alleviate it as soon as possible, then that is possible grounds if your property suffers additional damage due to their delay to act/stop the cause.) 

6     So I feel you would only have your own Insurance Policy to claim on for a potential Subsidence claim. The problem you have is when should you do it and if you should do it? You say the cracking is only hairline at the moment. And it could be due to the pulling from next door and not actually be Subsidence (which requires the land to have dropped under your own foundation.) 

You will, I think, be weighing up:    how close are you to your own Policy renewal where you may be being asked about any cracking and need to reply honestly.........          how bad do you think the cracking is and is it likely to be getting worse?..........       if you are worried about the whole situation, could the fact of you making an Insurance claim mean that your own Loss Adjuster will then get involved with the Housing Association (the neighbour) which might move things along faster.......and finally whether you need to get your own Structural Engineer in for their opinion first. 


==============================

Good luck with all this.  

eddddy

I'm not sure if I'm understanding correctly.  I think you're saying...

• You own no. 23

• A housing association owns no 19 and no 21

• no 19 and no 21 have suffered from subsidence

• You suspect that your house (no 23) might be showing signs of subsidence

But you seem to be blaming the housing association for the possible subsidence to your house - you suggest it's because they were negligent.

What do you think they've done that has caused your house to subside? Why do you want details of their buildings insurers?

You say you've asked for a copy of their structural engineer's report. I guess they could tell you what it says as a friendly goodwill gesture - but they don't have to. And if you're being aggressive and accusing them of negligence, I guess their less likely to show you any goodwill.


Perhaps a better way forward is to instruct your own structural engineer to report on your house. And if your structural engineer identifies possible subsidence, inform your insurance company.

(But don't jump the gun and mention possible subsidence to your insurance company, unless your structural engineer confirms it.)

superlight

Annemos said:

(I am not an Expert. I had a bad Subsidence claim and have done a lot of research.)



Some questions for you: 

1    Is your street in a mining area, where there could be ground movement due to historic mines?  

2    Are you on Clay Soil?  Can you see a lot of trees and vegetation close to the houses? Could there have been trees next to the house 19 that was underpinned many years ago? 

3 Are you on more of a Sandy type soil, where drain leaks etc can wash the ground away? 


=====================

Some comments:   


4a    A case came up on here recently, where a Terrace of three properties near a railway had subsided due to Tree Roots of Railway Trees.  

The 3rd property furthest back was having an issue with their Insurance Company because of the following.....

Their Insurance Company was trying to say that their damage had been caused by "the pulling" of the building next door (which had subsided due to tree roots) and therefore this did NOT qualify as Subsidence Damage. 

When one looks at a Homeowner's Policy, it normally states that there has to have been downwards ground Movement under the foundation of the Homeowners Home itself. (Thus the fact that there has been Subsidence under the neighbour's home, may not automatically imply that Subsidence has also occurred under the homeowners home.) 


4b    Only a Structural Engineer can do the required investigations etc, to see if your own property's foundation is also actually Subsiding and if so, what is the cause. 

I feel you should try and stay with your current Insurer and not switch to another provider while this is going on......

One has to be careful with ones Home Insurance, because if they find out that they were not informed about cracking at an early enough stage, they might try and get out of the claim. (There are often exclusions in a policy for pre-exisiting damage etc.)    There have been Ombudsman's cases where they have taken the position, that as long as a home has been insured throughout, then a Claim for Subsidence should not be disallowed by an Insurance Company. 

But the additional issue is....., if you are asked at renewal if there is any cracking and you said No, then they might come back and accuse you of not answering questions properly and try and void the Policy, if you later do make a claim and they decide the cracking has actually been going on for some time. (They can even look at Google Earth photos etc!)  

5  Subsidence Claims can take a long time to investigate to find the cause. I suspect that you would not have any legal redress against the Housing Association, because they are apparently investigating Number 21 to try and find the cause. Therefore I suspect it would be hard to make a negligence claim against them. (If a cause is found for the Subsidence and then they do not act to alleviate it as soon as possible, then that is possible grounds if your property suffers additional damage due to their delay to act/stop the cause.) 

6     So I feel you would only have your own Insurance Policy to claim on for a potential Subsidence claim. The problem you have is when should you do it and if you should do it? You say the cracking is only hairline at the moment. And it could be due to the pulling from next door and not actually be Subsidence (which requires the land to have dropped under your own foundation.) 

You will, I think, be weighing up:    how close are you to your own Policy renewal where you may be being asked about any cracking and need to reply honestly.........          how bad do you think the cracking is and is it likely to be getting worse?..........       if you are worried about the whole situation, could the fact of you making an Insurance claim mean that your own Loss Adjuster will then get involved with the Housing Association (the neighbour) which might move things along faster.......and finally whether you need to get your own Structural Engineer in for their opinion first. 


==============================

Good luck with all this.  

Hi Thanks for replying,

Regarding your questions...

1. Not in a mining area.

2. House 19 had leylandii trees in the front garden approx 4-5metres from the brickwork. these were removed around 10 years ago. Their underpinning was before the trees were removed, there is currently a privet style hedge used as natural fencing between 19 and 21.

3. The BGS map states we are predominately sandy type soil. although when I was landscaping the garden I excavated deeper than 1metre and the soil became more like clay.

Just to highlight some of your comments...

Based on the condition of our bricks furthest away from the partition wall showing no cracks whatsoever, and the only damages being within 1.2m from the partition does seem like 'pulling' as you describe.  Of course, only a structural engineer will be able to provide this information.

The dilemma I have is, do I appoint our own S.E. or allow the insurance company to appoint theirs?

I'm thinking I would prefer to appoint our own, but would the insurance company cover our upfront cost if the claim and remedial work goes forward?

I think I'm finding it difficult to come to terms with fundamentally hiring a S.E. to predominantly survey next doors property. It just doesn't sit right with me.

Thanks for your well wishes and hope that you resolved your bad subsidence claim

superlight

eddddy said:

I'm not sure if I'm understanding correctly.  I think you're saying...

• You own no. 23

• A housing association owns no 19 and no 21

• no 19 and no 21 have suffered from subsidence

• You suspect that your house (no 23) might be showing signs of subsidence

But you seem to be blaming the housing association for the possible subsidence to your house - you suggest it's because they were negligent.

What do you think they've done that has caused your house to subside? Why do you want details of their buildings insurers?

You say you've asked for a copy of their structural engineer's report. I guess they could tell you what it says as a friendly goodwill gesture - but they don't have to. And if you're being aggressive and accusing them of negligence, I guess their less likely to show you any goodwill.


Perhaps a better way forward is to instruct your own structural engineer to report on your house. And if your structural engineer identifies possible subsidence, inform your insurance company.

(But don't jump the gun and mention possible subsidence to your insurance company, unless your structural engineer confirms it.)

Hi Thank you for your reply,

Yes you are understanding correctly, although I think perhaps instead of our house showing signs of subsidence, I suspect it might be being 'pulled' by house 21.

Regarding blame, the HA knew about house 19 being underpinned 21 years ago. The more investigating I do, it seems subsidence measurement markers have been on house 21 before we moved in 12 years ago.  This makes it very apparent that the HA knew about these issues for a long time. Our RICS survey stated no subsidence in 2013. If the HA had addressed their problems and remedied their property promptly, then it would be highly likely that our house would not be showing signs of cracks it has now. If they had acted in good stead, the potential subsidence to our property could have been prevented.

The reason I asked for their buildings insurance details is if later down the line, our insurers might need to liaise with them.

The HA has also stated that I have all the information available. This would suggest that there is no S.E. report.

It's not a case of being aggressive. I think that for them to not have a S.E. report after knowing about this problem for so long could equate to negligence.

I think you are right about appointing our own S.E. before mentioning to insurance. Hopefully this can remove any 'grey area'.

Annemos

So, from what you say, we are no nearer to what the cause is of next door's subsidence. And that might make it also difficult for your own Structural Engineer, too, to make a good assessment? 

(Could there even be an underground stream, for example. There was a case like that a few streets away from me.)


I am pondering...... could it be best to contact your own Insurance Company and say that next door is undergoing investigations for Subsidence. Say you just have some hairline movement.  Ask them whether you should open up a claim and get them to do a review for you of your own property.   (I believe they would contact the Housing Association to obtain full details of what is going on. I think that would take place between the Two Insurers, yours and the HA's. So there would not likely be any hiding of information. )

A claim will then almost certainly be entered on the Claims and Underwriting Exchange Database (CUE) which almost all the Insurance Companies use to set premiums and assess risk. But if it is eventually found that your property did not actually have Subsidence under your foundation, then you can ask them to adjust the CUE so that it does NOT show as a Subsidence Claim. 

(I have seen Ombudsman cases where the Insurance Company investigated cracking and it was not Subsidence and so they agreed to show the claim as Accidental Damage, for example, instead. So there is not a Subsidence marker remaining on the CUE, which would have impacted the ability to get Insurance in future years.)

Also if they do an investigation, and conclude there is NO Subsidence, then you will have a written report to that effect which you will be able to produce when you take out a new policy. And you cannot be accused of not reporting any cracks. 


But what I really cannot judge....... is if they DO do the investigations, decide there is NO Subsidence. Close the claim and then refuse to give you a renewal. How will other Insurers view your Property? Will you have any problem getting a new policy? 

It is a real dilemma for you. I am wondering if you would have to go to a Broker for a policy if that was to happen, along with the Report. 


(An Insurance Company cannot drop you from Insurance while you are in the middle of investigations for a Subsidence claim. And they also cannot normally drop you if you have had a valid Subsidence Claim and if they have done the repairs:    someone who has had a valid Subsidence claim, must endeavour to stay with the same Insurer even after the Claim is finished, as other Insurers will be less likely to want to offer a Policy if a home has had a Subsidence Claim.)

===============================


Mine was almost 6 years from end to end and involved the Ombudsman twice. It involved seriously bodged repairs and also CUE reporting issues. And I was dropped from Insurance twice in the middle of the claim. (My Insurance Company chain kept breaking down due to Company reorganisations and buy-outs and mergers etc.) 

Annemos

PS  Another comment adding to the above just posted.....I do not think the Insurer would cover your up-front Str, Engineer costs, prior to a claim being opened. 

And once a claim is open. The Ombudsman says that the Insurance Company is entitled to use their own expert to do the Structural Report.

We then only get our own Expert's Report paid back to us, if our Expert disagrees with the Insurance Company Expert and our Expert's report is then deemed to be the correct way to go. 

Hope that makes sense.......

In my case, Insurance Company Expert said only one Tree should come down. I got my own Expert in who said a second Tree was also causing the damage and should also be removed. That was deemed to be the more correct assessment and so I was paid back for my own Expert's fees.  

Also in my case a second fee was also refunded to me:   Insurance Company expert said the Repairs were superb. My own Expert disagreed. So did the Ombudsman! 

user1977

superlight said:

eddddy said:

I'm not sure if I'm understanding correctly.  I think you're saying...

• You own no. 23

• A housing association owns no 19 and no 21

• no 19 and no 21 have suffered from subsidence

• You suspect that your house (no 23) might be showing signs of subsidence

But you seem to be blaming the housing association for the possible subsidence to your house - you suggest it's because they were negligent.

What do you think they've done that has caused your house to subside? Why do you want details of their buildings insurers?

You say you've asked for a copy of their structural engineer's report. I guess they could tell you what it says as a friendly goodwill gesture - but they don't have to. And if you're being aggressive and accusing them of negligence, I guess their less likely to show you any goodwill.


Perhaps a better way forward is to instruct your own structural engineer to report on your house. And if your structural engineer identifies possible subsidence, inform your insurance company.

(But don't jump the gun and mention possible subsidence to your insurance company, unless your structural engineer confirms it.)

The reason I asked for their buildings insurance details is if later down the line, our insurers might need to liaise with them.

You just give the details of the HA - whether the HA has insurance is up to them, it doesn't make a difference to what liability (if any) the HA owes to you. I think it's likely that large social landlords will self-insure for all but the largest losses.

superlight

You just give the details of the HA - whether the HA has insurance is up to them, it doesn't make a difference to what liability (if any) the HA owes to you. I think it's likely that large social landlords will self-insure for all but the largest losses.

Hi. Thanks for your reply.

Self insurance was not a term I was familiar with. After a brief read, it communicates to me as:- the chances for said company to carry out any proper repairs is going to be massively reduced. They would cut corners at any given opportunity. This seems like exactly what is going on here. 

Regarding liability, it is because the HA have known about these issues for quite some time and failed to identify cause or offer remedy. That is why I am suggesting they're liable. Just like if I lived on a first floor flat and accidentally left my tap running, subsequently the property below me is damaged. I would be liable, would I not? Can you see my point here?

Annemos

Interesting article here. 


https://subsidenceclaims.co.uk/is-your-neighbours-property-causing-your-subsidence-problems-what-you-can-do/


I am definitely not an expert on liability, but I suspect the neighbour has to have been made aware that damage is occurring to one's own home. Then if they fail to act, they may then become liable. 

===========================


Re the tap in the flat, I also seem to have read that the neighbour above may not be deemed to have been negligent, because they did not do it on purpose. It was an accident. And that's why people end up having to claim off insurance instead.

But again, if they have been told that the tap is running and then do not turn it off, then they become liable. 

Perhaps others can comment on that for you. 

===========================


Just an anecdote......

When I had my Council Tree Root Subsidence, my first reaction was that the Council must be liable for my damage, as they had allowed the Trees to grow to a huge size with no maintenance and very close to my home etc etc. 

But then I found an important legal case that one of the Insurers had won on behalf of a Council. 


The Court ruling was that the Council could not be held liable because....

a) Councils do not have infinite funding to survey and maintain every Council Tree. 

b) Not every Tree next to a Property will go on to cause Subsidence

c)  If every Tree near a property was cut down, we would all be living in a desert!  

(But of course, once the Council has been informed that the Trees have caused damaged, then they do have to act to remove that cause of damage, or they will then become liable.)

DullGreyGuy

superlight said:

You just give the details of the HA - whether the HA has insurance is up to them, it doesn't make a difference to what liability (if any) the HA owes to you. I think it's likely that large social landlords will self-insure for all but the largest losses.

Hi. Thanks for your reply.

Self insurance was not a term I was familiar with. After a brief read, it communicates to me as:- the chances for said company to carry out any proper repairs is going to be massively reduced. They would cut corners at any given opportunity. This seems like exactly what is going on here. 

Regarding liability, it is because the HA have known about these issues for quite some time and failed to identify cause or offer remedy. That is why I am suggesting they're liable. Just like if I lived on a first floor flat and accidentally left my tap running, subsequently the property below me is damaged. I would be liable, would I not? Can you see my point here?

"Self Insurance" on this website means one of two things... 

1) You explicitly put money aside to be able to afford to pay for any losses in the future

2) You dont buy any insurance and no pot to pay for any claims either, you'll just deal with it if it happens

By many people's language 2 would simply be uninsured but here they also call it self insured. 


For Corporates there are more options available, some will literally create a "captive" insurer (ie a licensed insurance company who only sells insurance to its sister companies). 

If you operate 100,000+ cars, homes etc the question is not "is there going to be a claim this year" but how many. If you know you have £10m of losses every year there is no point buying a policy that covers you from the first pound lost as your premiums will start at £10m + 12% IPT + Profit Margin + Risk Margin and thats before they add on the premiums to cover you for losses over £10m. If they arent going down the captive route then most would buy a property portfolio policy with a say £11m aggregate deductible so the insurance only pays out if your total losses are 10% above normal but your premiums are tiny compared to if you had taken a ground up policy. 

Negligence normally is doing something a reasonable person wouldnt do or failing to do something a reasonable person would do. In some circumstances a "reasonable person" is substituted with a reasonable XXX... for example you dont consider is a surgeon has been negligent by comparing them to the average man in the street but to what a reasonable surgeon would do. Certainly Councils have been found to have a higher duty of care in relation to negligence... never had to deal with a HA so dont know caselaw in relation to them.