Structural survey on older property raises too many questions... what would you do??!! (Sorry, long!!)

[happynappies]

We're the third link in a four-part chain, and have our fourth baby due in four weeks (got three under the age of five atm, just to set the scene!). We've been trying to sell our tiny 3-bed house for two years off and on (came off market when had last baby), and finally got a buyer in mid-June. Mortgage application went through, and we instructed a full structural survey last week on the property we'd had an offer accepted on - a significantly bigger 3-bed house built in 1905, so big rooms, lots of downstairs space, big garden, and with the all-important potential for a loft-conversion to get us the number of rooms we need for our big family.

The survey raised a question about possible rot under the floorboards in a downstairs room, so from this we asked a damp/timber specialist to do an inspection, and he concluded that there was no rot, but that the joists had moved as a result of settlement. The original survey mentioned 'historic settlement' but suggested it was non-progressive. We spoke to the surveyor again and he suggested getting a structural engineer in to look into this issue further. We spoke to the estate agent this morning and came under pressure not to, basically, as we're slowing things up for the rest of the chain. At the bottom of the chain first-time buyers are getting married first week in September and then are going on honeymoon, and apparently are un-willing to wait any more.

When I pressed the damp and timber specialist he mentioned that the vendors had mentioned underpinning. We went back to the EA and said we'd definitely need to arrange a structural engineer, as possibly this could affect the mortgage valuation. We said the vendors had mentioned underpinning to the damp specialist, at which point the EA volunteered that she had a certificate relating to work carried out on the property 3 years ago! She's send a scan of this document to us, which basically states that the owners saw a crack in the wall and claimed on their insurance to get the crack fixed and to re-decorate, and remedied the cause of the crack which was something to do with under-soil drainage. The house hasn't been underpinned, and the problem was corrected, but there is no guarantee - just a document from the insurance company outlining the nature of the work.

Now, should we be thinking that we shouldn't touch this place with a barge-pole? Will insurers be put off? Or was it minor work that shouldn't effect re-sale value etc. My hormones are all over the place, and I just want to be in the house, as soon as possible, but am really resenting the EA approach, pressuring us not to have further investigations, and prioritising the first-time buyers and their honeymoon, when I'm 8 months pregnant and going crazy here!! What would you do??

If your structural survey hasn't picked up current movement in the house, and you have details of work which has been done to sort out historic movement, then I wouldn't worry. I'd probably want to know a bit more about what the cause of the historic movement really was but you should ask your solicitor to enquire specifically about it.

Historic settlement in a house of this age is pretty normal. Get your solicitor to check it out and advise you, but it doesn't sound like a deal breaker to me, especially if your mortgage company isn't worried.

EA just wants her commission. Do this through your solicitor!

Thanks fresh, that is music to my ears!! I suppose the reason we went to EA was because we're aware the vendors are going on holiday on Monday, and we're panicking (well I am) that we won't be able to get a structural engineer in for another couple of weeks, and this will delay things further... I can see why people say moving house is stressful!!

I don't think it sounds too scary. I have bought and sold several houses of this age and they all had a bit of historic settlement/ movement and cracks etc but were all fine It is to be expected. Underpinning is major and would be documented somewhere if it had been done

our house was built 1892 (mid terrace, but neighbouring houses built at different times) & has various minor cracks down to historic settlement. We did get a structural survey, & that said it was not a live problem.

Having said that, it's a very wonky house - floors all sloping & windows mostly out of square - & it still seems to move a bit sometimes with extremes of weather

but as you described your potential house in your OP it has big rooms & lots of space. They are nice houses with bags of character

I mean we got a survey done by a structural engineer, not the standard purchase structural survey

Agree with the others that it sounds very typical for a property of it's age, and nothing to worry about unduly. Surveys always sound scary and it's normal to over-react slightly. I rang a random structural engineer up in a panic to discuss state of the Victorian house we were buying, and he was very reassuring. It sounded similar to your property, and we didn't have any problems with it when we lived there, and sold it on easily.

Hmm, all reassuring on one level, but as we look into this we're still worried. Has anyone whose property had a history of subsidence had trouble getting insurance? Dh looked at insurance quotes this morning, and the mention of subsidence added another £500 to the annual premium and there was only a couple of companies offering quotations. Is this the kind of thing that when you speak to the insurance company its not so bad? Or would a structural engineer's report (hopefully) offer some reassurance? We don't want to end up in a position where we can't extend the house because the loft conversion is no longer viable due to the subsidence, and we can't sell the house because potential buyers will be put off or won't be able to get insurance. The vendors are away on holiday this week so we've got some thinking time, but decisions decisions!!!

there is a difference between settlement & subsidence though. If there is no reference in any documents to "subsidence" then I think you can tick the No box on insurance quotes

Nice quote here from a \link{http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=3291812\moneysavingexpert forum}

'All houses move. To say movement is movement and therefore uninsurable under a normal policy is wrong. You won't find a Victorian house with true walls or a survey on one that doesn't mention longstanding movement.

The financial ombudsman does not consider settlement to be the same as subsidence.

Insurers usually ask the question about subsidence, landslip, heave; not movement. If they do ask about movement then you can't answer truthfully. If they ask about subsidence then you can answer truthfully no if the property has been seen by a surveyor and deemed to be long standing "settlement".

If they surveyor ticks the box that says "subsidence" then you can't exactly answer that it isn't.'

Depends what question insurers ask . Our house is within 300m, uphill, of a tiny little brook, & some insurers deem that a flood risk (apparently "water" means our little brook is the equivalent of eg the Avon) & won't quote.

If you are really keen on this house then I reckon it would be worth your getting a structural engineer's report against future queries.

NB The word subsidence was never used with reference to our cracks - is the subsidence box ticked on your survey?

We got the engineer's report done following a mortgage extension application where their surveyor queried one crack - it's so long ago now I can't remember the precise details

No - our survey didn't reveal subsidence, just 'historical settlement', but the document that the EA has now provided, the insurance claim from the vendor's when they had the crack fixed three years ago, mentions subsidence, and now we know that information - that kind of screws it all up I guess. Have gone from thinking its all ok to thinking its off!! The surveyor said it wouldn't affect our mortgage valuation, but the original buildings survey we had done doesn't identify this problem. Am going around in circles here!

Can you get a quote for underpinning and then ask the vendor to share the cost with you ??

It's interesting how the EA only volunteered the insurance certificate after you queried the 'underpinning'.

EAs are sneaky buggers at the best of times but (in theory at least) if they are asked a direct question they are legally obliged to give an honest response.

Just to put your mind at rest, email the EA (gets it in writing!),
asking if they can confirm by reply whether there are:
any other 'issues' relating to the property that they are aware of, any other certificates or paperwork that they (or the vendor) hold, any documents detailing any building work, or any information that has been communicated to them either verbally or in writing, which might affect any decision to purchase or affect a potential purchaser's or mortgage provider's opinion of the property, and which they would like to make you aware of now.

Basically just ask that they fully disclose any further information they have about the house.

See what they say before you spend any more money.

it probably doesn't even need underpinning though

it's all semantics, innit

• extra £££ for insurance (even if it was underpinned they still charge more I think)

We had no extra premium after underpinning was done.

well, we haven't put it in writing but asked EA for any other documents or info, and they asked vendors and there doesn't seem to be anything else. We were going to ask the solicitor to check, but the more we think about it it seems this is a no go. I can't understand the EA either, if we hadn't insisted in a full survey then followed up what we thought were minor queries we'd still be in the dark, might not have been able to get insurance and that could have thrown it all at the last minute before exchange. No idea why EA would risk whole chain while sitting on this info tho.... Not sure now whether getting a structural engineer would just be throwing more money away!

There's probably nothing to be unduly concerned about.

For example, is it possible that the vendors are either tightwads or say, slightly naive or a bit unworldly?

I can imagine a situation where a homeowner sees a crack in a wall and thinks, oooh what should I do? I know, I paid for home insurance, I'll ring them up and see what they say - save myself a few quid - after all I paid for it!

Before you know it, the insurance company - rather than telling the vendor to fix it themselves - are sending a surveyor round to check for subsidence or movement or earthquakes!

Of course, there is no structural issue - just a dopey tighwad vendor - insurance company fix crack and issue certificate.
Dopey vendor has no idea how this will look when they come to sell the property.

Time comes to sell, vendor is still dopey, EA queries wall repair - gets dopey answer from dopey vendor.

These things happen - many people are really surprisingly stupid.

I would still email the EA and get them to confirm status of property and/or any further issues in a written email.
This is just a way of making the EA aware that you are switched-on and won't be taken for a mug.
It duplicates the standard solicitor's property questionnaire which will highlight to the vendor the legal consequences of lying to you in writing.

Asking the EA to confirm all this in writing is the equivalent (in my mind) of banging your fist on the table and shouting in a loud northern accent - You'll not pull the wool over my eyes!

It's good to do this in all business transactions and sometimes, if there has been any underhand behaviour - this will give them enough of a shock to either make them back out or own up - although there are no guarantees of course.

Would you shell out for a structural engineer after banging your fist though? Am too busy sitting crying to formulate a proper plan now, need to pull self together and decide what to do!!

Personally, I would really have to love a house a lot, to psychologically overcome the barrier of a perceived major structural fault. I wouldn't want to live there worrying about whether I'd bought something which nobody else would buy.

But... has this house really got that kind of fault?

It doesn't really sound like it does but... so much depends on the personal vibe you get from the EA and vendor - do you trust them?

Would going round again to view and speaking to the vendor be possible?

Get a good old stare into their eyes when you ask about the work and why they felt they should get the insurance company involved rather than do it themselves?

If I really liked it and still had a little nagging doubt, then maybe I would ask the vendor to write to the insurance company for written clarification of what the problem was, why they were involved and what the outcome/prognosis was - could all be done by email if the vendor is motivated enough.

Soory, to actually answer your question...

The surveyor is covering his own back (in case he missed a problem he should have seen) and that is why he is advising you get a structural engineer.

The EA doesn't want you to get the engineer to do a report in case something is wrong, in which case you will pull out and the EA will be legally aobliged to declare this 'fault' to all future prospective purchasers, probably making the property unsaleable at the current price.
The EA would prefer you to simply pull out of the purchase rather than have a structural investigation.
And of course, it all takes time and the chance of commission is disappearing...

From what you know so far, I wouldn't pay a structural engineer at this stage.

I would exhaust all of the 'free' options to get information before spending another penny on a house that might fall through.

I would expect, once you get more information, you won't need a structural engineer, you will know enough to either go ahead or pull-out.

Is it actual subsidence then? If it is it will need remedied and insurance will be difficult until then

Noddy, the certificate the EA gave us, which is not a guarantee or warranty, outlines the cracks and sloping door as being caused by 'consolidation subsidence'. The brief report outlines how discharge of a rainwater pipe moved finer subsoil and dislodged the foundations. Drainage improvements were made, and the 'superstructure crack repairs' were made, and re-decorated. So I think that covers the outcome/prognosis etc that fourwalls mentioned. So it has been remedied, but insurance is still 'difficult' in that not many people are prepared to offer quotations, and it is expensive.

The EA wants a sale, they are not expert in the properties movement or lack of. If you are really concerned get the structural survey done, tough titty if it slows up the sale. Money well spent for peace of mind

Was it on a gable end or extension join?

You do need a definite answer re under pinning Why was it even mentioned.