First time buyers- previous subsidence claim on house we want to buy.

[MoonlitCastle]

Hello. I'm hoping that someone can shed light on this.

DH and I finally found what we thought was our perfect first family home. Our offer was accepted and then we were told about a subsidence claim that the vendors made back in 1996. Turns out the front of the house developed a large crack due to some trees in the front garden.

Long story short, the insurance company paid for it all to be sorted. Mature shrubs were removed and tree cut back, cracks fixed, external drainage all fixed and property declared structurally sound in the same year (1996.)

In 2002 the vendors noticed some internal cracking and again brought it to the attention of the insurance company thinking it might have been the same problem. Told it was not subsidence but just normal shrinkage, and they paid out 4k for internal plastering and redecorating costs.

We still want to buy the property. I got a local builder who has extensive experience in subsidence and has done underpinning in the past to view the property with me again. He took a good look and said he wasn't worried. That the cause was dealt with and there were no signs of further damage. We have also scheduled a full structural survey for a week's time.

My main worry is the cost of insurance. The vendors insurance policy covered all their claims and expires in 2022. They acknowledged that switching the policy into our name would mean a premium would be added for the remaining three years, and they have offered to cover the difference until the policy expires by reducing the house price accordingly.

I don't know where I stand with getting home insurance after the three years are up. Anyone have any idea? Will I really struggle to get the house insured? Will it be madly expensive? The claim was made in 1996 - 23 years ago now - but the other internal cracks claim was made in 2002 - 17 years ago. Will I be penalised or made to pay some extortionate premium? Would this be a dealbreaker for some? Any problems anyone can see?

I don't think I'd want to take the risk, OP. Insurance companies are notoriously risk averse, and you'd probably get offers to insure but EXCLUDING any subsidence or subsidence related issues.

Run. There will be lots of other properties, this will be a worry during your ownership and a nightmare to sell.

What if we were not considering ever selling the property? Would that make a difference?

Not really. Suppose the subsidence reoccurs and the house needs underpinning? Have you got deep pockets?

A house that has been repaired after subsidence is a better risk than one where subsidence might happen this summer or monitoring is ongoing. You need a report from a Structural Engineer, not a surveyor. There should not be a problem. Why would there be when been put right? You are basically saying that when a roof is repaired, a house is less insurable afterwards? Of course it’s not and the same applies to foundations. You might be advised to stay with the vendors insurers. By the way, builders are not qualified in any shape or form to advise on this and insurance companies won’t listen to their views. Structural engineers are the professionals that have clout here.

Why would it recur? The trees have gone. The foundations have been strengthened and redesigned? You have a much better house than before!

Your best bet is to call a specialist insurer and ask for a quote. Also you need to find out from the existing insurer how much it will cost for you to take on the policy as you may have to stay with them after the 3 years. We were in the same position about 6 years ago and decided to pull out in the end. Have you had a surveyor in to do a full survey? Please do before you proceed.

And yes a structural engineer was a must for us following the survey. We were surprised how much still came up even though it has been fixed.

Thank you, everyone, for all of your opinions and advice so far. The property was never underpinned in 1996 as far as I know, as it wasn't deemed necessary. The root cause (tree, mature shrubs) were dealt with.

Does anyone know how much (roughly) a structural engineer's report would cost?

Thank you, Hoosey, BubblesBuddy, SinglenotSingle and yellow square.

I think we paid about £550 but as with anything quotes will vary widely.

Thank you. Out of curiosity why did you pull put? Was it specifically the subsidence issue?

The house almost certainly would have been underpinned if a large crack appeared. Just getting rid of trees isn’t a cure for the damage. Removing trees would, in conjunction with underpinning, work. Of course there might be other problems. However if there are no cracks, then it’s likeky there are no further issues.

Surveyors look at all aspects of a house but rarely make a judgement on subsidence and cracks and foundations! I would suggest the SE will be £500 plus. However you need to know!

Oh yes absolutely. We would be getting a structural engineer to view the property regardless of the price but I was wondering how much to budget for this.

I've been looking online more into this. It seems there are specialist insurance brokers for this sort of thing who can offer deals..?

We bought a house with an at the time outstanding subsidence claim (the works were done after we moved in), we stayed with the vendors existing insurer and it was fine. We didn't need specialist insurers and by the time we sold 7 years later we could have insured with most insurers without huge premiums.

For me it would depend. Is there issues with subsidence in the area (mining/shafts/karst)? if the answer to that is yes and issues have already unfolded at the site then a big fat no. Otherwise I would consider it. Remember though that the statute of limitations has likely run out for the underpinning so you will have no recourse. Go into it with your eyes open.

As long as there aren't any ongoing problems insurance shouldn't be an issue - we just insured and were asked if there had been any issues with subsidence in the last 15 years (there hadn't). Similar situation to you, shrubs caused some cracks, it was sorted, found structurally sound and no issues since.

I bought a house with historic subsidence (20 years earlier). In our case it was underpinned and the raft was extended. We got a structural engineers report (can't remember how much but a few hundred) and submitted it to our insurers - we initially went with the buyers insurers but we were able to change to a regular insurer by providing the engineers reports and all of the original paperwork to an underwriter. The premium wasn't vast - with the work done the house was virtually bombproof.
We also managed to sell with no great difficulty.

If you know their insurers you could phone for a quote and definitely get insurance provisionally agreed before exchange if you decide to pursue. We have a house that's difficult to get insurance for (thatched) and had to go via specialist insurance brokers.

I would walk away but if you really like it get appropriate reports done.

Wow. Thank you everyone. Very valuable advice. Lazydaisies, no, there arent any further issues like mines etc. Not to my knowledge. Our structural survey is taking place soon and then I'll get a structural engineer's report, too.

Thank you hiphoppotamuses. That's great to know. And thank you for that suggestion, pandapenguinrabbit, that's really helpful. I will definitely do that. I know that most would definitely walk... it's just that we really love the house and it ticks a lot of our boxes (actually pretty much all!) and it's in our budget. Also they're not in a chain and we have spent the past year (almost) stuck in chains which eventually fell through. So we really do like the house which is why I'm looking so carefully into this historic subsidence issue. As Lazydaisies said, I'm trying to go into this with eyes wide open.

Sorry, only just saw your reply. We pulled out after the survey and structural engineer’s report made us worry. The house had been underpinned at the front, shrubs removed and a tree thinned down but was on clay soil (very common in London). Both the surveyor and SE said it could move again and need pinning at the back, there had been some cracks appearing before that just needed cosmetic repairs. It was currently sound but we didn’t want to risk having to do further work. The roots of the tree hadn’t been removed as they were worried that would cause heave. We struggled to insure at a reasonable cost- the existing insurance was sky high due to the earlier claims and our mortgage company wanted more reports before they would lend. In the end we decided it was too much and we were worried about being able to sell in the future as we knew we would be leaving London sometime in the next 5-10 years.

Heave is where clay expands due to having too much water in it. Roots don’t cause heave. Removal of trees that drank the water causes the water to remain in the soil after the trees have gone, roots or no roots.

If the reports you get suggest no further damage, you shouldn’t worry. If there are cracks between the ceilings and the walls, that might be heave. Basically houses need adequate foundations to cope with local ground conditions and trial pits can be dug to establish what they are around the rest of the house. One area of subsidence doesn’t mean trouble everywhere.

Why on earth would you take on this sort of risk? Just don't. It's really not worth the hassle.

Thanks everyone. I'm getting the surveys done and then I'll make a decision I guess. Our mortgage broker said that as long as we have a report saying the issue has been rectified and the house is now structurally sound there shouldn't be too much of a problem with insurance...