Advice needed please about we are buying

[Dontbugmemalone]

I'm a regular lurker on these boards but can't seem to find old threads for such specific advice.

Me and DH offered £14k under asking price on 1920s detached bungalow. After much negotiation, it was accepted.
However the following things have recently come to light, we haven't got to the searches stage yet because of point 2:

1. it was underpinned 30 years ago. We were not told this before making an offer. This was due to neighbours on either side removing trees. We are awaiting documents to outline what was done exactly.
2. the sellers have leasehold solar panels. They thought they'd paid them off but were scammed. We are waiting for paperwork about this but it's very slow.
3. We have just found out that, in 2006, the sellers treated part of the house for rising damp, apparently with a 20 year guarantee. We do think it was rising damp as there is no membrane layer at the bottom of the house, so this is more than likely.

At the moment, the seller's solicitors have been slow and haven't provided much documentation despite our solicitors chasing them.
We knew the house needed some work and offered accordingly.

Do you think we should continue and if so do you think we could negotiate more off the original offer?
We both love the house and are prepared to go ahead once we have the paperwork back but I also don't want to buy a money pit or something that will be unsellable in the future.

Thanks in advance

There should obviously be the word house in the title.

The leasehold solar panels would be a complete pain according to another thread on here, so that would put me off.

Did the survey bring up the underpinning, because that would be a big worry for me too. Has there been any movement since? I used to live in an area where it was unusual not to have subsidence so it would depend on how much the house has moved really.

Thanks for your reply.

That's what worries me, we are a bit stuck until we have more information and our solicitors will want more money from us to sort out a lease.

The valuer from the bank mentioned it but they were still happy to give us a mortgage. I didn't really trust their opinion tbh.

We had a structural engineer come and look at it and he couldn't see any issues apart from 2 small external cracks but they are historical. He wasn't concerned. I do feel that they should have been upfront but I don't know if it's enough to be able negotiate.

In a similar position but with a poor survey report, the EA suggested we reduced our offer. We didn't, the house with a history of underpinning wouldn't be worth what we thought so even with a reduced offer was too expensive and too much of a risk to buy. Underpinned houses are always difficult to sell, but it depends on your future plans really.

Thanks for your reply.

We were hoping this house would be a long term decision but we're also considering what might happen in the future.
We're going to contact the estate agents tomorrow and ay that we're not happy with the situation and price. That will hopefully push them a bit with the paperwork. Then we will take it from there.

If it sounds like a potential money pit, smells like a potential money put
It’s highly likely it’s a money pit
It would be a no from me I’m afraid

I would never buy an underpinned house personally, and a lot of people would agree with me, so your resale potential would always be limited. However long ago it happened, and however 'fine' it is now. Some people will of course be less risk adverse, particularly for a bargain...

Wow, one of those things alone would be enough to put many people off. With all three, get your running shoes on. What do your mortgage company say about the solar panels? Are they still prepared to offer a mortgage?

I'd be most worried about the solar panels TBH.

I'd want to know more about the damp - ie. is it a current issue. If they sorted it properly in 2006 (13 years ago...) it's probably fine.

Underpinning - would want an expert - structural engineer check (which you've done) then wouldn't give it a second thought. It was 30 years ago, and usually underpinned houses are more stable than most others, because literally they have had the foundations stabilised.

It's going to be your home and you don't want to worry about it. But I really think a lot of people panic unnecessarily about a lot of house related things!

If the house has had structural damage, but it’s been rectified, that’s way better than waiting for a problem to occur. If trees were removed, then more water was in the soil because the trees would have consumed it. Usually this causes heave, not subsidence. Subsidence is when ground shrinks because it’s too dry and allows the house to effectively sink (subside). However no current movement so that’s good. Yes, they should have declared the work on the foundations.

I wouldn’t buy with leasehold panels but this situation will become more and more common. There must be a way the lease can be transferred and you should be made aware of what this means for you.

The underpinning and damp are both issues which, if correctly treated shouldn't cause future problems - provided they were done properly. Why don't you believe your structural engineer?? Isn't his opinion what you pay for?

The damp - it depends on whats causing it and where it is. My parents have been living with a 1 metre square patch of damp in their utility room ever since the house was built. it has a damp course but this patch of damp just appeared and stayed!

Solar panels - that would bother me.

Thank you for all the replies. Sorry things have been a bit hectic.

I agree that the solar panels are more of worry. I think it's the fact we don't know the exact tenure of the air/roof space, it's all a bit up in the air. Once we have confirmation, we can rethink it then. The mortgage company haven't mentioned anything yet but we will confirm with them once we know more.
Regarding the other issues, we have contacted the vendors' estate agents to push their solicitors with the documentation. We want to know exactly what was done.

Sorry if it wasn't clear, the person that initially mentioned the underpinning was from the bank and just wanted to confirm the valuation. I doubt they did a detailed report.
I trust the structural engineer 😀.