Buying a property that has previously flooded

[catfeets]

Does anyone have any experience of this or know of any questions we need to ask during the buying process?
We have just found out close to the end of the buying process that the house flooded in 2007. I know the flooding was bad (in the north) but I was abroad at the time so I can't be sure just how bad it was.
We don't seem to be getting any answers as to how bad the flooding was/how deep etc. We just know it was the ground floor and garden. They've told us that drainage was improved shortly afterwards at the end of the road due to a new road being laid but we have no evidence of this.
We are trying to secure new insurance quotes but they are around 5 times higher than our first quotes. There's also a £2.5k excess on flooding claims.
The estate agent was unaware that it had flooded and tried to fob us off by saying they've sold loads of properties that flood and it's not a problem but surely their valuation was based on a non flooding property and therefore we should reduce our offer if we decide to continue?
We just don't know what to do. We can't continue to live where we do now and haven't found anything else as suitable as this house.

@catfeets Luckily we live up a hill so we’re ok. It’s really rough on the people whose houses were affected though. The village shop was 2.5 feet deep in water so I assume the houses nearby were flooded to a similar depth. Awful.

On insurance, is the house not in the FloodRe scheme?

@MaggieFS we are finding it hard to walk away from. It has features that we haven't been able to find in other houses and although it needs a lot of work, it's not a complete wreck.
It's in a quiet spot and there are very few houses there which is what we're looking for. It's just over 200yrs old and has some lovely original features.
It definitely doesn't feel damp and there's nothing noticeable. Other houses we've looked at were clearly suffering with serious damp issues and we really thought this one was ok.

@Changeismyname we've now found that a few of the larger insurance companies are quite happy to insure it as it's over 10yrs since it flooded.
I think the current insurer of the property might be taking the vendor for a bit of a ride. We were told they have evidence of changes made to the drainage in the local area but they actually have nothing!

No way, wouldn’t touch it with a bargepole

Walk away. If it was more then 20 years ago I might consider it but otherwise no.

There was a previous poster who had exactly this issue before - makes me wonder if you are buying the same house.

Plus, if they won't tell you how bad it was, assume it was bad.

As others have said, I would run, I can only imagine flooding will get worse.

I wouldnt even consider buying it.
I would also be annoyed with the estate agent, and whoever did your survey. It is very late in the sale to be finding this out now.
300 new houses are being built in our town on a floodplain.
No idea how they got planning permission.
Feel sorry for whoever buys them, personally I would only buy on higher ground.

Run away its just not worth the risk, in general Flooding is getting more common, Whilst some say global warming , I see the local river and drainage ditch maintenance has disappeared, one local land owner had a Ditch gang who just spent every day of the week cleaning and maintaining them , its long gone now and we do see the out come of this

I think any house which is 200years old will have damp. It’s not a 10yo Barretts home. My house is well over 100 years old and has damp. It’s not rising damp, it’s sort of condensation damp but there’s no cavity wall and when warm air hits the inside of external walls you get condensation. Even with all the airing I can do and a dehumidifier running 24/7 I get mould on curtains in some rooms. But the house doesn’t feel damp.

I’d be less worried about that and more worried about the previous flooding.

@matchingsocks

I would also be annoyed with the estate agent, and whoever did your survey. It is very late in the sale to be finding this out now.

I would be to, but they work for the seller and more importantly to them, themselves to just flog the house whoever and make a profit. There is little ethics for a large part of the industry.. in my view there should be a statutory duty to disclose facts such as this prior but the principal, is buyer beware.

I had exactly this on a house I was buying and about the same length of time ago. Also classed as high risk for surface water flowing and also due to the local authority failing to maintain local culverts. The vendors were in complete denial.

I loved the house but after a lot of thought I walked away. I knew that every time it rained heavily I would be getting up in the the middle of the night to check for flooding. I decided it was no way to live.