House purchase- previously underpinned and little documentation

[SubsidenceWoes]

We are buying an Edwardian house in London (so clay, shallow foundations). It’s not our absolute dream house but it ticks many boxes - we have been looking for more than two years and this has been the most suitable property we have found. Our buyers are moving as quickly as we would hope and the vendors of the house have no chain so things were going relatively smoothly.

We were told when we first viewed the house that it had been underpinned 20+ years ago and we were ok with that. We arranged a survey and asked for the usual documentation.

The survey has come back with LOTS of essential work that needs doing (mostly to do with the roof)- that part is I guess straightforwardly fixable but costly and we would need to renegotiate based on that. The surveyor noted the history of subsidence but wasn’t particularly concerned about active movement.

However, the vendors have not been able to produce full details of the underpinning. The council has a document confirming that the house was underpinned 35 years ago (not provided to us by the vendors). The vendors also gave us one document which was a structural engineer report from 2005, I think arranged by the insurer. This states that they would monitor for movement for a period of a year. However, they have not given us any further documentation. This was before they bought the house, but apparently it was mortgaged so I am surprised they didn’t see anything more than this themselves when they bought it.

It will be necessary to get a structural engineer to report if we do proceed, but we are wondering if this is just going to be a money pit and - crucially - if future buyers will be similarly put off (firstly by any history of subsidence and then especially given the lack of clear evidence about what was done) even if the engineer is unconcerned about any current movement.

Can anyone wise/experienced in this area give advice?

thank you

cheeky sellers trying to get away with the minimum. I bet they have alllll the paperwork really.

Personally, I hope you have got the house for a good reduced price due to the history of subsidence plus lack of documentation.

Even though the surveyor has said they can't see active movement, they're not the professional to decide that. only a structural engineer can determine this.

it's up to you, but I would make sure the property is correctly priced with this history and lack of paperwork, then get a structural engineer to tell you about any active subsidence.

I would also find out which building insurer the seller is with and discuss with the structural engineer and your solicitor if it's best to go with the same one. if subsidence comes about again, there could be issues about when it truly started and who (i.e. which insurer) would be responsible. keeping the same insurer will save a lot of hassle down the line.

make sure you have it in writing, with your solicitor too, that the seller declares no active subsidence.

Personally, i would be really annoyed about the lack of paperwork. subsidence is pretty serious. how have they not kept that paperwork?? no doubt the good ol' excuse of it being a long time ago. Like I said, i think a lot of sellers pretend and lie about what they do and don't know or have.

p.s i wouldn't buy a house with a history of subsidence where there's no paperwork.

ha, this popped up: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/property/5122604-discovered-next-door-had-subsidence-underpinned

just shows sellers are pretty sensitive about subsidence. i would run a mile

Thanks; we have already asked about the current insurers.

I did see that thread but it took quite a strange turn- the OP didn’t come across very well, and the advice received seemed pretty sensible honestly!

@Itsallsoboring - sorry for my ignorance, but may I ask wrt the seller declaring no active subsidence - in practice, how would this help me? since I would need a structural engineer report anyway.

Subsidence in London 35 years ago that has been underpinned wouldn’t bother me, and I don’t think it would bother a lot of sensible buyers. I think the reason your sellers are being so laid back is that it is so common in London (with clay soil) that most people have to also take that view, otherwise they would never buy anywhere.

Anyway, get a structural engineer to check it, and you are good to go. Maybe speak to the neighbours if you are still feeling nervous.

What documentation do you think you need? Building Regulations sign off certificates were only introduced in the late 80s, and even then conveyancers weren’t very interested in them. If the LA is aware and it showed up in searches, that may be all that was needed at the time. And if the LA has the documentation, why would the owners (when it was done) need to keep it?

Much more useful would be to know who the current insurers are, and I see that you’ve already asked about that.

I don’t know if @Itsallsoboring is being facetious, but I’m sure the sellers have given you all the paperwork they have. Why wouldn’t they?

I bought a property in London with some evidence of subsidence. The vendors got the house sorted before sale and paid for a structural survey before and after which was commissioned by me confirming the works undertaken were successful and the works themselves had a 10 year warranty.
I have to use specialised insurance and provide copies of the reports and warranty to the insurers. Not all insurers will even insure me with that and I have a large excess on subsidence. However I'm happy because the work was done and paid for by the previous owners so in a way I'm sorted whereas my neighbours are not and we're all on the same clay with the same houses!
I guess what I'm saying is you have to be eyes wide open and you have to have the documentation to support it. So at the very least I'd ask the vendors, in the absence of any documentation, to commission a structural report at their expense to confirm whether the property is OK or not. This would help in any sale because they will have to tick the "history of subsidence" box on the property information form and so any solicitor worth their salt will pick up on that.
The alternative is that you take out some insurance? Check with your solicitor on that.

You might want to check how much standard annual buildings insurance is on the house given its history, just get a quote. It may well be high.

Tbh on London clay it wouldn't bother me tbh with it being 35 years ago. I personally would get my own structural survey done and check with insurers. As long as no active movement, it's likely one of the strongest on the street tbh with the way London houses are being underpinned.

I wouldn't touch it. Your insurance bill will be through the roof and that's IF anyone will insure it. You need to go to try and secure insurance on it now to find out what will happen.

Thanks all. Lots to digest and I’m very grateful for all the advice.

@KievLoverTwo -May I ask, have you bought a house that was underpinned? If so, please let me know who you insured with.

@Andwegoroundagain did your premiums drop with time from the underpinning?

@NewFriendlyLadybird - regarding documentation: I have now spoken to many insurers and brokers; few will even give me a quote without a structural engineer’s report or a certificate of structural adequacy (neither of which the vendors have; we did get the buildings reg cert from the council). Those that did quoted very high (around 10x expected cost and that’s without subsidence cover). The other issue is the lack of end point to a second claim that apparently needed monitoring and a tree removal only.

We asked a structural engineer to see it and he is very confident there has been no movement since the underpinning and that any movement was minimal.

The insurance issue seems to be a binary though- subsidence or not; whether it was underpinned 6m ago or 60 years ago, the insurers and brokers are mostly saying ‘no.’

the insurers they are with currently have a very poor track record and I would never choose to insure with them.

It seems odd to me that a strong underpinned house would be so impossible to insure- if anyone has any specific advice re companies or brokers please let me know!

thanks again

No, I haven't bought a house that was previously underpinned so I have no insurance recommendations.

However, I would recommend asking in this group, where they will be very used to it:

https://www.facebook.com/groups/1023449561785486

It’s a bit of a minefield with insurance so unless I had serious money would walk away.

We use an insurance brokers called Gallagher's, ours is £750ish per year on a property worth approx 800k, hasn't gone up much since we bought the property 3.5 years ago

Thanks @StellaSmile, is this for a property that has been underpinned? May I ask how long ago if so?

I'm also with Gallaghers. Premiums haven't gone down over time but generally insurance premiums are increasing year on year