Potential historic movement

[Eatsleepbakerepeat]

We're in the process of buying our dream home and and some concerns about the living room floor so had a builder out to inspect it, he wasn't at all concerned by the floor however had great concerns on the outside of the property.

The front right and back left wall are bowed and when looking at the bottom of the house the bottom brick is about an inch further in than the brick above. He looked inside the house and all the floors etc are level with no signs of cracking. We also spotted expansion joints in the property
On further investigation we have found out the seller spotted cracks in the 90s, had a structural survey done which found it wasn't believed to be subsidence but there was brick movement as such expansion joints were recommended to help deal with the movement of the property. No inspections have been carried our since.

So there is a chance that the movement out builder found is historic and nothing has moved since the 90s, however my question mainly is should a further report have been done to check the expansion joints "solved" the issue?
To me this is like having bloods taking a tablet then not repeating your bloods to make sure the tablet is working!
Also with all this information would you run a mile or just request a new structural survey?

I'm very cautious but I don't like the sound of this. My DGPs had subsidence on one wall that was then underpinned and never moved. It didn't bow.

I'd get it properly looked at.

Thanks for the reply! The report from the 90s indicates it isn't subsidence causing it therefore underpinning shouldn't be required.
I guess we're just wondering if a follow up report should have been done x number of years later to make sure movement hadn't continued! To me that's logical but doesn't mean it should happen 🙈

@Eatsleepbakerepeat A building might have expansion joints from new but they are not normally introduced at a later date. What, exactly is expanding and why? These might be used between an existing building and an extension but putting them into an existing wall is odd. How was it done?

How old is the house and what did the structural survey say? I assume you had one.,A builder won’t be qualified to give an opinion. Some surveyors will defer to a structural engineer too. Is the bowing wall single brick or double skin? Also what is it constructed from? What’s above it? The walls might not be constructed properly to bear weight down to the foundations. Is the wall secured laterally? Quite possibly not. Are there signs of heave? Pressure from expanded ground forcing the walls upwards can cause instability. So get a structural survey urgently because you have no idea what’s causing this.

What about insurance? Does the vendor have it? You probably won’t get it.

Thanks for your thorough reply!
So they were added in 94 the house was built early 70s but had an extension added late 80s, another house on the estate had issues with an extension causing settlement issues when the extension destabilised the house, so not sure if it's the same on this occasion
Basically the home owner saw cracks in the 90s had a report done they recommended expansion joints and these were added. There's no sign of any movement inside it all appears to be the outside walls, the inside is completely level and no visible cracks (although I am aware these are easy to cosmetically cover over)

We are yet to get a new structural engineer report we're waiting on the seller to get one done as we and our solicitors believe this is something she should do, this would hopefully show the movement is all old movement
The survey we had did pass comment on historic movement but worryingly didn't comment on the house having slipped on the foundations

The report from the 90s also clearly stated it wasn't due to subsidence "just" settlement

The current owner does have insurance, and I believe hasn't had an issue getting it even with the report of movement, I believe this is because it wasn't movement caused by subsidence but movement "expected" in a house, but our worry is if this movement has continued since the report in the 90s

@Eatsleepbakerepeat If any remedial work is needed, you must get this done on the vendor’s insurance.

A house built in the 70s should have adequate foundations. Houses don’t slip off foundations. The expansion joint is between the house and the extension - probably. This is because there can be differential settlement between buildings of varying ages. Although less than 20 years is nothing. The foundations might be different for each part of the house and reacting differently to ground conditions. However no walls should be bowing and there should be a report done on this, the bowing wall and whether the expansion joint is working. A surveyor would not look at foundations. They will have to dig down to expose them if necessary.

The expansion joint isn't it's at the opposite end of the house to the extension.
It hasn't slipped off but has slipped on them so the bottom brick is 1 inch further in than the brick above showing the movement

I feel we need to keep pushing with the full structural survey and hopefully the owner will agree to get one done 🤞

Is it one brick that’s moved or a wall that’s bowed? I’m not sure why an expansion joint would be used in an existing house. They are used to equalise movement between older and new brickwork to prevent cracking. This just seems odd. Hopefully it will get checked out.