Is this structural engineer’s advice totally wrong?

[MiniMiniMiniBar]

Purchased a share of freehold flat in south London and moved in last November. It's a converted house around 100ish years old and just us and a flat upstairs in the building. It's semi-detached with next door still being a complete house. Had a level 2 survey done as the estate agent told me they couldn't do a level 3 survey on a flat (was possibly a mistake to listen to this) but the survey came back in July with brickwork fine and no signs of subsidence. On moving in I noticed some hairline stepped cracking above and below a small window in the living room which have widened and spread a fair bit and are also now mirrored on the outside brickwork too. Some of the outside brickwork near the bay window looks like it's starting to separate from the rest of the building in a quite terrifying way.

Got a structural engineer in who had advised Category 4 severity (extensive damage/structurally unsound) as a direct result of structural settlement and foundation movement, failed repointing, windows and frames separating from brickwork, inadequate lintel support . . . the projected costs come to £90k.

The structural engineer has advised we don't contact our insurer because of the risk of increased premiums/excess/loss of value. After asking questions he said we could tell them we are 'fixing cracks and carrying out reinforcement works' but not 'underpinning' -- can this be right? If we are underpinning then what would be the point of trying to hide it? If there were problems in the future and they found out we'd done the work wouldn't they refuse to cover us and potentially cause other problems?

Also I have images of when I viewed the flat that do show some of the initial cracking and nothing was flagged -- is raising a case with the surveyor an option to recoup the costs of this?

I'm at a bit of a loss where to go next with this and losing a fair bit of sleep. I've love advice from anyone who has gone through similar or is knowledgeable in this area.

Very sorry to read about your situation. Can be very stressful.

Have some experience with cracks in an old house a number of years ago.- not sure what is relevant or helpful.

Unless the movement is significant and a risk, the cracks should be monitored for change over a period of time - at least a year . Some houses in my area shifted during a significant drowt and hosepipe ban a number of years ago and have not moved since.

Insurance - any hit of cracks and premiums going up and you have to declare on any future insurance. Hense why they say not to mention it ( I paid for an independent survey so off record). Many companies do not insure underpinned properties which is stupid if the problem as been rectified

Movement around a bay window is not uncommon in 1930 houses and does not necessarily mean the body of the house has to be underpinned. All the bays on my row of houses have gapping cracks- mine is slowly moving but not enough/ quick enough to rectify presently.

failing lintels are not structural.

am not a surveyor- the only thing I would suggest is ensuring they are an independent one and not linked to a structural repair company.

Need to check the small
print from a house buying survey about a claim as there tends to be a short claim period.

( lintal- meaning you don’t have to declare a replacement if that is all
you do as far as I understand).
Insurers are only interested in risks of subsidence rather than other rapairs

Has the engineer been able to explain why he thinks it’s happened? Tree roots / drains?

If you’re genuinely looking at paying £90k then I’m not really sure what other option you have but to speak to insurers. Personally, I’d get a second opinion as that advice alone is a bit off.

You may have a claim against a surveyor but impossible to say without knowing what the survey said and what its caveats are. You’ve got plenty of time to look into that (6 years). I’d concentrate on working out if this engineer is right and how urgently you need to undertake the work.

You can go back to the original surveyor and show them your findings, they have insurance for this kind of thing so you may be able to claim it off that?

Seems odd to have insurance but not use it when you've got a £90k bill!

Best house on the street to buy is he underpinned one as its been fixed. That's what everyone told us when we bought our underpinned house. So don't let anyone tell you it'll put off buyers in future

He said foundation settlement, ground movement and historically shallow foundations. Although there is a drain and some tree roots nearby that also need to be explored. Apparently the clay soil in this area is an issue for lots of homes.

I live in south London too and half the area is subsiding. Surveyor told me - when I was buying - that if I didn’t want to deal with subsidence not to live in the area!

I don't think you can make a claim against the surveyor due to -
He said foundation settlement, ground movement and historically shallow foundations. Although there is a drain and some tree roots nearby that also need to be explored. Apparently the clay soil in this area is an issue for lots of homes.

Did you not look into their recommendations? Did your mortgage company raise any red flags?
Having working in Home Insurance, personally I don't think you'd get anywhere given the information you've given.
Possibly a claim against the estate agent stating you couldn't get a better survey done. Yes, it's a flat but it's still bricks and mortar.

So sorry OP, sounds like you've been given misleading advice. You should consult a solicitor that specialises in this type of thing. Someone is guilty of hiding something, covering something up - just to get the sale. Faced with a 90K bill, a few hundred specialist fee's will be small fry.

This is reference, I think, to what the structural engineer the OP instructed has said not the surveyor.

She also wouldn’t sue the surveyor to recover fees. She’s be looking at recovering the diminution in value of the property.

I knew you’d say it was built on clay. I would get a second opinion from a structural engineer OP, sort the repairs, be transparent with your insurance. I would not worry unless my hand fits between the cracks but I appreciate that when we see these things has home owners you do worry.

A Level 2 survey should pick these things up. My relative is a surveyor and they have insurance for these kinds of scenarios. Go back to your surveyor before you start paying out.

@kirinm yes you are right on both of those points. The original surveyor picked up nothing.

Hand not fitting through the cracks yet! But yes they are worrying. Doesn’t help that the cracks are right above the TV so I’m staring at them every evening (I should just watch less TV!).

We had similar (although by the sound of things not as bad) situation when we moved into a 'share of freehold;' flat. It was one of two converted from a terraced house in South London. We moved in 10 years ago or so and moved out in 2023.

Its worth taking a step back and thinking about legalities for a moment.

When you buy a share of freehold flat there are two legal entities - the title to your flat which is held on a lease and a separate title for the freehold of the building.

In your case (and ours) ownership of the freehold is shared between the two flats you mention. In other cases the freehold could be owned by another body such as company or in some cases the local authority.

Your mortgage is granted to you on the leasehold of the flat you live in. As owners of the freehold you can with the agreement of the other flat owner grant yourselves a new lease at any time. All it would take to grant yourself a new lease is a lawyer drawing up a new leasehold agreement or extending the current one.

Your mortgage company ultimately is not very concerned with the structure of the building as it has no liability for it. Ultimately it and you as leaseholders can take the freehold owner to court to enforce repairs to the structure of the house. (of course you wouldnt take yourself to court but if it was owned by another company you could take them to court for lack of maintenance)

In this situation you need to get together with the other flat owner (as joint owners of the freehold) to repair the structure of the building. They may have similar issues to the exterior of the upper flat but these may not have been picked up due to height etc. Whilst you may be the ones to directly benefit it is their liability too as its for the whole structure of the house. It would be similar to if the roof needed reparing - the upper flat would be the one getting wet but you as ground floor flat would be liable for the roof as joint freeholders.

How you go about doing this is a separate question. Ultimately you will need to both agree to this, each paying £45,000 or whatever half the cost is. It is worth contacting the insurance company - as joint owners you should have joint insurance for the freehold - but you may find that the insurance company says that this is fair wear and tear and to be expected in South Lonfon. It is part of the day to day maintenance required - similar to if the roof needs replacing or the exterior painting for example for which you would be both liable.

In our case we had cracking which was mentioned by the mortgage company surveyor as a concern that would need repairing in the next few years. We got a full structural survey when we moved in. It required repointing and other stuff at a cost of £20,000 ish which we shared with the upstairs flat as joint freeholders. Whilst we resented the cost (and I'm sure upsatirs werent too happy) it felt good to be sure it was structurally sound. We also took the opportunity for general maintenance - replacing gutters and resetting some of the tiles on the roof as we had the scaffolding up.

This is the circumstances we had, I think ultimately this is how you will have to resolve the situation As others have said it may be worth getting legal advice on what you can do. You should also speak to the other flat owner as they have liabilities too as joint owners of the freehold.