Underpinning... a dirty word?

Associate
Joined
16 Nov 2014
Posts
529
During the searches process, I have uncovered that the property I had intended on purchasing was subject to recent (3 years) "precautionary remedial works to the foundations". Read - underpinning. Although no claim for subsidence, or evidence of subsidence has been (so far - i'm awaiting a missing structural report) made or uncovered, it appears "underpinning" is a dirty word. My current insurers refused to insure the property - as in - wouldn't even offer a quote.

Quotes so far for building insurance have been circa £1000, with a massive excess if any work with regards to subsidence is required. 1940's house.

We offered full asking price for the property. It's not cheap.

I'm also concerned at the level of deception potentially involved. The works have been documented by a chartered engineer. The work has been signed off by the local Building control etc. but NOWHERE is the work referred to as underpinning, despite (as I've now discovered), it is exactly that.

Advice?

Everything is on hold atm.
 
Last edited:
Soldato
Joined
18 Jun 2010
Posts
6,564
Location
Essex
During the searches process, I have uncovered that the property I had intended on purchasing was subject to recent (3 years) "precautionary remedial works to the foundations". Read - underpinning. Although no claim for subsidence, or evidence of subsidence has been (so far - i'm awaiting a missing structural report) made or uncovered, it appears "underpinning" is a dirty word. My current insurers refused to insure the property - as in - wouldn't even offer a quote.

Quotes so far for building insurance have been circa £1000, with a massive excess if any work with regards to subsidence is required. 1940's house.

We offered full asking price for the property. It's not cheap.

I'm also concerned at the level of deception potentially involved. The works have been documented by a chartered engineer. The work has been signed off by the local Building control etc. but NOWHERE is the work referred to as underpinning, despite (as I've now discovered), it is exactly that.

Advice?

Everything is on hold atm.
Ask for money off asking price. In all honesty underpinned houses are probably more stable than houses without. It’s just that now there is evidence of subsidence there. What I’d ask is, has it been fully underpinned or just one part of the foundation?

Also in regards to insurance, ask to take over the policy of the current occupants. If that’s not possible go to a broker.
 
Soldato
Joined
1 Jun 2013
Posts
9,315
My parent's house was a terrace built on London clay, probably about the same age. A tree root in the back garden had broken some drains, and there was some subsidence. The insurance paid out for underpinning inside and out, the tree was removed, the drain was fixed, and for the last 35 years the house has been fine.

In fact, because it's built on clay and the houses all move about a bit, it's actually stronger than the houses around it. You can see all the houses have had some movement issues over the years and because my parents house was strengthened, the weak point of the terrace moved down the road.

Obviously it's your final choice, but if the house was weak, but that weakness was fixed properly, (you want to pay for a proper structural survey to show there is nothing more than the standard movement/settling) then it should be okay for the future, until something else breaks and needs fixing. It's the way it tends to be with older houses, and you accept that to get nicely sized rooms and decently built houses rather than whatever badly made slap-dash thing you'll get on the average new build. You may have to look around for specialist insurance and pay a bit more as part of getting the house that you want. You may certainly want to renegotiate the price to give you some peace of mind. You might even have to walk away, or decide it's going to be okay and just forget about it if there's nothing there to worry about.
 
Soldato
Joined
13 Feb 2012
Posts
5,761
Quotes so far for building insurance have been circa £1000, with a massive excess if any work with regards to subsidence is required. 1940's house.

Regarding this, the current insurer should have an obligation to provide cover if the remediation work was carried out as part of an insurance claim, so if that is the case it might be worth speaking with the owner and asking who they are insured through.
 
Soldato
Joined
5 Mar 2010
Posts
12,305
Does seem very wrong for the insurers to refuse to cover the property as long as works have been professionally done and signed off in order to make the property stable again. You could argue that with the underpinning work performed, it's now less likely to suffer subsidence than any property that hasn't had underpinning done.

How do people who do a full renovation works of some run-down properties where foundations and even external walls have to be rebuilt then get insured?

It does sound suspicious about all the works being done but never referred to as underpinning. I imagine as you already suspect, the current owners have paid out of their own pocket to rectify any issues before it can be classed as subsidence problems / underpinning work performed.

Would an indemnity policy not cover this should problems arise in the future?
 
Soldato
Joined
5 Mar 2010
Posts
12,305
Regarding this, the current insurer should have an obligation to provide cover if the remediation work was carried out as part of an insurance claim, so if that is the case it might be worth speaking with the owner and asking who they are insured through.

My take on the OP is that the current owners didn't pursue a claim via insurance for remedial works, and everything was paid out of their own pocket - could be a reason they've been able to avoid classing the works as underpinning. If they did have to go via the insurance route, then the works would have undoubtedly been put down as underpinning.
 
Associate
Joined
2 Oct 2007
Posts
1,430
Location
Winchester
i had a similar issue with the house i recently bought, a drain was broken and escape of water caused some movement. This was all fixed but trying to get insurance was a huge pain. as escape of water is considered as "subsidence" barely any insurance companies would pay.

we ended up using the same company that paid out for the works to be carried out in the first place. we did find out that if there are no issues or no work required after 5 years it no longer needs to be declared which will reduce the amount of money we are paying!
 
Associate
OP
Joined
16 Nov 2014
Posts
529
My take on the OP is that the current owners didn't pursue a claim via insurance for remedial works, and everything was paid out of their own pocket - could be a reason they've been able to avoid classing the works as underpinning. If they did have to go via the insurance route, then the works would have undoubtedly been put down as underpinning.

Correct. The documentation of the planning, work being completed and signed off by the building inspectors is well organised and thorough. However, the word "underpinning" is omitted throughout the documentation, despite being exactly what it is.

They have also failed to provide a pre-work structural report which was referred to in the report detailing the work being carried out. I have now requested this as it appears to have slipped through the net.

Ask for money off asking price. In all honesty underpinned houses are probably more stable than houses without. It’s just that now there is evidence of subsidence there. What I’d ask is, has it been fully underpinned or just one part of the foundation?

Also in regards to insurance, ask to take over the policy of the current occupants. If that’s not possible go to a broker.

I can see the logic of it being "better than new", however, only 1 corner of the property has been underpinned, which reading, may cause problems in itself.

How do people who do a full renovation works of some run-down properties where foundations and even external walls have to be rebuilt then get insured?

A good question and a very grey area and one often skirted around. For example, if you are having an extension built above a garage, you might need to strengthen the foundations in order for this to happen. Amazingly, when planning permission is sought, it can all be contained within the request to "build a 1 storey extension above an already existing structure". The fact that it has been signed off as a extension can allow you to skirt around questions surrounding foundations as they are EXPECTED to be checked and potentially modified as pat of the extension process. When underpinning is done in isolation, it appears to be a different scenario.

i had a similar issue with the house i recently bought, a drain was broken and escape of water caused some movement. This was all fixed but trying to get insurance was a huge pain. as escape of water is considered as "subsidence" barely any insurance companies would pay.

We like the house - did you make your offer before or after having all of the information available. I've got no issue with the work being done, and am happy that is has been done to the required standard. However, this might not be our "forever" home and I am concerned this may cause issues when selling the property in the future.
 
Soldato
Joined
5 Mar 2010
Posts
12,305
Correct. The documentation of the planning, work being completed and signed off by the building inspectors is well organised and thorough. However, the word "underpinning" is omitted throughout the documentation, despite being exactly what it is.

They have also failed to provide a pre-work structural report which was referred to in the report detailing the work being carried out. I have now requested this as it appears to have slipped through the net.



I can see the logic of it being "better than new", however, only 1 corner of the property has been underpinned, which reading, may cause problems in itself.



A good question and a very grey area and one often skirted around. For example, if you are having an extension built above a garage, you might need to strengthen the foundations in order for this to happen. Amazingly, when planning permission is sought, it can all be contained within the request to "build a 1 storey extension above an already existing structure". The fact that it has been signed off as a extension can allow you to skirt around questions surrounding foundations as they are EXPECTED to be checked and potentially modified as pat of the extension process. When underpinning is done in isolation, it appears to be a different scenario.



We like the house - did you make your offer before or after having all of the information available. I've got no issue with the work being done, and am happy that is has been done to the required standard. However, this might not be our "forever" home and I am concerned this may cause issues when selling the property in the future.

It's a tricky one in this situation, as the house could either cost you more in further remedial works if other corners of the house are at risk. Did you find out the causes of the subsidence in the first place?

Frankly if the vendors are going to be secretive about the causes, then i'd be very prepared to walk away.
 
Associate
OP
Joined
16 Nov 2014
Posts
529
It's a tricky one in this situation, as the house could either cost you more in further remedial works if other corners of the house are at risk. Did you find out the causes of the subsidence in the first place?

Frankly if the vendors are going to be secretive about the causes, then i'd be very prepared to walk away.

Update. They have now sent the investigation report that I mentioned previously. The report states that foliage and a tree close to the property was removed 2 years prior to the investigation taking place. It also states a drain survey was carried out. I've fired back requesting the drain report and what changes to the property (since the removal of the tree/foliage) necessitated the need for investigative work to be carried out. This is the key issue I am still unclear about - what changes to the property came about as a result of the trees/foliage being removed that warranted further investigation.

No form of subsidence or structural issue was picked up by the homebuyers survey, other than some slight displacement to brickwork in the porch which is commented on as being not untypical of a property of this age. However, the surveyor was not aware of the underpinning having being carried out when the survey was completed.

Regardless of the responses to my further enquiries, would it seem fair to request a renewed structural survey be carried out at the sellers expense before proceeding?

Thanks to all who have contributed their thoughts so far.
 
Soldato
Joined
5 Mar 2010
Posts
12,305
Regardless of the responses to my further enquiries, would it seem fair to request a renewed structural survey be carried out at the sellers expense before proceeding?

Going on what you've said so far, it seems you've only had the home buyers report done. I would definitely argue for a structural survey carried out at the sellers expensive based on recent findings regarding the remedial works carried on the foundations of the property.

If i was to put myself in your shoes, the BIG RED flag to me is that this was something you had to uncover through searches rather than the seller being upfront about the works in the first place. I know people will say you never advertise the bad points of something you're selling, but for a house purchase, any issues will come out regardless of whether someone is upfront about them or not. My take personally is that if the vendor is upfront and honest about them, then we can consider actions moving forward from the beginning. By not mentioning them and relying on them being bought up from searches is in my view a little bit devious.

I would argue that had you been made aware of potential structural problems earlier on, you could have commissioned a full structural survey from the start.

The bigger question you have to ask yourself is if they reject your proposal, are you happy to walk away, or invest more money into potentially uncovering further problems. A structural survey is rather expensive.
 
Associate
OP
Joined
16 Nov 2014
Posts
529
Going on what you've said so far, it seems you've only had the home buyers report done. I would definitely argue for a structural survey carried out at the sellers expensive based on recent findings regarding the remedial works carried on the foundations of the property.

If i was to put myself in your shoes, the BIG RED flag to me is that this was something you had to uncover through searches rather than the seller being upfront about the works in the first place. I know people will say you never advertise the bad points of something you're selling, but for a house purchase, any issues will come out regardless of whether someone is upfront about them or not. My take personally is that if the vendor is upfront and honest about them, then we can consider actions moving forward from the beginning. By not mentioning them and relying on them being bought up from searches is in my view a little bit devious..

Thanks Semple.

It's a bit grey. I'm a bit of a layman and know nothing about construction per-se.

They haven't been completely dishonest and some naivety on my part is to blame. A lot can also be said for the role of solicitors; to clarify - the vendors did declare the work in the initial enquiries, and corresponding completion certificates were provided as (and considered a suitable response in the eyes of the solicitor to the enquiry) but as stated, the wording didn't mention "underpinning". As I've now discovered, solicitors are not capable to advise on work carried out in terms of context. They only exist to ask what work has been done and to check the associated documentation is in order. To summarise, it's completely my fault that the connection between "Precautionary remedial works to front elevation foundation" and the concept of underpinning was not made until now.

I will await the responses of my last round of enquiries.
 
Associate
Joined
7 Nov 2012
Posts
1,611
Location
UK
My previous house was underpinned and in hind sight I wouldn't have bought. It wouldn't have mattered how many reports the sellers paid for, or how much money they knocked off, I should have run a mile.

The house was underpinned on a corner wall. The drains had collapsed. If I recall correctly, it wasn't called subsidence due to what caused it.

I could only get house insurance from the provider the seller had used and every year they increased the premium massively. Every year I tried in vain to get a quote from elsewhere, but couldn't. As soon as you mention under pinning, not even 'subsidence', that's it! You're either rejected or get a 4-figure premium. This went on for over 10 years. It was then I could answer 'no' to most insurance company questionnaires regarding underpinning/subsidence and got an almost reasonable premium.

We sold the house soon after, but not until we'd gone through more stress losing a few buyers because of it. It was only when a young couple fell in love with the property and their builder father recognised it wasn't actually that much of a structural issue, we finally got a sale.

Unless you love the house, intend to stay there for a long time and/or can afford the ££££/stress - move on.
 
Last edited:
Soldato
Joined
3 May 2012
Posts
8,520
Location
Wetherspoons
I'd stay away also, I don't disagree with some of the above posts saying technically the structure is stronger, I'm sure that is true, it's just the stigma that goes around it, not just the insurance but mortgage/marketability also
 
Soldato
Joined
26 Feb 2007
Posts
14,107
Location
Leafy Cheshire
For me the main thing is: underpinning isn't necessarily an issue, and if you're savvy and/or practical in a building sense you can get a great deal on a lovely house and have no issues.

The big issue is if you ever want to sell. It's a huge stigma. You have to wait for the 1 in 10 people that are willing to take on the insurance, OR get a good deal out of you; or wait for a national psyche to change regarding underpinning.
 
Associate
OP
Joined
16 Nov 2014
Posts
529
For me the main thing is: underpinning isn't necessarily an issue, and if you're savvy and/or practical in a building sense you can get a great deal on a lovely house and have no issues.

The big issue is if you ever want to sell. It's a huge stigma. You have to wait for the 1 in 10 people that are willing to take on the insurance, OR get a good deal out of you; or wait for a national psyche to change regarding underpinning.

Update and reply below.

After asking a number of tactical questions, I was finally provided with documents illustrating the whole story. They had purchased the property in a damaged state. There was both internal (main spine wall!) and external wall cracking, recorded on the engineer report as "most likely" due to hedgerow/laurel tree root growth causing issue with the foundation, discovered by a test hole and inspection being carried out. They were advised to remove the vegetation and allow 12-24 months before re-assessing the ground. On re-inspection 2 years later, the ground was still found to be in an unsuitable condition to allow serviceable support to the property, therefor the underpinning was done.

This is a bit different to the story we had been allowed to formulate in our heads, again, however, showing naivety on our part.

As others have said, i'm not sure I can face the risk on the insurance. There's no guarantee that premiums won't continue to rise.

But as dampcat has stated, the stigma is my biggest barrier. I have no doubt the remedial work is excellent and has more than likely resolved the problem. It's all documented with appropriate permission and certificates being in place. "But what if....." will be creeping through every potential buyers mind, unless they are particularly risk-adverse.

It should also be noted that the vendors have spent an astronomical amount of money improving and modifying the property. My guess is that they bought it with the intention of staying for the duration (and therefor bought not being particularly concerned about selling it perhaps, and not giving it much thought?), however, we believe the sale has come about due to them separating.

I'm awaiting to hear back about a couple of other enquiries.

Also, do I need to inform our mortgage lender about this - is it worth getting their take on the value of the property since this information has come to light?
 
Soldato
Joined
5 Mar 2010
Posts
12,305
That would be my biggest concern, the insurance you can deal with. But when you come to sell the property in the future, any potential buyer will be going through the same doubts that you have.

How well is it priced? I think I recall you saying earlier that you had offered asking price for it. How well does it compare with similar properties in the area? If it's significantly cheaper and a potential bargain, then could be worth considering. If it's on par with other properties, then you have to ask yourself is it worth the price when other properties possibly don't have any of the concerns regarding subsidence.
 
Associate
OP
Joined
16 Nov 2014
Posts
529
That would be my biggest concern, the insurance you can deal with. But when you come to sell the property in the future, any potential buyer will be going through the same doubts that you have.

How well is it priced? I think I recall you saying earlier that you had offered asking price for it. How well does it compare with similar properties in the area? If it's significantly cheaper and a potential bargain, then could be worth considering. If it's on par with other properties, then you have to ask yourself is it worth the price when other properties possibly don't have any of the concerns regarding subsidence.

Funny you should say that.

It's a detached 4 bed property in a desirable location with a big plot. It's circa 500k (which is the very top of budget). It's had copious extension and modernisation. It's a lovely house.

A semi on the same road came up for sale yesterday. Similar size but not quite as cosmetically impressive. £315k. Had the loft coverted for the 4th bedroom.

I'm beginning to think we overpaid in the first place now anyway - however it's very difficult to say as all the properties on the road are different. There's a massive mix of styles and eras.
 
Back
Top Bottom