1948 house with suspected movement. Buy or walk away?
Discussion
Should be a simple answer and walk or possibly even run away, but this house is potentially the one for us and heart and head are in disagreement so any thoughts or experiences appreciated
Had full building survey done which pointed to a number of small cracks in exterior render and a number of small cracks and blown plaster on inside walls. One door won't shut and there's higher than expected damp readings at the ground floor front. House is built on clay soil with some largish trees nearby and two more trees taken out in last 10 years.
But - what to expect from an old house on London clay and 1940's depth of foundations which are likely to be concrete trench and maybe just a metre deep? Hard to tell if surveyor is just covering his arse or there really is a problem as he's refusing to get into any discussion over degrees of severity or normality for the age of property or possible other causes such as thermal expansion or freezing water under the render causing the cracks.
One option is get a second opinion from a structural engineer.
Potentially seller could notify a suspected problem to his buildings insurer and start a monitoring process for a year or so but anybody got any idea how difficult it's going to be to insure in the future or if there's going to be difficulty with change of ownership with an ongoing claim?
Seller might have his arm twisted for a price reduction too but I doubt it.
Anyone been there - and gone through with it?
Had full building survey done which pointed to a number of small cracks in exterior render and a number of small cracks and blown plaster on inside walls. One door won't shut and there's higher than expected damp readings at the ground floor front. House is built on clay soil with some largish trees nearby and two more trees taken out in last 10 years.
But - what to expect from an old house on London clay and 1940's depth of foundations which are likely to be concrete trench and maybe just a metre deep? Hard to tell if surveyor is just covering his arse or there really is a problem as he's refusing to get into any discussion over degrees of severity or normality for the age of property or possible other causes such as thermal expansion or freezing water under the render causing the cracks.
One option is get a second opinion from a structural engineer.
Potentially seller could notify a suspected problem to his buildings insurer and start a monitoring process for a year or so but anybody got any idea how difficult it's going to be to insure in the future or if there's going to be difficulty with change of ownership with an ongoing claim?
Seller might have his arm twisted for a price reduction too but I doubt it.
Anyone been there - and gone through with it?
As far as I understand it, the prescribed course of action is to walk away, as there will always be another house, somewhere. However if it is really the perfect house for you, then the key part is whether anyone has registered any claim for subsidence against the property? That's when it becomes really difficult, not impossible, but very difficult to get it insured and for it not to effect the resale value, if you ask the vendor a direct question on this, they are obliged to tell you. If your dead set on it, and went ahead to buy it (the problems you mentions are effect, not cause and should be easily sorted with some minor works) it would indeed be a case of monitoring it, and if nothing further happened, you've come out properly lucky. If however, it gets worse in the future, think very carefully before phoning the insurance company for the claim, as this will forever add a stigmata of Subsidence to the house, and a lot of people would immediately dismiss it when you came to sell it.
Would definitely be worth getting a specific survey done on the house at this stage to determine if it was movement from the trees from 10 years ago or not, although most surveyors are hard to pin down to precise answers in case it's proved otherwise in the future, it should still give you a better idea of the possible issue before committing to buy.
Would definitely be worth getting a specific survey done on the house at this stage to determine if it was movement from the trees from 10 years ago or not, although most surveyors are hard to pin down to precise answers in case it's proved otherwise in the future, it should still give you a better idea of the possible issue before committing to buy.
It's unclear from what you've said if all the problems you've described are definitely attributed to subsidence.
A door not shutting may simply be down to age and possible expansion of the wood due to damp or excessive humidity in the house from belongings, etc.
Cracks in plaster may be shrinkage over time or poor application.
But point taken regardng subsidence. We encountered subsidence in our 100+ year-old house when we bought it 11 years ago. We knew the risks and still went ahead. Surveyors report concluded a 40 year-old extension had 'settled'. True but also not true. As in your case, we had woefully inadequate foundation depth for the soil type in our area.
After much thinking and discussion, we had borehole surveys taken and the ground 'stabilised' by expanded foam by Uretek. Very non-invasive, quick and relatively cheap when compared against conventional repair methods.
The same MAY apply to you. Yes, trees and damaged drains may exaccerbate the problems as they also had with us. We took a pragmatic approach to it. Haven't claimed off the insurance to avoid the 'stigma' and residual value issue.
Clearly, your case neeeds more investigation and I'd say you need to be VERY sure and determined to continue with the purchase. If the purchase price is right and you can live in the house regardless, then you've a chance.
A door not shutting may simply be down to age and possible expansion of the wood due to damp or excessive humidity in the house from belongings, etc.
Cracks in plaster may be shrinkage over time or poor application.
But point taken regardng subsidence. We encountered subsidence in our 100+ year-old house when we bought it 11 years ago. We knew the risks and still went ahead. Surveyors report concluded a 40 year-old extension had 'settled'. True but also not true. As in your case, we had woefully inadequate foundation depth for the soil type in our area.
After much thinking and discussion, we had borehole surveys taken and the ground 'stabilised' by expanded foam by Uretek. Very non-invasive, quick and relatively cheap when compared against conventional repair methods.
The same MAY apply to you. Yes, trees and damaged drains may exaccerbate the problems as they also had with us. We took a pragmatic approach to it. Haven't claimed off the insurance to avoid the 'stigma' and residual value issue.
Clearly, your case neeeds more investigation and I'd say you need to be VERY sure and determined to continue with the purchase. If the purchase price is right and you can live in the house regardless, then you've a chance.
based on the findings in your survey and circumstances as described its nothing id be remotely concerned unless there was history of subsidence or that structural work had previously been undertaken to mitigate a potential risk
you should enquire with the vendor but also see if the neighbours can offer some insight on the QT...
i bought something 2 years back at 30's detached on a gradient with some very scary trees within influencing distance of the property... the survey did point out some clear signs of historic movement but because the movement did not seem current i took a view and went ahead..
2.5 years on and touch wood nothing yet. yes there has been some movement but nothing that would not be expected in the normal course. i repaired a 2 mm crack when i moved in and now it seems to be re-appearing but other than that nothing scary...
you should enquire with the vendor but also see if the neighbours can offer some insight on the QT...
i bought something 2 years back at 30's detached on a gradient with some very scary trees within influencing distance of the property... the survey did point out some clear signs of historic movement but because the movement did not seem current i took a view and went ahead..
2.5 years on and touch wood nothing yet. yes there has been some movement but nothing that would not be expected in the normal course. i repaired a 2 mm crack when i moved in and now it seems to be re-appearing but other than that nothing scary...
Jaguar steve said:
But - what to expect from an old house on London clay and 1940's depth of foundations which are likely to be concrete trench and maybe just a metre deep?
This is the point, really. In London everything moves, it's just a question of by how much and is it still doing it. I bought one which had subsided and had been fixed (through insurance) 9 or so years earlier. Soil samples and bore holes at the time concluded it was due to trees (poplars) which had subsequently been removed. I had three problems; a lawyer (normally very calm) telling me heatedly to walk away during the purchase, one mainstream insurer declined to quote on it and the eventual building insurance (and contents insurance) was quite steep. All because it had gone through a claim in the past.
It didn't stop me doing a major redevelopment and punting it on easily 18 months later.
Jaguar steve said:
One option is get a second opinion from a structural engineer.
I'd do this. Facts help defuse some of the hysteria around this subject. You might want to hold a little money back if you and he feel it might be worth doing a little non-intrusive underpinning at some point and/or reduce/cut down the trees (often the culprits). Of course once you get into full bore hole/soil sample/annual monitoring thing it all starts getting a bit expensive.Minor movement on properties like that has since stopped is nothing. Minor movement that continues might or might not need some remedial work. I'd talk to a surveyor and get some sensible risk assessment..
Me? I'd buy it but be prepared to spend a bit on tree surgery/basic underpinning if needed (worst case sceanrio!)
Edit; as RC1 says sound out the neighbours too - information from them can round out the picture
crankedup said:
Any near neighbours? perhaps have a chat, you may be able to build a picture of subsidence in the immediate are (or none).
Good idea. In the late '40s there was a chronic housing shortage (no change there) and also a chronic shortage of building materials so they were throwing up houses as fast, skimpily and cheaply as possible (no change there either). After 70 years this is going to show up. However if it has gone this long without subsidence and there is none known in the neighbourhood I'd press on with a second opinion. AC43 said:
Jaguar steve said:
One option is get a second opinion from a structural engineer.
I'd do this. Facts help defuse some of the hysteria around this subject.BTW, a metre deep would be a good footing then, 250mm not so good.
We had to have a Survey done as bank insisted due to exterior cracks.
Complete waste of £750. He came back with a report full of might be... and could be attributable to... and various other caveats. It was patently obvious to anyone with half a brain that we didn't have subsidence and that the cracks were due to blown render (due to corroded wall ties).
The whole thing was an arse-covering exercise by all involved that I had to pay for.
IANAS
Complete waste of £750. He came back with a report full of might be... and could be attributable to... and various other caveats. It was patently obvious to anyone with half a brain that we didn't have subsidence and that the cracks were due to blown render (due to corroded wall ties).
The whole thing was an arse-covering exercise by all involved that I had to pay for.
IANAS
boyse7en said:
We had to have a Survey done as bank insisted due to exterior cracks.
Complete waste of £750. He came back with a report full of might be... and could be attributable to... and various other caveats. It was patently obvious to anyone with half a brain that we didn't have subsidence and that the cracks were due to blown render (due to corroded wall ties).
The whole thing was an arse-covering exercise by all involved that I had to pay for.
Then I guess that that would be from a surveyor. Blown plaster and subsidence are completely different types of crack. You needed a structural engineer's report.Complete waste of £750. He came back with a report full of might be... and could be attributable to... and various other caveats. It was patently obvious to anyone with half a brain that we didn't have subsidence and that the cracks were due to blown render (due to corroded wall ties).
The whole thing was an arse-covering exercise by all involved that I had to pay for.
Cheers Chaps.
Apparently the property had been monitored for a while around 8 years ago after the removal of two conifers and movement of a rainwater soakaway to further away from the house. So insurance company must therefore be aware - vendor has never changed to another company - maybe because he can't get insurance anywhere else. Very possibly blighted then.
Spoke to structural Engineer this am. He said exactly the same as surveyor, wait and watch then decide course of action.
Going to have a chat with him later and a natter with the neighbours too. They've got big trees as well.
Apparently the property had been monitored for a while around 8 years ago after the removal of two conifers and movement of a rainwater soakaway to further away from the house. So insurance company must therefore be aware - vendor has never changed to another company - maybe because he can't get insurance anywhere else. Very possibly blighted then.
Spoke to structural Engineer this am. He said exactly the same as surveyor, wait and watch then decide course of action.
Going to have a chat with him later and a natter with the neighbours too. They've got big trees as well.
TA14 said:
boyse7en said:
We had to have a Survey done as bank insisted due to exterior cracks.
Complete waste of £750. He came back with a report full of might be... and could be attributable to... and various other caveats. It was patently obvious to anyone with half a brain that we didn't have subsidence and that the cracks were due to blown render (due to corroded wall ties).
The whole thing was an arse-covering exercise by all involved that I had to pay for.
Then I guess that that would be from a surveyor. Blown plaster and subsidence are completely different types of crack. You needed a structural engineer's report.Complete waste of £750. He came back with a report full of might be... and could be attributable to... and various other caveats. It was patently obvious to anyone with half a brain that we didn't have subsidence and that the cracks were due to blown render (due to corroded wall ties).
The whole thing was an arse-covering exercise by all involved that I had to pay for.
To the OP, if your heart is set on this property then get someone to tell you how much it would cost to underpin the walls that are defective Make your decision to buy based on whether you can afford to underpin, if subsidence is actually found to be the problem. As mentioned before, a 1m deep trench foundation is pretty good compared to the Victorian method of 3 stepped bricks about 400mm from ground level and absolutely no foundation under window bays! If it is within your budget to underpin (if you have to) then it's a done deal. Underpinning needn't be a massive cost and I have even witnessed remedial works for clay shrinkage (after a long hot summer) by inserting hoses into the ground and lifting the house up by re-hydration of the soil. It worked!
Jaguar steve said:
Cheers Chaps.
Apparently the property had been monitored for a while around 8 years ago after the removal of two conifers and movement of a rainwater soakaway to further away from the house. So insurance company must therefore be aware - vendor has never changed to another company - maybe because he can't get insurance anywhere else. Very possibly blighted then.
Spoke to structural Engineer this am. He said exactly the same as surveyor, wait and watch then decide course of action.
Going to have a chat with him later and a natter with the neighbours too. They've got big trees as well.
OK; sounds like a similar case to my former property then.Apparently the property had been monitored for a while around 8 years ago after the removal of two conifers and movement of a rainwater soakaway to further away from the house. So insurance company must therefore be aware - vendor has never changed to another company - maybe because he can't get insurance anywhere else. Very possibly blighted then.
Spoke to structural Engineer this am. He said exactly the same as surveyor, wait and watch then decide course of action.
Going to have a chat with him later and a natter with the neighbours too. They've got big trees as well.
IIRC the original insurer has to continue insuring if the client wants them to but when there is a break they can decline to insure the new party. I think. OR you can continue the insurance if you request it? Can't recall. Mine was probate so it got a little muddy.
What I did was to track down the original surveyors involved way back and got them involved in my party wall stuff so they could certify that nothing had moved since and so on. To reassure any timid buyer. Luckily I found one like me whoe went "Underpinned?" "Engineered properly?". "Good, that's not going to move now".
Johnniem said:
To the OP, if your heart is set on this property then get someone to tell you how much it would cost to underpin the walls that are defective Make your decision to buy based on whether you can afford to underpin, if subsidence is actually found to be the problem.
+1And you can use it as a bargaining chip - it's going to cost £xxxx so I'd like £yyyy off the price. Then it's free.
Griff Boy said:
As far as I understand it, the prescribed course of action is to walk away, as there will always be another house, somewhere. However if it is really the perfect house for you, then the key part is whether anyone has registered any claim for subsidence against the property? That's when it becomes really difficult, not impossible, but very difficult to get it insured and for it not to effect the resale value, if you ask the vendor a direct question on this, they are obliged to tell you. If your dead set on it, and went ahead to buy it (the problems you mentions are effect, not cause and should be easily sorted with some minor works) it would indeed be a case of monitoring it, and if nothing further happened, you've come out properly lucky. If however, it gets worse in the future, think very carefully before phoning the insurance company for the claim, as this will forever add a stigmata of Subsidence to the house, and a lot of people would immediately dismiss it when you came to sell it.
Would definitely be worth getting a specific survey done on the house at this stage to determine if it was movement from the trees from 10 years ago or not, although most surveyors are hard to pin down to precise answers in case it's proved otherwise in the future, it should still give you a better idea of the possible issue before committing to buy.
Good advice. I'd be trying to get it looked into a bit more.Would definitely be worth getting a specific survey done on the house at this stage to determine if it was movement from the trees from 10 years ago or not, although most surveyors are hard to pin down to precise answers in case it's proved otherwise in the future, it should still give you a better idea of the possible issue before committing to buy.
When we bought our 1942 house last year (on clay soil), we were in the same position, perfect location and an old house with potential. I will add though we didn't have many alerts regarding exterior issues but hardly any internal doors would shut and the top corner of most internal doors had cracks down to them. The house was full of damp too. The plaster was loose on all walls with cracks in all walls and ceilings.
Anyway, luckily my mates dad-in-law is a surveyor and also runs a company specialising in the restoration of period (usually listed) properties. He came round and checked things out and the first thing he said was "Don't confuse settlement with subsidence. All old properties will have moved over time. They are like humans in a way. When I was 25 I had a 40 inch chest, now I'm 55 I have a 40 inch waist. Things sag and move over time".
I thought that summed it up quite well. We went ahead on his advice and are now well into the refurbishment and seeing the old house being brought back to life is great.
Things that the survey said vs actual outcome -
Damp, possibly rising, in living room and dining rooms - The gutters had ripped off the house as it had stood vacant for over 3 years. We got those replaced with a full re-roof and had the stove installed to get some heat in the place and it dried out lovely. Re-checked with damp meter last week before plastering and it's bone dry. We still added a water proofer to the cement mix for the base anyway.
Cracks above internal doors due to no lintels - There are lintels but they are spindly little timber things so we are about to have beefier ones fitted before the new door frames go in.
I'm so glad we went for ours. We are a long way off finished and it's hard going but it's also the best thing we've ever done. Our survey read like War and Peace, honestly and the day it came through we simply thought it was game over for this one, but as I've said above after having someone knowledgeable guide us through it, it wasn't really that bad at all.
Good luck!
AC43 said:
Johnniem said:
To the OP, if your heart is set on this property then get someone to tell you how much it would cost to underpin the walls that are defective Make your decision to buy based on whether you can afford to underpin, if subsidence is actually found to be the problem.
+1And you can use it as a bargaining chip - it's going to cost £xxxx so I'd like £yyyy off the price. Then it's free.
Been back now with very open eyes and a copy of survey. Vendor has reluctantly confirmed it's insurance blighted after previous episodes and cracking is far more widespread than I remembered.
Lovely house and perfect location though. In the light of what's become apparent contemplating a cheeky - no actually very rude offer and treating it as a major refurb.
Mrs JS hates caravans. We could have one in the front garden and live in it for a while...
Lovely house and perfect location though. In the light of what's become apparent contemplating a cheeky - no actually very rude offer and treating it as a major refurb.
Mrs JS hates caravans. We could have one in the front garden and live in it for a while... TA14 said:
Yes, that's great: underpinning £5K, discount £10K happy days unless you want to sell at some time then 10% off the value of the house and you've lost £30K.
Well I bought the house at market rates and sold it 18 months later for a record price making a 27% profit.The (historical) subsidence didn't bother me one iota nor my buyer.
Edit; but it does seem to bother a lot of people. So you have a point.
Edited by AC43 on Friday 25th July 16:46
Gassing Station | Homes, Gardens and DIY | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff