UKH

So I've had an offer accepted on a property, well over the asking price, which is always the way round here.

The survey has come back with evidence of structural settlement. He is fairly confident it's most likely historic rather than continuing, but more than he would expect to see in such a property. He doesn't think it's subsidence either. Some floors are sloping towards the rear (can be fixed if required, £1,500 maybe) and all walls leaning towards rear of property slightly . Walls are only visible with spirit level, the surveyor spotted the floor issue without getting out his spirit level!

If myself/surveyor are confident that remedial work has been done and no further issues arise, I'm just wondering about reducing my offer. It's not my intention to niggle or use the survey to play hardball in negotiations as I really want/need the sale to go though. However, the surveyor is quite clear that this issue affects the resale value (and hence what I should be considering as my purchase price) and I don't want to be paying over the odds.

Have only ever bought new builds before so no experience of this sort of property - all thoughts/opinions/experiences appreciated!

In reply to Andy Dines:

If your insurer asks about any signs of settlement or subsistence (which they do), you either lie to them or end up shopping around for a specialist insurer who will do you a policy with an exemption for subsistence/settlement.

Even though settlement is expected and normal in 250 year old stone walls.

I'm hoping someone here tells me I've got it wrong and names an amenable insurer...

The specialist was willing to consider insuring for s&s if I gave them the whole surveyors report, but no good can come of that. The survey on an old building is in parts informed guesswork and is erring on the side of caution.

In reply to wintertree:


I found DirectLine surprisingly reasonable when I spoke to them. They have rules such as not insuring underpinning, ever. However, if it is long-standing settlement (I think nothing new in ten years was the requirement) they were happy to insure as normal and gave a good price. There is a note somewhere on their system that I spoke to them about it.

In reply to Andy Dines:

If an old property then some degree of settlement is expected and should not be a major issue.

In Insurer terms there is a big difference between settlement and subsidence. In simple terms settlement is normal building movement, over time and isn't normally covered by your policy. Subsidence is movement due to an external cause - trees, drains etc - and is covered under a policy, though with a hefty excess and they would want to know at underwriting stage if the property had suffered a subsidence problem previously and has the cause been addressed. Mining subsidence is something different again, and usually not dealt with by Insurers directly.

I'm sure your surveyor will be able to give you the advice you need, but be very wary of mixing the two terms when speaking with your insurers.

Keith

In reply to wintertree:

Thanks - surveyor has suggested I follow this up with vendors and ask for details of their current insurers/premiums. Waiting to hear back!

True, the surveyor always has to cover himself for worst case and as you say, a fair degree of guesswork involved! I had an "off the record" conversation with him and he's confident it's not an issue, it's just a case of the potentially lower value of the house.

In reply to MG:

Thanks, good to know about 10 year rule!

In reply to KeithWakeley:




Thanks, good info to have!

In reply to Andy Dines: you stated at the start that property in the area normally goes above the asking price. I would suggest that. Trying to reduce the price will lose you the property .

In reply to MG:

Interesting, thanks for your post. So just another 8 years...

In reply to Andy Dines:

By way of reassurance, we live in a house built by a builder in 1947. The survey we had done when we bought it in 2007 showed up a 'bulge' in an outer wall. I've never been able to spot this myself and although, alarmed then I'm not now.

The bathroom floor also slopes downwards by as much as an inch or two, caused by subsidence of an internal wall. That too is of no concern now - we don't play marbles in the bathroom and the bath was put in level anyway so its no big deal.

And take his Victorian house built in my local town of Whitby. It too is still occupied and has been up a 100 years or more. It makes live interesting. https://www.facebook.com/1599353963684056/photos/1602710146681771/

In reply to Dave Perry:

Something about that crooked house doesn't look right, if you straightened it up the windows wouldn't be anywhere near level.

In reply to gethin_allen:

It stands on a shale cliff overlooking the harbour. Its been that for as long as I can remember. There were a couple of others that have been rebuilt over the years, but this one is the only one left. Over the years owners have tried to 'square up the windows' a little but its never going to be right. I believe the floor is level. Well sort of. At least if anything falls on the floor you know which corner it ends up at. It is now a holiday rental property.