Historical subsidence advice.

The in-laws dropped a surprise on the family this week by telling us that they want to move out of their 2 bedroom bungalow (always going to be their last property) which they are finding increasingly difficult to keep on top of due to ill health and purchase a smaller wardened accommodation. They have the money to purchase the 2nd property outright and so selling their current bungalow isn't an immediate concern but at some point they will want to sell. Back in 1999 about 6 years after moving in they found that the front porch which they had built was starting to drop on the front corner, the property had to be underpinned and the cause which was a huge tree in the copse to the right to them was removed. Since then there hasn't been a single issue as the FIL being involved in the building trade all of his life has kept his eye on it. Does any body know what complications this will cause to any future sale or letting? We've read that you’ll likely have to accept a 30-40% reduction in the value due to this. Does anyone have any first hand experience of this?

I don’t see why there would any future issues with sales or lettings.

If it is as you have said and the house has been underpinned and no further issues have been seen since, then the issue is surely now resolved no?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tango

I don’t see why there would any future issues with sales or lettings.

If it is as you have said and the house has been underpinned and no further issues have been seen since, then the issue is surely now resolved no?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

Quite but then would you buy a house which has been underpinned is a question i keep asking myself.

Ah, I now understand where you are coming from.

I have purchased properties in the past that have been affected by subsidence, some worse than others.

Those that were underpinned and corrected I have not managed to negotiate any sort of meaningful discount on, so in your case I think you would be nowhere near having to offer the kind of percentage reduction you mentioned in your post.

For those that did not have remedial works completed, it is true that a reduced asking price is quite common. However this is usually due to the sale usually being a cash only purchase as most banks won't lend against such properties.

That said if the property is in a sought after area, even with it being a cash only purchase I have never seen them go for 40-50% below market value.

It may be different depending on where you are, I merely share my personal experience with you.

As an addition to my post, I personally prefer a house that has been underpinned to one that hasn't, particularly if it is in an area that is known to have a subsidence history. The underpinned property is in an infinitely better state structurally to those that have not had underpinning.

If you saw the foundations of some of the older houses that exist in the UK you would pay extra for houses that had been underpinned correctly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tango

Ah, I now understand where you are coming from.

I have purchased properties in the past that have been affected by subsidence, some worse than others.

Those that were underpinned and corrected I have not managed to negotiate any sort of meaningful discount on, so in your case I think you would be nowhere near having to offer the kind of percentage reduction you mentioned in your post.

For those that did not have remedial works completed, it is true that a reduced asking price is quite common. However this is usually due to the sale usually being a cash only purchase as most banks won't lend against such properties.

That said if the property is in a sought after area, even with it being a cash only purchase I have never seen them go for 40-50% below market value.

It may be different depending on where you are, I merely share my personal experience with you.

---

Thank you, my in-laws have also kept all info for the issues including invoices etc, I'm struggling to see how it could impact the price but I'm not in this game. Thanks again.

Not underpinned but my previous house was subject to heave due to trees in mine and neighbours property
I removed the trees and the internal and external cracks were repaired
We sold it last year and disclosed everything - buyers had a survey and there were no issues
House price didn’t appear to suffer

Mums house had subsidence in 1991.
Was underpinned - we still own the house and rent it out . No issues since . When we got a buy to let mortgage on it we didn’t have to disclose anything .

From that long ago I’l doubt they’d be any issue on the price .

Our house had subsidence caused by trees and had been underpinned on one corner. It’s quite common in London with clay soil. Didn’t bother us as an underpinned house is stronger than one that isn’t. We stayed with the same building insurance provider - Barclays I think - as it was easier but other than that no issues.

Should not be a problem if the underpinning was done well. I would get a specific survey done beforehand, then include it in the sale ad - with full price- no discounts.

I think you're worrying needlessly. As long as it doesn't affect mortgage company valuations I can't seeing it affecting a sale.

If however you're worried get an independent survey and give a copy to any serious buyer as it's the cost of this that would put off many from making an offer.

If it’s been remedied and the buyers survey picks up no issues, I don’t see how it would affect the current value at all?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RobDad

If it’s been remedied and the buyers survey picks up no issues, I don’t see how it would affect the current value at all?

---

Yep as was my thoughts, however…..https://propertypressonline.co.uk/20...alue-property/
One of many similar

I’d understand that if the whole area had a history of subsidence issues. If it was a big tree which was removed a few years ago - so the obvious source of the issue has been permanently removed - I still don’t see an issue. I’d speak to an estate agent when you’re getting a valuation and see what they say. I don’t see how it can be an issue if the prospective owner gets a survey done and it shows no current problem. It’s not like buying a car that’s been in a big accident is it?

The issue regarding the value is primarily impacted by peoples perception and lack of understanding, ie they are scared of the words 'subsidence' and underpinning' - even when the property in question may be more structurally stable than others nearby - as it has been repaired.
It will just simply scare some people away, therefore reducing your desirability at point of sale.

The second main issue is insurance cover, as there are insurers nowadays that just see the previous structural issues as a reason to increase your annual premiums or even refuse cover, as they prefer to concentrate on the 'run of the mill' customers.

The one issue may be around insurance. The original insurer is required by law to continue to offer insurance on the property but many others in the market may not insure it. We were considering a house that had some historical subsidence issues and were told around 70% of insurers wouldn't insure it. This puts off some buyers (myself included) but not others. Net net, I wouldn't expect a very big drop in value - but some accommodation on price might be required and it may take a tiny bit longer to sell

I’ve idly wondered in the past who insures houses that have recently/regularly been flooded. I live in a coastal area where there are plenty of gorgeous and very expensive properties that suffer flooding quite regularly. Wouldn’t touch one myself but clearly others are prepared to pay vast sums for the seaside views