-
Hi all and welcome to TheWoodHaven2 brought into the 21st Century, kicking and screaming! We all have Alasdair to thank for the vast bulk of the heavy lifting to get us here, no more so than me because he's taken away a huge burden of responsibility from my shoulders and brought us to this new shiny home, with all your previous content (hopefully) still intact! Please peruse and feed back. There is still plenty to do, like changing the colour scheme, adding the banner graphic, tweaking the odd setting here and there so I have added a new thread in the 'Technical Issues, Bugs and Feature Requests' forum for you to add any issues you find, any missing settings or just anything you'd like to see added/removed from the feature set that Xenforo offers. We will get to everything over the coming weeks so please be patient, but add anything at all to the thread I mention above and we promise to get to them over the next few days/weeks/months. In the meantime, please enjoy!
Subsidence
- Thread starter RogerS
- Start date
Steve Maskery
Old Oak
Roger. Sell up. Cut your losses. Buy a motorhome. Go.
S
S
duke
Old Oak
Are these cracks which have grown since moving in Roger?
DaveL
Old Oak
Big roll of gaffer tape should fix it.
More serious, I think Steve has the answer.
More serious, I think Steve has the answer.
fuse
Nordic Pine
- Joined
- Sep 4, 2025
- Messages
- 517
- Reaction score
- 395
- Location
- Herefordshire UK
- Name
- Martin
- LOCATION
- Uk
Took me three years and several price cuts eqivalent to 40% to sell a house with a big crack down one wall.
Best of luck with it Roger and look after your sanity as a priority
Best of luck with it Roger and look after your sanity as a priority
Afraid so. There is a massive subsidence issue in the UK as a result of the summer weather. One insurance company was filing around four claims a day. This year, it is a hundred. It will be six weeks roughly before they even get round to considering at our claim.
Doug
Old Oak
Are you on clay Roger?
A mate got a lovely house a few years ago for a bargain price due to large cracks particularly at the front of the house, there were a couple of very large trees in the front garden which he cut down not long after moving in mainly because his wife didn’t like them, the upshot has been that the cracks haven’t moved since.
A mate got a lovely house a few years ago for a bargain price due to large cracks particularly at the front of the house, there were a couple of very large trees in the front garden which he cut down not long after moving in mainly because his wife didn’t like them, the upshot has been that the cracks haven’t moved since.
Yes we are but no close trees or shrubs.
Lons
Old Oak
There can be a downside to that Doug, hopefully not in your mate's case.
Large trees takea a huge volume of water out of the ground and when you cut them down that of course stops so not such an issue in dry conditions but a very wet winter means the water stays in the ground and you can get flooding, soil erosion, clay heave or both.
Damned if you do it, damned if you don't sometimes.
Lurker
Old Oak
Just a thought regarding the cracks and the recent drought.
Where does the run off from the roof go?
Soak away, down the sewer or what?
My thinking is waterlogged foundations in the winter and dried out more during the summer.
Probably a load of BS on my part.
Where does the run off from the roof go?
Soak away, down the sewer or what?
My thinking is waterlogged foundations in the winter and dried out more during the summer.
Probably a load of BS on my part.
Some goes into the septic tank... some into a soakaway..some small rooves probably into a soakaway but volumes relatively low.
What foundations ?
So here is my take on the ‘system’ so far in case anyone else has the misfortune to be in the same position.
The number of subsidence claims has exploded. It was bad last year but this year it is even worse. The insurance company outsources all the claims to an external company as do most of them. Talking to (by chance) a senior investigator at the claims handling company’s…last year was bad but this year is worse. They usually get four claims a day from the insurance company we are with. At the moment it is closer to 100.
So if you were an insurance company what would you do? You’d outsource to a company whose USP was that they would save you money on claims. As ours has done. So far so good. From an insured perspective all very slick. So Step 1…they send out a surveyor to view the damage. To take photos and videos etc and then to report back and upload their photos into the system. Then some weeks later, your case is reviewed by a senior surveyor/engineer and on to the next stage. If they accept the claim.
So chummy rolls up 45 minutes late (ok) but no apology. Listens. Dictates an initial report into his phone and asks if I agree with what he’s said. So far so good. He then goes on to take some photos and some videos. He departs. These photos and videos give validity to the claim
and will be reviewed by a senior surveyor.
A day or so later, I can see his photos online from their system. But can I see the videos? Not available. So I push. And push. Very reluctant to make them available. So I push. Then push some more as those who know me well appreciate that I don’t suffer bullshit gladly and can smell a fob off a mile away.
Finally I get to see those videos and can see why they don’t want me to see them. The video trivialises all the issues. Basic message to go onto the file is Nothing to see here…claim rejected.
So videos duly reviewed and commented on by me and the Missus (she’s the one with the smarts). That all took the better part of two days to do it bulletproof. Watch this space.
The number of subsidence claims has exploded. It was bad last year but this year it is even worse. The insurance company outsources all the claims to an external company as do most of them. Talking to (by chance) a senior investigator at the claims handling company’s…last year was bad but this year is worse. They usually get four claims a day from the insurance company we are with. At the moment it is closer to 100.
So if you were an insurance company what would you do? You’d outsource to a company whose USP was that they would save you money on claims. As ours has done. So far so good. From an insured perspective all very slick. So Step 1…they send out a surveyor to view the damage. To take photos and videos etc and then to report back and upload their photos into the system. Then some weeks later, your case is reviewed by a senior surveyor/engineer and on to the next stage. If they accept the claim.
So chummy rolls up 45 minutes late (ok) but no apology. Listens. Dictates an initial report into his phone and asks if I agree with what he’s said. So far so good. He then goes on to take some photos and some videos. He departs. These photos and videos give validity to the claim
and will be reviewed by a senior surveyor.
A day or so later, I can see his photos online from their system. But can I see the videos? Not available. So I push. And push. Very reluctant to make them available. So I push. Then push some more as those who know me well appreciate that I don’t suffer bullshit gladly and can smell a fob off a mile away.
Finally I get to see those videos and can see why they don’t want me to see them. The video trivialises all the issues. Basic message to go onto the file is Nothing to see here…claim rejected.
So videos duly reviewed and commented on by me and the Missus (she’s the one with the smarts). That all took the better part of two days to do it bulletproof. Watch this space.
Last edited:
duke
Old Oak
F ing scam, I worked for an insurance restoration company for a few years where most claims were due to water damage and never an issue ok ing the claim but as soon as foundation subsidence was the issue you had to fight with the insurer. I have seen many written reports which gloss over the problem causing denial of claim.
Lurker
Old Oak
Who is your insurer, Roger?
I’d rather not say until it’s all done and dusted
MattS
Nordic Pine
They look bad Roger, bad luck after only just moving. We are watching cracks after this summer, deciding whether to discuss with the insurer. Not as bad as ours and limited to one internal block wall. I expected that things would be busy and tricky if we did go down that route.
Hypnotic Chimera
Seedling
- Joined
- Aug 11, 2025
- Messages
- 47
- Reaction score
- 29
- Name
- Mark H
- LOCATION
- nr Lincon
Aw crap, I am saddened but not surprised by the insurance mobsters trying to wriggle out of a claim by any and all means at their disposal. Finger crossed you are one that gets through the substantiation process and are actually successful at the claim. Seems cut and dried to me. If you insure a building and the insurer accepts the premiums on the terms that they will cover significant damage - they ought to be paying out to cover the costs of the damage. It's what we all pay insurance for - and nobody should care if the company taking money for protection "suffers" financially for providing the financial cover against the risks insured against. Win some, lose some. That's what insurance is supposed to be for... A guaranteed profit is not the right of the insurer - it's supposed to balance us all out - and sometimes this is at the cost of the insurer - sometimes not. But Capitalism has lost sight of the collectivism of the notion of insurance.
Gill
Nordic Pine
Jeez, Roger. I’ve nothing substantive to contribute to this thread but I really feel for the awful situation you’re in.
Eric the Viking
Nordic Pine
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2020
- Messages
- 924
- Reaction score
- 373
I've been through this farce.
The huge issue is that there are a very limited number of structural surveyors in any given area, and they get the bulk of their work from insurers. It's nigh-on impossible to find one to work for a property owner, and in my limited experience they are happy to be very 'economical with the truth,' if to be honest would rock the boat. They all know each other, and you'll never find one that will go into bat against another, however egregious the breach of professional standards.
What seems an obvious cause can be explained away by any number of technical phrases, all leading towards doing less remedial work than is necessary. We even had 'surveyors' claiming work had been completed and inspected, when (a) the work wasn't done, and (b) they hadn't been near the place.
I had a tedious battle with our insurer, which was trying to prematurely close the file. It also refused to acknowlege damage that was obvious but which hadn't been taken into account at the time of the initial claim (I had pointed it out but the surveyor had ignored it).
The work done didn't, in my lay opinion, fix the cause. We're on clay soil, and tree roots were blamed, when in reality it was poor foundations and liquefaction from next door's broken sewage pipes. Underpinning was the right answer, however that is hugely expensive and was ruled out by the insurer before proper monitoring and analysis had happened.
Furthermore, the remedial action that was taken, I now know to have been virtually pointless (with the benefit of hindsight and better understanding of Edwardian building practices). Sure enough, many cracks have returned in identical places to the original ones.
Twenty-five or so years on, this probably isn't over. As far as the insurers are concerned, the property has no issues: I beg to differ. Soon we will want to downsize, and I am not prepared to take the financial hit of a disadvantageous survey once we put the property on the market. I am weighing up how to proceed, but it may have to be the legal route.
I realise this isn't encouraging news. The upside is that old houses are a lot more adaptable than newer ones. For example, lime mortar (used here) has flexibility that Portland cement doesn't have.
You may have a big task to fix yours up to be smart, but it is unlikely to demolish itself.
I wish I could be more optimistic on your behalf.
E.
The huge issue is that there are a very limited number of structural surveyors in any given area, and they get the bulk of their work from insurers. It's nigh-on impossible to find one to work for a property owner, and in my limited experience they are happy to be very 'economical with the truth,' if to be honest would rock the boat. They all know each other, and you'll never find one that will go into bat against another, however egregious the breach of professional standards.
What seems an obvious cause can be explained away by any number of technical phrases, all leading towards doing less remedial work than is necessary. We even had 'surveyors' claiming work had been completed and inspected, when (a) the work wasn't done, and (b) they hadn't been near the place.
I had a tedious battle with our insurer, which was trying to prematurely close the file. It also refused to acknowlege damage that was obvious but which hadn't been taken into account at the time of the initial claim (I had pointed it out but the surveyor had ignored it).
The work done didn't, in my lay opinion, fix the cause. We're on clay soil, and tree roots were blamed, when in reality it was poor foundations and liquefaction from next door's broken sewage pipes. Underpinning was the right answer, however that is hugely expensive and was ruled out by the insurer before proper monitoring and analysis had happened.
Furthermore, the remedial action that was taken, I now know to have been virtually pointless (with the benefit of hindsight and better understanding of Edwardian building practices). Sure enough, many cracks have returned in identical places to the original ones.
Twenty-five or so years on, this probably isn't over. As far as the insurers are concerned, the property has no issues: I beg to differ. Soon we will want to downsize, and I am not prepared to take the financial hit of a disadvantageous survey once we put the property on the market. I am weighing up how to proceed, but it may have to be the legal route.
I realise this isn't encouraging news. The upside is that old houses are a lot more adaptable than newer ones. For example, lime mortar (used here) has flexibility that Portland cement doesn't have.
You may have a big task to fix yours up to be smart, but it is unlikely to demolish itself.
I wish I could be more optimistic on your behalf.
E.
Last edited:
I went probing with the knife today.
Front Hall
Bedroom - LH and RH walls
I've also pointed out that since the wing containing the bedroom and front hall is separating from the rest of the house then there is the risk that the central heating pipes feeding the radiator in the bedroom could have a joint fail under the increased tension thus causing flooding or drips.
I then asked them for their advice thus putting the ball firmly in their court.
Of course what I am hoping for is that they finally realise that there really is quite a lot of continuing movement and so push us up the priority list for attention.
Front Hall
Bedroom - LH and RH walls
I've also pointed out that since the wing containing the bedroom and front hall is separating from the rest of the house then there is the risk that the central heating pipes feeding the radiator in the bedroom could have a joint fail under the increased tension thus causing flooding or drips.
I then asked them for their advice thus putting the ball firmly in their court.
Of course what I am hoping for is that they finally realise that there really is quite a lot of continuing movement and so push us up the priority list for attention.