historic non -progressive movement and insurance

[nik]

anyone got any advice on getting buildings insurance on a house that has from what the building surveyor described as

'historical long standing non-progressive movement , caused by old settlement of the building which is not considered significant and no structural remedial work has been done or deemed necessary" .

And the mortgage valuation report says "evidence of movement was observed in the form of past crack damage to main walling and uneven floors. This appears to be longstanding and non-progressive and the likelihood of further significant movement seems remote. no structural works are considered necessary'

Anytime I look at the online screen scrapers they always have a check box saying has your property suffered from 'ground movement / subsidence'. If this box is checked, then instantly all companies say absolutely no chance mate, your on your own.

with a house with historical movement, when you insure and are asked if there is sign of subsidence should you say yes or no ? would just like some advice on whether long standing movement is classed as subsidence and if its necessary to declare to an insurance company historical movement? And maybe a list of companies which may be able to help me. :wink:

would have though lots of you may have crossed this bridge as most old buildings in this country have signs of settlement

cheers Nik

 

[FamilyWiggs]

Historical and non-progressive? Depends on the age of the house - but I would be strongly inclined to not declare subsidence if it was me - certainly not in a checkbox that leads to automatic refusal. Historical and non-progressive could mean 300 years ago, which is hardly relevant to current risks, especially if you have a surveyor's report saying so.

You could always enter it freetext, so that the underwriter can look at it - or better still look for an insurer who understands old properties and speak to them not web-fill. This is probably the best advice with anything out of the ordinary - t'internet is fine for run of the mill stuff that easily fits into databases and algorithms. Most of what we do on here doesn't.

I haven't tried them, but many on here speak highly of NFU for insurance.

 

[Flyfisher]

I agree. You really need to speak to a company that understands older properties rather than rely on standard policies primarily intended for modern properties built to recognised standards. I found that many companies would not offer cover simply because of the age of our house.

I'm with the NFU for our part-timber-frame-part-rubble-wall-part-chalk-block house and it was not a problem. You get to speak with real people in a local office and they are very understanding about non-standard properties in my experience.

 

[Hatster]

Yes, it can actually be a great advantage - when people try to pester you to change your house insurance you snap back 'timber frame' and they shut up.

I recommend NFU too - they insure us, and have been very nice so far, though quite slow in getting a claim paid.

 

[Gareth Hughes]

I wonder who insures this?

 

[FamilyWiggs]

See - that's why you get 3 quotes and take up references; otherwise you get some cowboy like they did. :roll:

Bet it doesn't stay up for long...

 

[Gareth Hughes]

it only bent over for a look when a virgin arrived on her wedding day. It'll straighten up the next time one does.