Jump to content

Advice please - insurance after underpinning (due to extension not subsidence)


sdas111

Recommended Posts

We have recently completed our side return extension and in doing so, lowered the floor level in the kitchen. In order to do this, we had to underpin the existing party wall because it wasn't deep enough.


When looking at buildings insurance, the relevant question appears to be generic - along the lines of "has your property ever been underpinned?" Now that the answer to this is yes, I'm struggling to get quotes.


Has anyone else had this issue and where were you able to find insurance? Did it make a difference (or should it make a difference) that the underpinning was due to the extension rather then subsidence, for example?


I'd be grateful for any advice anyone has.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't advise on the specific issue, but I suggest you speak directly to an insurance broker, or possibly directly to insurance companies rather than filling in a list of questions online.


Though if you get a minion who just goes through the same list of questions, that will probably be as bad as trying to do it online ........


ETA: Or whoever did your underpinning may be able to advise, or possibly put you in contact with other people who have had the same thing done for the same reason?


Obviously (or at least I imagine that) the reason for the question is because insurance companies assume that any underpinning is done as a result of subsidence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have also had a wall underpinned (I prefer reinforced) as part of a kitchen extension because the original foundation wouldn't have been able to support the structural changes we were making. As I recall when I renewed my insurance the question mentioned underpinning in relation to subsidence rather than just underpinning. I would think that a large proportion of extensions would require some reinforcement to existing walls, especially Victorian houses, so I doubt it would affect your insurance.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • What would I do about cyclists?  The failed Tory manfesto commitment to train all kids was an excellent proposal.  Public information campaigns aimed at all road users, rather than singling some out, to more considerately share the road, as TfL have done, is welcome too. As for crunching vehicles.  I'd extend this to illegal ebikes, illegal e-scoooters (I think some local authorities have done this with the latter) but before that I would (a) legislate that the delivery companies move away from zero hours contracts to permanent employees and take responsibility for their training, vehicles and behaviour on the road.   More expensive takeaways are a price worth paying for safer roads and proper terms and conditions (b) legislate to register all illegal e-bikes and scooters so that when they are found on the road the retailer takes a hit, and clamp down on any grey markets.  If you buy an e scooter say from Halfords this comes with a disclaimer that it can only be used on private land with the owner's permission.
    • I know a lot of experts in the field and getting a franchise was a license to print money, that is why Virgin were so happy to spend lots of dosh challenging government ten years ago when they lost the West Coast franchise.  This will not be overnight, rather than when the franchise has come to the end. Government had previously taking over the operator of last resort when some TOCs screwed up. Good, at last some clear blue water between the parties.  Tories said they were going to do a halfway house, but I've not noticed.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_British_Railways   : "On 19 October 2022, Transport Secretary Anne-Marie Trevelyan announced that the Transport Bill which would have set up GBR would not go ahead in the current parliamentary session.[15] In February 2023, Transport Secretary Mark Harper re-affirmed the government's commitment to GBR and rail reform.[16] The 2023 King's speech announced the progression of a draft Rail Reform Bill which would enable the establishment of GBR, although it has not been timetabled in the Parliamentary programme.[5] The Transport Secretary Mark Harper later told the Transport Select Committee that the legislation was unlikely to reach Royal Assent within the 2023-2024 parliamentary session.[17]"
    • Can't help thinking that regardless of whether Joe wanted to be interviewed, the 'story' that Southwark News wanted to write just got a lot less interesting with 'tyre shop replaced with ... tyre shop'! 
    • Labour are proposing to nationalise the railways, (passenger trains but not fright)  Whilst it removes them from shareholders control, and potential profit chasing, is it workable or will it end up costing tax payers more in the long run?  On paper the idea is interesting but does it also need the profitable freight arm included to help reduce fares,? 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...