Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Does anyone know: is 'underpinning' a specific area of insurance trouble - by which I mean, not comparable to, say, having had a subsidence claim but it only resulting in (relatively) minor repairs?



Are are you ripe for the picking if there's any mention of subsidence whatsoever?

I think underpinning is particularly problematic, as it indicates that the movement has been significant.


I would be interested to hear from anyone who has managed to get insurance on a previously underpinned house, and an indication of how extortionate the premium tends to be.

We has a subsidence claim 10yrs ago. Only superficial repair work needed and no underpinning. Now we have contents insurance which does not cover subsidence damage. Policy with Zurich. I have never tried to change the buildings insurance (NatWest) and am sure we pay an extortionate amount because of the subsidence and two other claims we have made (burst pipe and legal claim).
We purchased a house in the area last year which was underpinned. Eventually managed to get insurance through http://www.hardtoinsure.co.uk/. The annual fee isnt too bad, probably 250-300 more than normal house insurance and covers against any new subsidence, but not the old underpinning work.

Jeremy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I think underpinning is particularly problematic,

> as it indicates that the movement has been

> significant.


One of the reasons premiums can remain high is that underpinning isn't necessarily a cure for subsidence. If subsidence is caused by landslip rather than heave, for example, underpinning won't make any difference. Landslip subsidence is a problems on the land under Dawson's heights and led to the demolition of much of Dunstan's Road. Some details here:


http://www.dulwichsociety.com/newsletters/43-spring-2006/213-dawsons-hill-before-daswons-heights


It's one of the reasons that buildings insurance premiums for SE22 are far higher than the national average.

having been underpinned then massively overcharged for years by our insurance company because no-one else would touch us, I discovered that things have changed and lots of companies will. I'm now with Aviva - they insisted on a surveyors report, which cost about ?400 but we then saved over ?1000 on this year alone- and they threw in free contents cover too

Lynne

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

    • Comparing to Week 11 last season, the table is a lot more compact, even the distance between top and bottom is half of what it was when RC was a runaway leader on 90+ points. Also worth remembering there are 25 or so game weeks left, so any points difference can slowly be eroded away. Week 11 points...   Week 11 table....      
    • Some people don’t like it, some people will love it.  It doesn’t bother me at all. In fact I quite like it. I do not like assumptions you make about ‘elderly people’. 
    • This concerns me as it essentially disregards the significant number of people who do experience a high level of disruption because of the event.  While it's great that you personally are not inconvenienced, this is absolutely not the case for a great many residents many of whom are elderly or who do not have private gardens and rely on the park.   Great that you have a PHD in ecology but might also be worth reading the report into the environmental impact of Gala which paints a rather different story to yours. This comes round every year with a request to extend. This seems to me to be a distraction to steer everyone away from the main event. However, Southwark Council and Councillor Catherine Rose in particular must bear responsibility for what is effectively privatisation of our community space.  I requested data on the results of the last consultations and had to use a subject access request to get it.  In 2024 the council received 111 responses of which 108 were negative. The event went ahead. Last year they received 136 of which 82 were negative and 34 said only with major changes (which did not happen).   The impact of the event on the community and the enviroment is well-documented.  The council has so far refused to supply data on the demographics of the attendees but it doesn't take much to work out that this is largely single under 30s from out of borough judging by the steady stream of people from the station.   Please do take time to protest and also to email Events as we try to hold the council accountable for their disregard of the public consultation results. Appendix 1.pdf 2025 consultation.pdf
    • 2 x 2 cubes if anyone has one going 🙏 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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