Property Information Form 3rd Edition - subsidence

[PinkDalek]

Assume Freehold property in England.

I've downloaded the Law Society specimen TA6 from https://www.lawsociety.org.uk/support-s ... specimens/ and the Explanatory Notes but have only looked briefly.

Under which section should a seller disclose a prior subsidence history?

I can see underpinning mentioned under 5.1(h) but that only seems relevant for continuing Guarantees and warranties.

Similarly 6 Insurance talks of the seller having been subject to abnormal rises in premiums and claims. What if the seller didn't make a subsidence claim, as the event occurred prior to their purchase, and they themselves haven't seen any abnormal rises in premium.

If the seller isn't obliged to disclose, how does the buyer find out about a prior subsidence claim before exchange of contract?

If of relevance, I'm asking on behalf of someone else, who didn't discover the prior history until after exchange or maybe completion (details somewhat vague).

[pochisoldi]

Looks like there is nowhere to disclose previous subsidence.

As I see it, the forms are there to collect information allow the purchaser or their lender to take a view on any risk to the property.
The forms aren't intended for you to disclose what seems to be a lower than expected risk of subsidence.

If there has been no subsidence during your period of ownership, and you want to make it clear that the property is at lower than expected risk of subsidence, then answer the questions on the TA form as they are asked, and disclose the additional information on a separate sheet, and ask your conveyancer if they think the additional information should be passed to the purchaser (=pass the buck onto them) prior to the sale.

The other alternative is to complete the form, and if any further requests come in, disclose the "good news" information as required.

PochiSoldi

[PinkDalek]

Looks like there is nowhere to disclose previous subsidence.

Thanks for your reply, most helpful in confirming what I'd seen.

The situation I was asked about was where the buyer has now discovered that there has been an historical subsidence claim and thus the insurance premiums are unsurprisingly said to be somewhat high.

I suggested the buyer had a look at what had been disclosed on purchase but only later did I look at the specimen TA6. I was surprised that the question wasn't specifically asked of the seller (who may have only owned for a couple of years) but I suppose such a question could easily have been added by a competent conveyancer or a surveyor may have noticed some works had been undertaken, if the restoration works had not completely disguised prior cracks, underpinning works etc.

Would it be normal for a competent conveyancer to ask for the claims history over the prior (say) 25 years or to be given permission to enquire of the current building insurers?

In our situation, no connection with the property above, the seller disclosed a prior subsidence claim she'd made and the 25 year builder's Guarantee of the underpinning works came with the bundle. Presumable if such a Guarantee existed for the property I am asking about, that should have come to the buyer at some stage.

[k333]

There is a central database for this sort of thing available to insurers, so I don't think they don't need an answer to this question.

- K

[k333]

"Even if the problem was decades ago and your property has been underpinned, providers don’t want to know

Homeowners who have claimed for subsidence on their insurance are stuck paying expensive premiums to existing providers because no other insurers will offer them cover."

- K

[PinkDalek]

"Even if the problem was decades ago and your property has been underpinned, providers don’t want to know

Homeowners who have claimed for subsidence on their insurance are stuck paying expensive premiums to existing providers because no other insurers will offer them cover."

Thanks but I'm unsure what your point is nor from whom you are quoting. As it happens we have successfully moved insurer but that isn't the subject of this topic.