Premier Bond - and water ingress due to structural defects

makeorbrake

Hi all. I'm in the very last year of the 10 year Premier Bond on my house. I've got a series (as in multiple) hairline cracks along the gable wall. It's precisely the wall that takes the hit in terms of the weather i.e. driving rain when we get the most inclement of weather.


Anyways, I'm now experiencing water ingress - resulting in mould on the interior surface of that wall.

What's the chances I'm covered by this?

I have only started to look at it - and will try and dig out the documentation. I did a quick google and I'm fearful for what I read. If its correct, it stated that cover for "water ingress" was for a duration of 5 years - with cover for "structural defects" at 10 years.


IF the above is true, then I understand I'm out of luck as regards 'water ingress'. However, is there a grey area here? Surely the water ingress is as a direct result of what - when all those hairline cracks are taken into account together) - amounts to a fundamental structural defect??


I'd really appreciate comments from anyone with experience in this area.

Ray Palmer

An engineer is really the only person who can say for sure. Hairline cracks are kind of normal and by no means indicate a structural fault. You simply need a structural survey and a professional opinion on what is happening.

miss no stars

Hairline cracks are not usually considered to be structural defects. http://www.bre.co.uk/page.jsp?id=3356

However, when you say hairline, how big do you mean?

If they truly are hairline I can't see a claim being successful but by all means try. Your first step is to have an engineer look at it.

Also, there's no guarantee that it's the cracks causing the damp problem. There could be other problems. Hence, go talk to an engineer.

makeorbrake

Hi all. Thanks for your comments. I get what you are saying re. an engineer. However, I'm coming at this from a totally different perspective. I want to establish if there is cover from Premier Bond or not.

Whilst I havn't engaged an engineer, I've talked to a number of people in the trade - and they are all pointing towards the source of the water ingress being the cracks.


I will ultimately get an engineer in to carry out a structural survey. However, there's little point in me doing that if Premier Bond are not going to cover it.

miss no stars wrote:

Hairline cracks are not usually considered to be structural defects. http://www.bre.co.uk/page.jsp?id=3356

However, when you say hairline, how big do you mean?

pic 1
pic2

And a closer look at same:
pic3
pic4
pic5
pic6
pic 7

As you can see, there are a series of 'lines' running horizontally. I understand completely that hairline cracks as such wouldn't be classified as a structural defect. However, if we were to assume that they are responsible for water ingress, does that give them a different classification? My dilema then is - is this looked at purely in terms of water ingress? Can this be viewed as a structural issue that will cause water ingress (whilst I take responsibility for any existing water ingress internally myself)? I hope that makes sense but what I'm trying to establish is whether I stand any reasonable chance of getting this covered via Premier bond.

miss no stars

The BRE digest I linked to is basically how cracks are assessed. If any of the cracks are over 5mm in width they're deemed to be structural, be it serviceability or strength. They're certainly visible so I wouldn't be inclined to call them hairline - a hairline crack wouldn't be visible from that distance. (Hairline cracks are less than 0.1mm in width, have a look at how small a tenth of a mm on a ruler is). If you look at the category descriptions it might help you figure out which category they're in. Are doors and windows sticking? Have these only just appeared or have they been there a long time? It may be easier to pursue the cracking than the consequent water ingress. It looks like just filling them would fix the problem though so I don't know how much joy you'd have with the premier bond.

I can't give you advice on whether to pursue it with them. Personally I'd chance it but I wouldn't be volunteering to accept responsibility for anything. Ask for more than you really want and all that... If the cracks aren't growing the fix could be as simple as filling the cracks, in which case I don't know if you could successfully argue a problem with the structure. If they are growing, you'll need to get to the root of the cause, which is back to the problem of being in the last year of the guarantee.

makeorbrake

miss no stars wrote: »

Are doors and windows sticking?

No, definitely not - so any issue is not to that extreme.

miss no stars wrote: »

Have these only just appeared or have they been there a long time?

I have not been very conscious of it - as I guess they have 'crept' up over the 9.5 years - so they have definitely gotten bigger in that timeframe.

I guess initially I would have thought they just needed a bit of filling prior to painting (as you can see, it's overdue a paint!). However, as you can see, there's quite a lot of it now. Someone suggested I needed to clean the cracks out and fill them with a metal based filler. However, that's not an inconsiderable piece of work now. I'd also need to have one of those scaffolding units in place - there's too much of it to do off of a ladder.

miss no stars wrote:

I can't give you advice on whether to pursue it with them. Personally I'd chance it but I wouldn't be volunteering to accept responsibility for anything. Ask for more than you really want and all that... If the cracks aren't growing the fix could be as simple as filling the cracks, in which case I don't know if you could successfully argue a problem with the structure.

I have to get my hands on the policy - which may take some time - as it looks like the bank have it (who knows how long it will take to get a copy from them - but that's another story). I guess what I'm concerned about is that if I just say they're cracks, then they'll say, sure that's not structural. If I then say they've been responsible for water ingress, are they going to disqualify my claim on the basis that water ingress isn't covered (have yet to check the policy but have been led to believe that cover for 'water ingress' extends for a duration no longer than 5 years). I don't need them to deal with any internal damage (I'd like them to - but if not covered, i'm happy to forego this) if they take responsibility for the external structural defect.


I know I may be going round in circles a bit here - but as with any type of insurance, you have to have all your ducks in a row before tackling a claim. No disrespect to Premier Bond (have yet to have had any contact with them) but generally speaking, for any insurance type product, the insurer usually does their best to minimise their exposure.

miss no stars

makeorbrake wrote: »

No, definitely not - so any issue is not to that extreme.

I have not been very conscious of it - as I guess they have 'crept' up over the 9.5 years - so they have definitely gotten bigger in that timeframe.

I guess initially I would have thought they just needed a bit of filling prior to painting (as you can see, it's overdue a paint!). However, as you can see, there's quite a lot of it now. Someone suggested I needed to clean the cracks out and fill them with a metal based filler. However, that's not an inconsiderable piece of work now. I'd also need to have one of those scaffolding units in place - there's too much of it to do off of a ladder.



I have to get my hands on the policy - which may take some time - as it looks like the bank have it (who knows how long it will take to get a copy from them - but that's another story). I guess what I'm concerned about is that if I just say they're cracks, then they'll say, sure that's not structural. If I then say they've been responsible for water ingress, are they going to disqualify my claim on the basis that water ingress isn't covered (have yet to check the policy but have been led to believe that cover for 'water ingress' extends for a duration no longer than 5 years). I don't need them to deal with any internal damage (I'd like them to - but if not covered, i'm happy to forego this) if they take responsibility for the external structural defect.


I know I may be going round in circles a bit here - but as with any type of insurance, you have to have all your ducks in a row before tackling a claim. No disrespect to Premier Bond (have yet to have had any contact with them) but generally speaking, for any insurance type product, the insurer usually does their best to minimise their exposure.

I honestly think you need an engineer on your side. It could be that the mortar used was too strong and hasn't allowed enough flexing and thus has cracked and is now allowing water in. An engineer will be able to arrange for testing to determine if this (for example) is the cause. You could argue that's a structural problem and the water ingress made you aware of it. But ultimately, if you have a claim against them with an engineer backing you up it's harder for them to dispute. Not impossible, but it gives you more fire-power.

And as I said, cracks can be structural depending on the size and nature of them. They're often one of the biggest indicators of a structural problem. The normal way of assessing them is BRE digest 251, but their classification is only a guideline and engineering judgement has to be used. According to them, a Cat 3 crack (over 5mm) is structural and 0-2 aren't. But do cracks appear and immediately become 5mm or more? That's why you need someone who can assess the cause of the cracking to argue your case. I imagine that at 9.5 years in, Premier Bond are going to fight tooth and nail to not have to do a tap here...

Victor

Moved from Accommodation & Property

Moderator

makeorbrake

I've now requested a copy of the Premier Bond Certificate and Premier Bond Policy from the lien-holder (i.e. the bank) - so I guess that's going to take a bit of time before I actually get my hands on it. I also made one tentative enquiry with a structural engineer - but got no call back :-( I guess I'll re-double my efforts in this regard when I get a hold of - and read - the policy itself in the first instance.


In the meantime, I'd be grateful for anyone's input in two respects;


1. Based on the info provided and the pics that I linked to, would anyone else like to hazard a guess as to the likely cause? I think it's interesting to note that practically ALL of the cracks are perfectly horizontal (there's one exception which I don't think I provided a pic for - a crack of approximately 1 meter towards the base of the wall - which is vertical). I've been reading up on this - and I note that there are many suggestions suggesting that horizontal cracking (although not necessarily the case...) is more likely to be structural in nature. There seems to be some suggestion that it may implicate failure of wall ties. Would that be applicable to a property that's nine years old? I have no experience in this area but I would have thought wall ties would last considerably longer than this??


2. Anyone have any experience in dealing with Premier Bond? What were they like to deal with? I don't suppose anyone has had to approach them with anything similar? Failing that, I don't suppose anyone has submitted a claim to Homebond based on cracking of this nature? I know Homebond is not the relevant party or guarantee here - but just curious.



I fully accept I need to get professional advice and will do so - just as soon as I possibly can. In the meantime, I don't think it's any harm for me to consider all or any of the above - with your suggestions.


Thanks in advance for any input anyone can provide.

makeorbrake

It looks like this has been caused by mortar on wall ties - bridging water from the outer leaf to the inner leaf. To find out definitively, I'd have to get someone with a camera to drill a hole and check OR take a block out of the wall. That's the professional opinion I got. The guarantee covers defects for the first 5 years and structural guarantee is 10 years (currently on year 9). Is this 'structural'?

It's been suggested that I could try to pursue the engineer that signed off on the property and their insurance (assuming they still have insurance!) rather than premier guarantee.

I'm unsure how forcefully to pursue this - as going legal is an expensive business. The opinion I got was from an engineers perspective - whether its worthwhile to pursue legally is another matter entirely.

I'll get premier bond out now anyway - and see what they have to say on the matter.


Anyone got any thoughts on this?

BryanF

Did you self build? Or had you a main contractor ?

makeorbrake

BryanF wrote: »

Did you self build? Or had you a main contractor ?

Bought off plans from a developer. Developer was struck off by the companies registration office 12 months ago.

makeorbrake

Just to add....


The engineer wasn't able to provide a definitive cause of the cracks on the external surface of the gable wall....only to say that they were 'abnormal' - and certainly not settlement cracks by their nature. He did mention the possibility of pyrite being at play - but said that was an outside shot. I'm 40 miles away from the nearest known source of pyrite. I guess it's not impossible that the blocks contained it - will have to do some research as to where the blocks came from. However, there doesn't seem to be any other classic indicators of pyrite damage otherwise.


In the absence of any other explanation, can anyone suggest a potential cause - as I'm still left wondering despite having gone and paid for professional advice?? Mortar on the wall ties explains away the transfer of water from the outer leaf to the inner leaf. However, the cause of the cracks in the first instance - which are allowing the water to penetrate the outside leaf - remains an unknown....


Furthermore, it was mentioned that I may need to get someone with a camera to drill a hole in the wall - and check inside to determine with 100% certain that it is in fact mortar on the wall ties that is at play. Anyone know where I can source someone to do this??

PaleRider

It's near impossible to impart with any useful advice - but I'll have a go.

It may be that even if the wall ties were clean - they may still allow water ingress. If this wall is exposed to the south/southwest then it may be that the correct waterproofing detail was not carried out. Walls exposed need to be detailed correctly so as not all passage of water driven by the rain - can be avoided.
The plastering method the plasterers would have employed would have required joints every 1.5m approx. This may have caused the horizontal cracks - working from partially set to fresh area of plaster applied. The works depends on for example having three plasterers and two labourers.
Also it look like the plaster finish is called nap - this plaster if not the best at avoiding cracks - because of the nature of working required by sponging. If the wall was exposed to the sun when plastering would not help either.

It may be down to poor plastering.

Also walls like yours need to be painted and these minor cracks filled. (Weather shield paint)
The house needs to be protected. Try out the cheapest thing first.

You have already sound advice from other posters. My advice is a wild card.

makeorbrake

PaleRider wrote: »

It may be that even if the wall ties were clean - they may still allow water ingress. If this wall is exposed to the south/southwest then it may be that the correct waterproofing detail was not carried out. Walls exposed need to be detailed correctly so as not all passage of water driven by the rain - can be avoided.

Yes, that wall is pointed towards S/SW. It takes the full brunt of driving rain in inclement weather.

PaleRider wrote: »

The plastering method the plasterers would have employed would have required joints every 1.5m approx. This may have caused the horizontal cracks - working from partially set to fresh area of plaster applied. The works depends on for example having three plasterers and two labourers.

If this was the case, I guess I have no route to get this covered? i.e. this would be deemed a defect rather than a structural issue?

PaleRider wrote: »

Also walls like yours need to be painted and these minor cracks filled. (Weather shield paint)
The house needs to be protected. Try out the cheapest thing first.

Yes, I accept that - and it is overdue painting - and of course, I intend to fill the cracks....but didn't want to do so without figuring out what was causing same. i.e. I don't want to find that simply filling in the cracks kicks the can down the road - with the problem potentially getting worse (depending of course upon what the actual cause is) in the fullness of time.

PaleRider wrote: »

You have already sound advice from other posters. My advice is a wild card.

Ok, well others have suggested I get professional advice - I've done that and that advice was inconclusive....

makeorbrake

Got a forensic engineer out - and not really any the wiser as a result. He said, could be pyoritic (even though I have no evidence of that internally in any way), could be a leak from a radiator - which makes no sense as the areas of damp are well above the radiator.


I've got the claim form from Premier Bond - will send it in - and see what comes from it.


They say that I have to inform my regular home insurance provider - that I'm obliged that I'm submitting a claim to Premier Bond. Is this going to affect my insurance premium? I'm just after renewing my insurance with a different insurer ...doesn't kick in for another 2 weeks though...