# Buying site with foundations laid,any risks?



## raven (6 Jan 2010)

Hi,

I'm interested in purchasing a site, which already has the foundations laid.
My understanding is that this is not totally abnormal, and the reason for laying the foundations would be to retain planning permission. 
Basically, there looks to be foundations and bases of walls, full with stones. The foundation looks to be in place at least a year or two, - if not more now.

I'm wondering  is there any danger that there could be faults that would not be visible to an engineer?
I saw a construction sign outside a house in the same estate (they're all standalone, self-build type houses) for a contractor who was doing work on subsidence, - i guess this is what has gotten me worried.

Obviously, if I went any further with this I will get an engineer involved, but would like some idea as to what issues if any there might be.
Also, should the person selling the site have some sign off/papers from an engineer who would have overseen the laying of the foundations?

Thanks for any advice...


----------



## MH2 (7 Jan 2010)

Buyer beware!!

As a builder myself i would advise caution as there are many thing that could go wrong but with a proper investigation by a qualified engineer looking after your interests only.

Some issues that could arise to get you started:
1. Inadequate or no reinforcement in the concrete foundations - assuming that you mean literally the wall foundations are the only items built.
2. Correct specification of concrete used to support the intended structure to be built off the foundations
3. Condition of ground under the house - type of clay etc.  
4. Is the foundation built as per the original specification?
5. Is the foundation built sufficient to support the building?
6. Subsidence would suggest poor ground build up or bad ground - a good engineer would help you with this


Suggested investigation:
1.Obtain any drawings, specifications and inspection reports from the architect/engineer involved in the project.
2. If possible try to talk to the builder who put the foundations in originally and he might be impartial enough to help(provided he is not the developer)
3. Check if any cube tests taken for the concrete prior to pouring and can a copy of the results be obtained(cube test is a test on a small cube of conc. where it is crushed to test its strength after a period of time)
4. Dig some trial/inspection holes beside the foundations to check the quality of the ground underneath - engineer to inspect

Depending who the architect or engineer is or was i would be doubtful of any sign off papers at such an early stage, however an inspection should have taken place prior to the pouring of the foundations. If a report is available, make sure he/she are independent and not an employer of the developer/builder.

Hope this helps, if you need a good engineer - i can point you in the right direction if you are in the Dublin county/city area.

Best of Luck


----------



## onq (7 Jan 2010)

Hi raven,

Your posting suggests you're hunting for what you think is a bargain - this is not a good approach to a purchase.
I would strongly caution you against getting involved on such a site without professional advice per MH2's post.
This advice should include a review of the estate, its level of completion and any problems in the other houses.
You should check on the building firm responsible for your foundations and find out what stopped work on site.

For some problems with foundations read
http://www.askaboutmoney.com/showthread.php?t=101735

Completing the foundations does not establish permission.
It establishes that commencement has occurred but little else.
"Substantial completion" to the satisfaction of the local authority is required to establish a permission.
This may be taken to mean "completing a house to wall plate level" but thsi rests on a provision in the Planning Act 2000 which has been removed.
An application for an extension of time for a house completed to this level if lodged within one year of the expiry date of the permission may be successful.

FWIW

ONQ

[broken link removed]


----------



## raven (7 Jan 2010)

onq said:


> Hi raven,
> 
> Your posting suggests you're hunting for what you think is a bargain - this is not a good approach to a purchase.
> I would strongly caution you against getting involved on such a site without professional advice per MH2's post.
> ...



Thanks ONQ for the input.

The site is literally just a site,  - the last remaining one in an estate of one-off/self-build style standalone houses (probably around 20 bungalows). ie. The estate wasn't built by one developer.
Almost all the other houses in the estate would have been build over the last 10 to 20 years. - This is the last lot/block/site in the park. 
I'm not trying to cash in on this as a #vulture type opportunity", - the site is asking over 300K, but the indications are that they would let it go to 250K or thereabouts.
- certainly not fire-sale stuff by any means!

I noticed a contractor's sign outside one of the other houses (built 10 or 20 years ago I'd say)  ie. the sign said "XYZ Ltd, Subsidence Contractors", - underpinning I'd say.
This causes me some concern.
The estate agent mentioned that the seller of the site is/was themselves in construction, - so my guess is they were involved in laying the foundations, - so I think anything they say would have to be taken with a grain of salt.

I'm wondering is the safest thing here to just bite the bullet and pull up the foundations that are there, and redo them, - would this be a huge job? - if it was just going to add a few grand it might be a better option...
It seems like it might be a shame to pull them up if they were fine though. Would it be possible to reuse any of the materials? Would it complicate relaying of the foundation in any way, - (ie. having just previously pulled up a foundation in the location )
What seems to be there are the base of internal and external walls (maybe one brick/block high), with what would be the flooring area filled with stones.

Or, would a structural engineer be able to adequately test/inspect them? - My worry would be that they simply couldn't see all potential problems without having overseen it.

Be assured, - I would definitely get a structural engineer involved, before making any commitment
- But I'm half thinking of going ahead anyway, and possibly being prepared to pull up whats there if an engineer can't certify it.

Apologies for all the questions!


----------



## raven (7 Jan 2010)

MH2 said:


> Buyer beware!!
> 
> Suggested investigation:
> 1.Obtain any drawings, specifications and inspection reports from the architect/engineer involved in the project.
> ...


Thanks MH2. I'm in the Munster area btw, I'll definitely engage an engineer before commiting to any purchase, - but I'm trying to get a feel for the issues/options at this stage.
 As I mentioned in the previous reply to ONQ, the estate agent mentioned that the seller of the site (site is in an estate of one-off houses) was themselves in construction. So I fear that they may have put down the foundations themselves, - and there's always the fear that they may have cut corners, along with the engineer possibly having been an employee or a friend.


----------



## raven (8 Jan 2010)

Would it be reasonable to say that if they have indemnified certification in place for the work so far, its good enough to build on?
Or would it still be risky?


----------



## onq (8 Jan 2010)

raven said:


> Thanks ONQ for the input.
> 
> The site is literally just a site, - the last remaining one in an estate of one-off/self-build style standalone houses (probably around 20 bungalows). ie. The estate wasn't built by one developer.
> Almost all the other houses in the estate would have been build over the last 10 to 20 years. - This is the last lot/block/site in the park.
> ...



Now this is more like it, a man prepared to investigate the problem professionally with the integrity to accept and deal with any negative feedback in the best possible manner!


First, take a glace at the Self-Build FAQ

http://www.askaboutmoney.com/showthread.php?t=126261

This is a work in progress for self builders, but covers many general points on sites, planning, etc. which you might bear in mind.
I'm not suggesting you're going to built this yourself, but I suspect you're going to get involved in the build in terms of overview regardless.
There may be hidden issues about to affect your site adversely which you should research before commiting yourself in terms of new development adjoining, SAC listing, road and rail networks, etc.

Take a look at the planning files for the estate and see what the planner's reports say, or retain a professional to undetake this research on your behalf and issue a Planning File Inspection Report.
In general this is far less onerous than it used to be because you can ask for copies fo the reports now, unless the files are in storage in which case they must be formally requested and retrived for a fee.
You could also usefully check newspaper reports about the development many of which may be available online.
Finally have a chat to the Local Authority planner and engineer - there may be a member of staff who can give first hand comment on the development

=================================

My non-exhaustive advice would be as follows in relation to the site;
Retain a structural engineer and have a contractor on call with a JCB.
Request a fee from the engineer for performing an evaluation of the existing site conditions, estate services and culverts, and foundations, which may end up dealing with, but may not be limited to, the following issues:


Site Conditions:

  Investigate whether subsoil conditions, previously filled land, underground watercourses or landslip could cause subsidence on a given site, or promote problems on adjoining sites, particularly downhill or downstream sites.
  If you're not on mains services, you'll need to undertake Trial Hole and Percoation tests anyway and these will yield useful information about the type of soils and the level of the water table.
  Investigate whether any dumping or contamination of soils or water courses has occured on your site, adjoining sites or in the area.
  Establish whether any wind farms have been built locally and whether you are on well founded ground unlikely to be affected by landslip.
  Establish the likelihood of your site flooding, whether it is due to being at the bottom of a hill in the estate through which groundwater overflows will route or due to being on or near a known floodplain.
  There are some online resources mentiones in the Self-Build FAQ as well as the usual method of seeking local knowledge, the best of which may be available not from your neighbours, but in the local pub - a good excuse to call in and see what the locals are like.


Estate Services and Culverts:

These can be established by inspection of submitted planning and planning agreement drawings, by inspecting and levelling manholes and if necessary by undertaking a survey using CCTV remotes.
First establish whether or not the estate has been taken in charge yet.
If so, establish that this has include all the underground services including the water supply and drains.
If not, establish whether it is going to be taken in charge per comment above.

Sometimes estates can be developed with main sewers running in front or rear gardens and this usually means the Council won't take them in charge.
Such estates may have sewers running underground in many gardens, front and/or back [which may be combined] and not just traversing a key site.
Sometimes an unavoidable route through a key site is required and has been agreed, for example as a main drain route serving upstream or exiting through downstream estates.
In such a case the Council may have reserved a wayleave and it may be prohibited for the houseowner to build near the drain or extend over it.
Usually the requirement is for say 3M either side of the drain to allow for working tolerance for a JCB and spoil heaps.
You should check whether your site hosts such a sewer or a culverted river.

Where the estate is not going to be taken in charge and/or where the drains pass through your or other site, it may be advisable to check the condition of the drains and assess whether they are admitting ground water.
Opening manholes will give a direct source of information and these can be levelled to check falls. This only leaves the sections between manholes and these can be traversed by a CCTV camera to check for pipe condition gradients, breaks blockages and root intrusions.
Where the estate is privately maintained by the house owners, an assessment of the roads, paths, paving ducts and all the services including commissioning certificates from the builder and sub-contractors is well advised, because any remedies for such as these are going to be cost and labour intensive.


Existing Foundations:

It is possible to check whether or not these are suitable in several ways:
 Excavation at a minimum of two different points or as required will allow your engineer to form an opinion on the depth, thickness, reinforcement, trench blinding and compaction of trenches and general workmanship of the pours.
 Sampling of the concrete will allow its strength to be tested.
 Sampling of the hardcore will allow it to be checked for impurities like pyrite.
 Removal of sections of the foundations and hardcore will show whether the site was properly cleared of vegatable matter which could compromise the foundations later, such as tree roots.
Your engineer may suggest other means of investigaion including taking core samples.

=============================

The above advice is not exhaustive and is remote from the site and estate which are not known to me.
It doesn't touch on restrictions in relation to the type of house permitted or even if permission will be granted.
You could find for example that this is an "extra" site, snuck in under the noses of the planners and this may be the cause of its non-development.

Most clients don't want to know about all this sub-soil grief and may try to blank it out because its all "money buried in the ground", but it is precisely such issues that are the most easily avoided at the stage you're at by not buying and the least easily or cheaply addressed once you've bought and built.
Even should you be able to address some of the issues above should the arise, they may affect your later sale price and thus the return on your investment.
That having been said, neither these nor other issues may arise and good luck with the purchase and later build.

HTH

ONQ

[broken link removed]


----------



## onq (8 Jan 2010)

raven said:


> Would it be reasonable to say that if they have indemnified certification in place for the work so far, its good enough to build on?



This totally depends on whose doing the certification and what their insurance covers.

For example the builder may only certify the built work unless he's claiming to have had design input or retained someone who did and either he or they carry professional indemnity cover.
Accepting a cert from a builder who's gone bust seems to be a pointless exercise - who can you call to remedy problems if they arediscovered?

The engineer - if their was one - normally only certifies the design of the work and carries Professional Indemnity cover.
These days you need ot check and see whether the engineer or firm of engineers is still in business and insured.



> Or would it still be risky?



Yes.

Accepting paper assurances without independent verification always carries an element of risk.

But by following the advices in this thread and others and in the Self Build FAQ you will be well served.

ONQ.

[broken link removed]


----------



## raven (9 Jan 2010)

Thanks so much ONQ, - there's plenty of very useful info there on getting started with the whole process. 
I'll definitely be engaging a suitably qualified engineer early on in the process.
We're very much leaning towards taking no chances and replacing the foundation work thats there, - think I'd sleep better at night in the long run to be honest!


----------



## onq (9 Jan 2010)

Well Raven,

You seem to be getting mixed reviews on Boards.ie.

It never hurts to get a second opinion on any subject though.

If you got the foundations out for €1500 you'd be doing very well - dunno about re-using the rubble though.

Builders rubble isn't that suitable for use as graded fill especially with a lot of soil attached, but your engineer can advise you on that.

You'd have to grind it down to allow it be used as backfill or 150mm layers - prolly cost too much.

In the end it comes down to suitability and the difference between what it costs to take it away and what it costs to process if for re-use.

As you might have gleaned from the Self Build FAQ and the other posts in this thread and on Boards.ie the foundations are only one issue amongst all the others.

Good luck with it and let us know how you get on.

FWIW

ONQ.

[broken link removed]


----------



## raven (15 Jan 2010)

Meeting with an engineer on Monday.
Met with a foundations contractor today to get a quote on pulling them up.
His overall impression was that they were put down neatly and he was fairly sure they were good (based on brickwork etc.)
He felt he would be robbing us (albeit probably shooting himself in the foot by losing a job) if he pulled them up and relaid.
So, think we'll get the engineer to have a good look and do the tests outlined above with a view to retaining them if possible.
If we change the plans, we might be able to just add to the foundations already there (its just a matter of widening the depth). Fortunately, he reckoned they were timberframe foundations which is what we want.
An internal spine may need to be moved, but not a huge job apparently.


----------



## RKQ (15 Jan 2010)

raven said:


> Meeting with an engineer on Monday...
> 
> He felt he would be robbing us (albeit probably shooting himself in the foot by losing a job) if he pulled them up and relaid.
> So, think we'll get the engineer to have a good look and do the tests outlined above with a view to retaining them if possible.


 
Sounds like the right thing to do. 
A good Structural Engineer will inspect existing and advise on their condition. This advice is critical. Retaining a Structural Engineer to inspect the foundations is the first thing I'd have done.


----------



## onq (15 Jan 2010)

raven said:


> <snip>
> If we change the plans, we might be able to just add to the foundations already there (its just a matter of widening the depth). Fortunately, he reckoned they were timberframe foundations which is what we want.
> An internal spine may need to be moved, but not a huge job apparently.



Your builder sounds like a decent sort, but changing the foundations is not just a matter of "widening the depth", whatever that means 
I'd be more interested in what your engineer says after seeing what's under one of the footings as noted above.
Adding to foundations must be done properly or you may get differential settlement.

The last time I was advised on doing this I was told I'd have to make a decision, to either; -

(i) have a sliding joint and design the superstructure to allow for some differential settlement - or
(ii) drill holes into the existing foundation and grout them to receive bolts to form a mechanical bond with the new foundation to resist any differential settlement.​
In both cases you have to prepare the trench by finding and filling soft spots and compacting them and possibly pre-load the ground to try to avoid any settlement.
You cannot do the usual corner cutting, you have to properly blind the trench prior to the pour to avoid leeching and weakening of the concrete. 
You also need to specify a reasonable level of reinforcement to help resist what differential settlement may occur.

In extreme cases, for example where the area furthest away from the join is on significantly worse ground and differential settlement is more than likely, it may be advisable to consider whether to use ground beams and piled foundations to avoid this.
This will have the knock on effect of needing a suspended ground floor - expensive and hard to detail well.

Merely widening or extending the foundations without taking on one or the other options above and doing the preparation i.e. just "hoping for the best" could result in the new foundation settling significantly, or rotating around the point it connects to the existing, leading to significant cracking of superstructure in both cases.

FWIW

ONQ.

[broken link removed]


----------



## raven (16 Jan 2010)

Thanks again ONQ, - this is all very useful to know going to the enginerer, will be interesting to see what the he makes of it.
In fairness to the foundations contractor, he did say that "some steps need to be taken" but that its possible, - talk to your engineer.
I think the position we'll take is; if the engineer can't say with certainty that there would be no risks, then the foundations come up. 
I guess it would add 4 or 5K to the cost of the overall job by the sounds of it, - and of course that can be brought to the negotiations on the price of the site. 
Obviously, it would be nice to make a saving by using the incumbent foundation, - but only if there are no doubts whatsoever.

Incidentally, in relation to the tree, - there happened to be a tree surgeon doing work nearby one day when I went for a look, and I had him take a look at the tree that I'm concerned about. He reckoned there was no danger of it falling on the house because of the orientation of the crown etc. We'll see what the engineer says re. its impact on the foundations though.


----------



## raven (20 Jan 2010)

Just to put some closure on this in case the info is useful to someone else, - after meeting with the engineer, the site is now a complete non runner.
The pitch in the roof is too low to meet building regulations for a proper dormer, and the seller won't agree to selling subject to planning in order to rectify this, and some other shortcomings raised.
Also, the engineer recommended walking away if the tree mentioned earlier didn't come down prior to contract, just too risky as insurance companies may resist paying out if they inspected for a claim later.
The foundations issue wouldn't have been unsurmountable, he felt they could be sufficiently tested by digging down, doing some drilling and sending off some samples for testing. Also, they could be extended with steel dowel joints if need be.
All moot points now anyway, - thanks for the useful advice to all the contributors all the same, - it definitely helped me in asking the right questions.
I think the right decision in this case is to walk away.


----------



## RKQ (20 Jan 2010)

raven said:


> I think the right decision in this case is to walk away.


 
I'm sorry it didn't work out for you but its best you know all the possible problems at the start. 
Now at least you know the facts and learned something new about the roof. With proper professional advice you have been able to make a proper decision.

On a positive note, its time to move on & to look for your real dream home. Best of luck.


----------



## onq (20 Jan 2010)

Raven,

I echo RKQ's sentiment, but ts a buyer's market.

For the vendor not to rise to deal with the advice offered by your engineer was a mistake on their part - it lost them the sale.
Another time, say three years ago,  I might have argued for going with it and taking a risk on the planning.
However there is no bouyant market now onto which to offload the site onto if matters don't go your way.
The rest of your engineer's accords with what I've heard myself in such cases.

ONQ.

[broken link removed]


----------

