Subsidance in Low Rise Buildings

Licensed copy from CIS: carlos_delima@bathnes.gov.
uk, BATH and NORTH EAST SOMERSET COUNCIL, 02/08/2013, Un
A single copy of this document is licensed to

carlos_delima@bathnes.gov.uk
On
02/08/2013
This is an uncontrolled copy. Ensure use of the most current version of the document by searching the Construction Information Service.
The Institution of Structural Engineers
Subsidence of low-rise buildings

SECOND EDITION
A guide for professionals and property owners
AUGUST 2000
The Institution of Structural Engineers

11 UPPER BELGRAVE STREET SW1X 8BH
Constitution of Task Group

B P Clancy, JP, BSc(Eng), CEng, FIStructE, FICE, ACIArb, FASI, (UK Subsidence Group), Chairman (Consultant) F Allen*, CEng, MIStructE, (Cunningham UK Ltd.) (Loss Adjusters) Rev F J Atkins, CEng, MIStructE (National House-Building Council) (Building standards/Insurer) P G Biddle**, MA, DPhil, FArborA (Arboricultural Consultant) J Biller, CEng, MICE (Royal & Sun Alliance plc) (Insurers) D F Cutler**, BSc(Hons), DIC, PhD (Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew) (Botanist) M Fisher, ARICS (Halifax plc) (Lenders) R B George, ACII, FCILA (McLarens Toplis) (Loss Adjusters) R A Jones, CEng, MIStructE, MIGasE, FBEng (London Borough of Southwark) (Local Authority Building Control) C Munnings***, ACII (AXA Insurance plc) (Insurers) J C W Patch, BSc (Roger Bullivant Ltd) (Contractors) J Pryke, MA(Cantab), CEng, FIStructE, FICE (Consultant/Contractor) C G Rae, FRICS (Abbey National plc) (Lenders) J C Smith, Cert Arb (RFS) (London Tree Officers Association) (Arboriculturists) J E A Tapsell, CEng, FIStructE, MICE (Tapsell, Wade & Partners Ltd.) (Consultants) W Thompson, IEng, AMIStructE (Van Elle Ltd.) (Contractors) D A Travis*, BEng(Hons), CEng, MIStructE (Cunningham UK Ltd.) (Loss Adjusters) Secretary to the Task Group B Chan, BSc(Hons), AMIMechE (Institution of Structural Engineers) D Wiltshire, CEng MIStructE (Former Secretary to the Task Group) Corresponding member J Batten, ACII (Royal & Sun Alliance plc) (Insurers) N Spring-Benyon*, BSc(Hons) CEng MICE ACII (Ellis & Buckle) (Loss Adjusters) A Whitehead, Dip Arb (RFS) FArborA (A Whitehead) (Arboricultural Consultant) *Cunningham UK Ltd. merged with Ellis & Buckle in November 1998. ** representing the Arboricultural Association. *** representing the Association of British Insurers. The following additional people served on the original Task Group that produced the first edition and whose efforts are reflected in the second edition: M Abbott CEng MIStructE MIAS (Southwark District Surveyors) A Boobier BEng(Hons) CEng MICE FCILA (Robins South Ltd) R A Bullivant BSc(Eng) CEng FIStructE FICE (Roger Bullivant Ltd) W Carson CEng MIStructE MIBC (Glasgow City Council) E S Coady FRICS (Abbey National plc) T Freeman MA CEng MICE (Geo-Serv Ltd) P D Johnson BSc(Eng) CEng MICE (Sun Alliance Insurance) Professor G S Littlejohn BSc(Hons) PhD FEng FIStructE FICE (University of Bradford) A K Moores CEng FIStructE ACIArb MWeldI (S B Tietz & Partners) D Spencer FRICS (Leeds Permanent Building Society) P Kitchen (Consumers Association) Published by SETO, 11 Upper Belgrave Street, London SW1X 8BH First edition published 1994 ISBN 1 874266 54 9 2000 The Institution of Structural Engineers Produced by Andy Lorans/Choni Barrio for SETO
The Institution of Structural Engineers and the members who served on the Committee which produced this report have endeavoured to ensure the accuracy of its contents. However, the guidance and recommendations given in the report should always be reviewed by those using the report in the light of the facts of their particular case and specialist advice obtained as necessary. No liability for negligence or otherwise in relation to this report and its contents is accepted by the Institution, the members of the Committee, its servants or agents. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means without prior permission of the Institution of Structural Engineers, who may be contacted at 11 Upper Belgrave Street, London SW1X 8BH.
IStructE Subsidence of low rise buildings 2nd edition
Contents
Foreword . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7 1 Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13 1.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14 1.2 Historical perspective . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14 1.2.1 Clarification of the problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 1.2.2 Reaction to the problem. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 1.3 The Institution initiative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15 1.3.1 Establishment of the Task Group in 1992 . . . . . 15 1.3.2 Consultation with other bodies . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 1.3.3 Reforming the Task Group in 1998 . . . . . . . . . . 16 1.4 Customer care . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16 1.5 The Expert . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16 1.6 Codes of Practice, Standards & Regulations, etc. . . . .16 2 Explanation of terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17 2.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18 2.2 Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18 2.2.1 Technical terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 2.2.2 Insurance terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 2.2.3 The technical expert adviser (The Expert) . . . . 20 2.2.4 Glossary of qualifying bodies for Experts . . . . . 21 2.3 Mortgage procedure the relationship between Lenders, Borrowers, Insurers and Valuers . . . . . . . . .21 2.3.1 The mortgage. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 2.3.2 The role of the valuer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 2.3.3 Insurance arrangements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 2.3.4 Standard house purchase reports . . . . . . . . . . . 22 2.4 Supplementary reports . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .23 3 Concerns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .25 3.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .26 3.2 Customer care . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .26 3.3 Property owner (The Insured) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .26 3.4 Lender . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .26 3.5 Insurer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .27 3.6 Local Authority/Utilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .27 3.7 Neighbours . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .27 3.8 Contractor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .27 4 Insurance matters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .29 4.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .30 4.2 The insurance contract . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .30 4.3 Subsidence damage cover . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .30 4.3.1 Insurance cover and its continuity . . . . . . . . . . 30 4.3.2 Establishing a claim . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 4.3.3 Timing of subsidence damage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 4.3.4 Reopening claims. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 4.4 Policy conditions and exclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .31 4.4.1 General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 4.4.2 Prompt notification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 4.4.3 Non-disclosure. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 4.4.4 Sum insured . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 4.4.5 Under insurance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 4.4.6 Maintenance and repair . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 4.4.7 Betterment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 4.4.8 Floor slabs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
4.5 Investigation of insurance claims . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .32 4.6 Handling of subsidence, heave and landslip claims . .32 4.6.1 Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 4.6.2 Simple stabilisation measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 4.6.3 Continuity of cover after remedial works . . . . . 32 5 The causes of damage to buildings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .35 5.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .36 5.2 Differential movement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .36 5.3 Cracking due to movement of foundations . . . . . . . . .36 5.4 Causes of foundation movements that may lead to structural damage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .36 5.4.1 Settlement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 5.4.2 Consolidation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 5.4.3 Volumetric changes to soil . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 5.4.4 Instability. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 5.4.5 Erosion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 5.4.6 Mining . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 5.4.7 Frost heave . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 5.4.8 Vibration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 5.4.9 Chemical attack . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 5.5 Superstructure damage not due to subsidence . . . . . . .43 5.5.1 Thermal movement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 5.5.2 Creep . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 5.5.3 Moisture movements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 5.5.4 Roof spread . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 5.5.5 Timber rot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 5.5.6 Masonry and brickwork damage . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 5.5.7 Poor design, detailing and workmanship . . . . . 44 5.5.8 Fire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 5.5.9 Lack of maintenance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 5.5.10 Movement due to changes in load patterns . . . 44 5.5.11 Accident . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 5.5.12 Calcium silicate bricks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 5.5.13 Bookend effect/thermal expansion. . . . . . . . . . 45 5.5.14 Direct root action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 5.5.15 Mundic concrete . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 5.5.16 Damage caused by subsidence of an adjoining building . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 6 Initial appraisal of the property . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .49 6.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .50 6.2 Objectives of the initial appraisal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .50 6.3 Suitable professional experts for the initial appraisal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .50 6.4 Damage threshold and the significance of cracks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .50 6.5 Procedure for the initial appraisal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .53 6.5.1 Basic factors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 6.5.2 The age of the property and any alterations . . . 54 6.5.3 The type of movement and pattern of any cracking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 6.5.4 Proximity of property to trees and large woody shrubs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 6.5.5 Proximity of the property to sloping ground . . . 55 6.5.6 The likelihood of leaking drains . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
3
6.5.7 Likelihood of the property being on subsidence-sensitive soils . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 6.6 Identification of subsidence crack patterns . . . . . . . . .57 6.6.1 Identification of cracks related to various types of buildings. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 6.6.2 Characteristics of subsidence cracks . . . . . . . . 58 6.6.3 Decorations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60 6.7 Report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .61 7 Further investigations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .63 7.1 Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .64 7.2 Scope of further investigations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .64 7.3 Assessment of which parts of the foundation or superstructure are stable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .64 7.3.1 Full crack record. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 7.3.2 Distortion survey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 7.3.3 Crack monitoring. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 7.3.4 Level monitoring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67 7.4 Soil investigation procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .68 7.4.1 Trial pits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 7.4.2 Boring and hand augering. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 7.4.3 Probing penetration testing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 7.4.4 Soil examination . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 7.4.5 Soil tests. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 7.4.6 Assessment of desiccation from soil tests . . . . . 70 7.4.7 Assessment of shrinkability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71 7.4.8 Calculation of heave/shrinkage potential . . . . . 71 7.4.9 Assessment of permeability and rate of moisture recovery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71 7.4.10 Identification of root samples . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71 7.5 Predisposing factors, and diagnosis of their involvement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .71 7.5.1 Trees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71 7.5.2 Slope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72 7.5.3 Drains . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72 7.5.4 Traffic, or potential causes of vibration . . . . . . 72 7.5.5 Other building operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72 7.5.6 Changing environmental factors . . . . . . . . . . . . 72 7.6 Final report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .73 8 Trees and tree management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .75 8.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .76 8.1.1 Nature of damage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76 8.1.2 The tree: crown-root balance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76 8.1.3 Water use and pruning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76 8.2 Roots . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .76 8.2.1 General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76 8.2.2 Interpretation of root spread data. . . . . . . . . . . 77 8.2.3 Roots and drains . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78 8.3 Remedial work on trees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .78 8.4 Root barriers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .82 8.5 Monitoring after remedial action to trees . . . . . . . . . .82 8.6 Tree management for prevention of subsidence . . . . .82 9 Subterranean, substructure and superstructure repairs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .85 9.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .86 9.1.1 Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86 9.1.2 Options for remedial works . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86 9.1.3 Expectations of remedial works. . . . . . . . . . . . . 86 9.2 Ground stabilisation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .86 9.2.1 Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86 9.2.2 Repair of drains and leaking water mains . . . . 86 9.2.3 Control of ground moisture content . . . . . . . . . 87
9.2.4 Soil moisture management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87 9.3 Main topics of remedial works to foundations . . . . . .87 9.3.1 Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87 9.3.2 Traditional mass concrete underpinning. . . . . . 88 9.3.3 Beam and pier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88 9.3.4 Mini-pile systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89 9.3.5 Jacking building back into previous position . . 94 9.3.6 Post tensioned and reinforced collar beams . . . 94 9.4 Guidance notes for engineers, contractors and others responsible for remedial and underpinning works contracts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .95 9.4.1 Traditional mass concrete underpinning. . . . . . 96 9.4.2 Beam and pier underpinning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98 9.4.3 Piles with beams or rafts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98 9.4.4 Jacked piles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99 9.4.5 Contractor proposals, workmanship and quality control on site. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 9.5 Partial underpinning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .101 9.6 Repairs to superstructure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .101 9.6.1 General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101 9.6.2 Floors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102 9.6.3 Repair of plasterwork to walls, ceilings, etc. . 102 9.6.4 Doors/window realignment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103 9.6.5 Cosmetic repairs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103 10 Remedial works to properties damaged by subsidence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .105 10.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .106 10.2 The role of the Expert in remedial works . . . . . . . .106 10.3 Contract administration and procedures for major remedial works . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .106 10.3.1 General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106 10.3.2 Pre-contract stage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106 10.3.3 Design administration stage . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107 10.3.4 Contract and other insurance . . . . . . . . . . . . 107 10.3.5 The pre-contract meeting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107 10.3.6 Contract stage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108 10.3.7 Project management of the contract on site . 109 10.3.8 Work in the ground . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109 10.3.9 Work above the ground . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109 10.3.10 Decoration. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109 10.3.11 Final completion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110 10.4 Health and safety matters relating to remedial works contracts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .110 10.5 The Housing Grants Construction and Regeneration Act . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .111 10.6 Building regulation matters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .111 10.6.1 Scope of the regulations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111 10.6.2 How to ensure compliance with the regulations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111 10.6.3 Building regulations as they apply to foundations and underpinning. . . . . . . . . . . . 111 10.6.4 Scottish regulations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111 10.6.5 The scope of the regulations (Northern Ireland) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112 10.7 Guarantees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .112 10.8 Certificate of structural adequacy . . . . . . . . . . . . . .112 11 Research & future activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .115 11.1 General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .116 11.1.1 Activities identified in 1994 as requiring attention. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116 11.1.2 Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116
11.2 Particular research topics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .116 11.2.1 Root barriers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116 11.2.2 BRE research into desiccation of clay soils . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116 11.2.3 HORTlink project Controlling water use of trees to alleviate subsidence risk . . . . . . 116 11.2.4 Soil rehydration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117 11.2.5 Mining subsidence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117 11.2.6 Tolerance of structural movement. . . . . . . . . 117 Appendix A Mining subsidence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .119 A.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .120 A.2 Coal mining subsidence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .120 A.2.1 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120 A.2.2 Factors affecting mining subsidence. . . . . . . . 121 A.2.3 Estimation of subsidence. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122 A.2.4 Surface damage. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124 A.2.5 Ground movement due to old coal workings . 125 A.2.6 Geometry of mine shafts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126 A.3 Metalliferous mining subsidence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .126 A.3.1 General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126 A.3.2 Typical surface mining related features . . . . . 126 A.3.3 Investigation of metalliferous mining subsidence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128 Appendix B Measures to minimise the effects of foundation movement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .131 B.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .132 B.2 New build . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .132 B.2.1 Detailed site investigation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132 B.2.2 Desk study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132 B.2.3 Walkover survey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132 B.2.4 Physical investigation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133 B.2.5 Identification of sites where special precautions are required . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133 B.2.6 Factors relevant to selection of appropriate ground improvement and foundation types . . . 134 B.2.7 Ground improvement methods . . . . . . . . . . . . 134 B.2.8 Selection of foundation type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135 B.3 Existing structures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .138 B.3.1 Factors within the property owners control . 138 B.3.2 Possible effects of excavation for adjacent construction activity on existing buildings . . . 140 B.4 Mining subsidence precautions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .140 B.4.1 Precautions taken during mining . . . . . . . . . . 141 B.4.2 Structural considerations to minimise the effects of mining subsidence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141 B.4.3 Consolidation of mine workings . . . . . . . . . . . 142 B.4.4 Shafts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143 B.5 Treatment of site with natural cavities . . . . . . . . . . .144 Appendix C Sample certificate of structural adequacy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .145 Appendix D Specimen underpinning guarantee . . . . . .149
E.2.1 The Agreement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157 E.2.2 Guidance on the Agreement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158 Appendix F Building Regulations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .159 F.1 Building Regulations (England & Wales) . . . . . . . .160 F.1.1 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 160 F.1.2 Requirements of the regulations . . . . . . . . . . . 160 F.1.2.1 Part A: Structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .160 F.1.2.2 Other requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .161 F.1.3 Scope of the regulations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 162 F.1.3.1 Exemption by Schedule 2 . . . . . . . . . . .162 F.1.3.2 Exemption by prescription . . . . . . . . . .162 F.1.3.3 Crown property . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .162 F.1.4 Application of the regulations. . . . . . . . . . . . . 162 F.1.4.1 Full plan route . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .163 F.1.4.2 Building notice route . . . . . . . . . . . . . .163 F.1.5 Building regulations as they apply to underpinning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163 F.1.6 Building control reverting to a local authority . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163 F.1.7 Regularisation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163 F.1.8 Building regulation charges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163 F.1.9 Building over a sewer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163 F.1.10 Determinations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163 F.1.11 Relaxations or dispensations . . . . . . . . . . . . 163 F.1.12 Requirements of other related legislation. . . 164 F.1.12.1 Inner London . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .164 F.1.12.2 Other local Acts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .164 F.1.12.3 Other relevant legislation . . . . . . . . .164 F.2 Scottish regulations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .164 F.2.1 Introduction Building standards (Scotland) Regulations 1990 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164 F.2.2 Part A: Structure. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164 F.2.3 Part C: Structure. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164 F.2.4 Further requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164 F.3 Northern Ireland regulations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .165 F.3.1 Building regulations order . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165 F.3.2 Scope of the regulations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165 F.3.3 How to ensure compliance with the regulations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 166 F.3.4 Regulations as they apply to foundations . . . 166 Appendix G Party Wall, etc. Act 1996 . . . . . . . . . . . . . .169 G.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .170 G.2 Scope of the Act . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .170 G.3 Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .170 G.4 Notices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .170 G.4.1 Work to an existing party wall . . . . . . . . . . . . 170 G.4.2 New wall astride a boundary line. . . . . . . . . . 170 G.4.3 New wall against the boundary line . . . . . . . . 170 G.4.4 Excavation near neighbouring buildings . . . . 170 G 5 Dispute procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .171 G.6 Award . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .171 G.7 Costs of work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .171 Appendix H Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .173
Appendix E ABI Domestic Subsidence Agreement & Tree Root Claims Agreement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .153 E.1 ABI Domestic Subsidence Agreement . . . . . . . . . . .154 E.1.1 The Agreement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 154 E.1.2 Guidance on the Agreement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155 E.2 ABI Domestic Subsidence Tree Root Claims Agreement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .157
Foreword
The original Guide was published in March 1994 and has since then been the authoritative reference on the subject of subsidence of low-rise buildings. Following recommendations in that edition the subject has moved forward, particularly in the case of claims for subsidence damage to domestic property where Insurers are involved. This has been accompanied by the widespread adoption of our recommendation that matters can be more quickly resolved to the satisfaction of both Insurers and the Insured (the householder) if procedures are based on co-operation rather than confrontation. One of the most important points for Insurers and Lenders to appreciate is that procedures developed over the last 10 years now deal with the problem of subsidence well. Therefore to refuse to lend on, or to insure, a property that has suffered subsidence in the past, which has been properly appraised and dealt with, is not reasonable. It will exclude an ever-increasing proportion of the housing stock. Subsidence claims now average about 40,000 cases each year and there is no reason to suspect that this rate will reduce in the foreseeable future. There has been a substantial reduction in the use of disruptive and costly underpinning to solve subsidence problems over the last 5 years. The emphasis has changed to considering alternative less disruptive means of stabilising affected properties. In recent years it has been statistically shown that trees and other large vegetation on clay subsoil are responsible for over 65% of all instances of subsidence damage to domestic property that percentage is even higher during drought years. The presence of trees clearly add value to an area and its property. This edition of the Guide advocates and advises on tree management and recommends felling of trees only in exceptional circumstances. The Guide continues to recommend that, like any other form of property maintenance, householders should regularly address tree management. Tree owners have a responsibility to all adjacent properties, whether they own them or not, so good relations are important between property owners and the tree owners. This time the Task Group had three Arboriculturists/Botanists among its members Giles Biddle, David Cutler and Jim Smith. David and Giles were nominated to our group by the Arboricultural Association; Jim was nominated by the London Tree Officers Association. I am especially grateful to them for their help on this difficult topic. Previously Insurers expected the Insured to have proved their subsidence claim before they were prepared to accept it. Most claims are now handled by Insurers who themselves directly appoint Experts to investigate notified claims. This is a much more efficient procedure, which also minimises the likelihood of disputes between householders and Insurers. Again the Task Group has consulted widely in order that the Guide will be as relevant and comprehensive as possible. The Association of British Insurers, the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors, the Arboricultural Association and Association of Building Engineers have all been most helpful with comments. As Chairman of the Task Group, I must say that I am also very appreciative of all those other individuals and organisations that wrote in to give their views; all were carefully considered and many incorporated in this new edition. Names of those who offered comments are recorded in Appendix H. As with the first edition, I would again like to thank all those who served on the Task Group for the immense contribution which they have made to the drafting of this second edition. They brought an equal degree of professionalism and dedication, as did those members who served on the first Task Group. Some are common to both and a number of the original team have also commented most helpfully on this edition. To all of them, and to the firms and organisations which they represent, I give my thanks and appreciation. I am conscious that the Institution has many technical and professional matters in train for publication and I wish to thank the Engineering Committee and the Council for allowing me to persuade them that this second edition was required so soon after the first. Finally but by no means least I wish to thank the Institution staff involved in the preparation of this new edition and particularly Berenice Chan, our Task Group Secretary. The remarkably short pre-publication period achieved is substantially due to her efforts. In my view it has been an excellent team effort. I am sure that this new edition will be as successful as its predecessor and that it will build on the considerable progress which that
original edition brought to a subject which was, at the time in 1994, in something of a state of chaos. Yet it is a subject which intimately affects the lives of hundreds of thousands of ordinary people. All members of the Task Group hope that this second edition of the Guide will be of benefit to all whose property is experiencing subsidence as well as those called upon to advise and deal with subsidence problems. Brian Clancy Task Group Chairman August 2000
Notes for readers of the 2nd edition

1. This Guide has been drafted to meet the needs of a wide readership including Mortgage Lenders, Consulting Engineers, Property Valuers, Insurers, Builders, Solicitors, Surveyors, Loss Adjusters, Local Authorities and property owners. 2. Technical formulae and specialist jargon have been kept to a minimum, to enable the ordinary householder and other non-specialist to gain a comprehensive understanding of subsidence from this Guide. 3. Although the Guide focuses on domestic property, it is readily applicable to all lowrise buildings irrespective of use. 4. The technical issues in the Guide are common to low-rise buildings throughout the UK. The insurance procedures outlined in the Guide reflect the current situation in England. However, whilst procedures vary from one region to another, the principles on which they are founded hold true across the UK. 5. Definitions of technical, insurance and other terms given in the Guide are those used in the first edition; they are consensus definitions based on present day common usage and understanding. But it is acknowledged that some variance of terminology exists in specialist fields. 6. Some repetition of material occurs in the Guide for the convenience of those wishing to dip into the Guide for specific information. This repetition avoids the irritation of excessive cross-referencing. 7. The whole process of handling a potential subsidence case from its identification through to its solution, is outlined in the flowchart beginning on the opposite page. 8. Each chapter is prefaced by a detailed contents list to guide the reader through the text. 9. Names in brackets in illustration captions acknowledge their source.
Flowchart for the handling of a potential subsidence claim

Through lender
Insurer
Building insurance policy
Through broker Initial insurance claim liaison stage Initial claim investigation approval stage Direct from Insurer
Damage to policyholders property
Insured
Submit claim form
Liaise Insurer Continue to advise Insured
Appoint & liaise Expert on approved list main alternatives: Specialist consultant Loss adjuster using in-house Loss adjuster technical expert using specialist consultant advisers
Specialist consultant
Inspection and initial appraisal of property
Advise Insured of reasons for not accepting claim but also action required on property, e.g. repair of defects Report to Insured and Insurer Claim declined by Insurer
No
Damage caused by other insured peril?
No
Possible subsidence damage Yes Tree root identification Drainage contractors Arboric Specialist site investigation Soil sample and testing
Yes
Position monitoring studs
Report to insured and insurer with advice on further action/investigation
Appoint specialist consultants/contractors/ laboratories as appropriate
Further investigations
GO TO TOP OF PAGE 10
Chapters 5-6 (possible Chapter 8)

9
Chapters 2-4
Purchase of insurance policy
Insureds Expert if appointed
A
Other cause? Trial holes Type, depth of foundation and nature of ground beneath
CONTINUED FROM PAGE 9

Drains? Suspect leaking drains possible trial holes
Further investigations
Tree root identification if required
Soil analysis Monitor to identify pattern of movement and probable cause
Persistant moisture deficiency implications Possible cause trees see 7.5.1. Minor
Cause other Major
Expose drain junctions
Drains test
Cause defective drains Repair drains
On policyholders land
No
Put adjoining owner on notice
Is an arb. report necessary Yes Obtain arb. report with recommendation Consult LA on TPOs Remove/prune trees
No
Further investigation stage Has property stabilised? Yes Prepare superstructure repair specification Insurers approval Invite contractors to tender Insureds approval Insurers (Expert) check No Appoint superstructure repair contractor Yes Review position on Contractors guarantees
Is property likely to remain stable in future? Yes Continue monitoring No Completion of agreed monitoring period
No Trial hole data
Is further site investigation required Yes
No
Site investigation report
Site investigation to enable underpinnning design Contractors design Partial or complete underpinnning scheme Design underpinning scheme and superstructure scheme Obtain tenders Appoint Contractor(s) Pre-contract meeting
Insurers (Expert) design
No
Yes Building regs CDM Regs Detailed specification Party wall act
Apply as appropriate
CONTINUED OPPOSITE ON PAGE 11
10
Chapters 7-8
CONTINUED FROM PAGE 10
Items to consider, e.g. Programme of works
LA planning matters/building regs Photographic record Contractor Precontract Contract administration To Insured & lender Property saleable and insurance capable of being continued to existing or new owner Handover Chapters 9/10
11
Inspect adjoining properties Discuss betterment items Discuss Insureds interests Payments to contractor Protection of works & adjacent areas Need for progress/site meetings Minutes distributed by Expert
Pre-contract meeting
Insured Expert
Take possession of site
Notify Contractor
Building control
Expert/inspection of works
Site inspections
Underpinning works
Superstructure works
Inspection of works
Redecoration as agreed with claimant
Contract instructions
Interim payment certificates Interim payments
Final payment certificate
Final completion Defects liability period
Final payment Payment of Expert Contractors guarantee Certificate of structural adequacy
To Insured & lender
Result of process
Improved customer service quality
12
Chapter 1 Background
1.1 Introduction 1.2 Historical perspective 1.2.1 Clarification of the problem 1.2.2 Reaction to the problem 1.3 The Institution initiative 1.3.1 Establishment of the Task Group in 1992 1.3.2 Consultation with other bodies 1.3.3 Reforming the Task Group in 1998 1.4 Customer care 1.5 The Expert 1.6 Codes of Practice, Standards & Regulations, etc. 14 14 14 15 15 15 16 16 16 16 16
13
1 Background
1.1 Introduction
The intention of this publication is to provide as much up to date information as possible to encourage a more rational approach to damage and loss caused by subsidence, heave and landslip, and repair of affected buildings. Although this Guide confines itself to dealing with low rise, conventionally constructed buildings, i.e. those up to four storeys in height, the principles discussed can also be applied, where appropriate, to much larger buildings. The guidance given can therefore be applicable to virtually all domestic properties, except high-rise flats. The technical principles which are addressed can also be applied to low-rise buildings used for commercial purposes. The insurance information given in the Guide is applicable only to domestic properties. It is however recognised that not all buildings are insured. The general public are to be excused for believing that subsidence and heave of buildings are relatively recent problems. This is because they were only generally included as insured risks in household policies after 1971. It is, therefore, only since then that the public have been particularly aware of them. Subsidence and heave have in fact always affected buildings under certain ground conditions, but in the past, cracks and other damage resulting from them were normally attended to by building owners as part of routine maintenance. Very few buildings required major remedial works, although only buildings constructed on very stable hard material, such as rock, are likely to avoid this type of damage completely. Prior to the 1970s subsidence, heave, settlement, consolidation, compaction and similar terms were used somewhat interchangeably by both specialists and lay persons to mean more or less the same thing as regards ground movement. Since then, the lack of specific definitions for ground movements generally within insurance policies can lead to frequent misunderstandings. In what circumstances is it reasonable to conclude that a property requires remedial work to overcome the results of subsidence or heave? What form should that remedial work take? Is it reasonable for an Insured to expect an Insurer to pay for the repair of structurally trivial damage, even if it is technically the result of subsidence, when there is a possibility of the same sort of damage occurring again in the future because of continued slight movement in the property? Is it reasonable to expect Insurers to pay for preventative remedial work to a building or part of a building which may not have been actually damaged by subsidence, heave and landslip, but which might possibly be damaged in the future?
These and many more such relevant questions have only come to the fore since subsidence and heave cover has widely become available. During the past 25 or more years since the introduction of subsidence insurance cover, there have been a number of exceptionally dry periods such as 1975/76, 1984, 1989, 1990, 1991, and 1995. During these years, subsidence claims reached peaks which were completely unforeseen not only by Insurers but also by Experts (see Fig. 1.2). Thousands of properties throughout the country suffered structural movement, cracks appeared in walls and ceilings, and home-owners were obviously extremely worried for two reasons: Were their homes becoming structurally unsound and therefore dangerous? Were their homes being affected so severely that their value would decrease appreciably?
1.2 Historical perspective

1.2.1 Clarification of the problem
Initially, in the early 1970s there were very few subsidence claims and Insurers tended to meet them in full with little regard for the extent to which the repairs might be justified from a technical point of view. In the twenty years or so before this Guide was first written, various parties had attempted to define subsidence, but such definitions had not received universal acceptance because it was thought that they could possibly have been produced by sectional interests for their own benefit. Insurance cover against subsidence, heave or landslip damage was introduced in 1971 to accommodate Lenders in protecting both their loan security and their customers against major catastrophe (see Fig. 1.1). This cover has increasingly caused difficulties over the last 25 or more years, particularly in how subsidence, heave and landslip damage was to be appraised and dealt with. These difficulties were never anticipated. Insurance cover against subsidence, heave and landslip damage has unintentionally developed to become a form of general building maintenance paid for by Insurers at enormous cost and used for the repair of thousands of properties showing only the slightest signs of subsidence damage. This cost must eventually be reflected in higher premiums for all. The main problem has been the failure of all involved to anticipate and answer the following questions: What is subsidence, is it different from settlement, and what is heave?
The first question was relatively easy to answer by obtaining technical advice from a Chartered Structural or Civil Engineer or Chartered Building Surveyor. The second question was more difficult. The value of anything is only what others will pay for it. Buyers will only pay the true value if those advising them on the value confirm that it is unaffected to a significant degree by any defects. There was no doubt that in the dry periods mentioned, a number of properties suffered quite severe structural movement to the extent that even engineers had concerns about their structural stability. However, thousands, almost certainly the vast majority, suffered only minor damage. Once it was realised by home owners that most properties
Fig. 1.1 Example of major subsidence damage resulting from collapse of an underground canal
14
Cost (m)
19 75
19 76
19 77
19 78
19 79
19 80
19 81
19 82
19 83
19 84
19 85
19 86
19 87
19 88
19 89
19 90
19 91
19 92
19 93
19 94
19 95
19 96
19 97
19 98
Fig. 1.2 Cost and number of claims 1975-99 (data from ABI)
had insurance cover for subsidence damage, it was hardly surprising that claims were made by the owners against their Insurers even for trivial damage. Unfortunately the extent to which a property must be damaged before it technically justified remedial works had never been defined by Insurers, so the obvious course of action for the owner was simply to make a claim and have the work attended to at the Insurers expense. This has since given rise to problems and misunderstandings as Insurers sought to limit their losses in various ways, when they realised that they were effectively providing a maintenance service.
1.2.2 Reaction to the problem

Unfortunately, the problem was not examined from first principles. Typically, it was not recognised that building construction over the preceding two or three decades had used less flexible materials. For example, hard cement mortar was introduced in place of the traditional lime mortar for brickwork making buildings more brittle. As a result, modern buildings tend to show signs of structural movement more dramatically than older, more flexible buildings, and even minor movement may be sufficient to cause some visible damage. Consequently, because individual Insurers were having to meet many thousands of subsidence damage claims, they became much more reluctant to provide cover for any property with signs of subsidence damage or structural movement. In addition, since the early 1970s, there has been a tendency for an increasing public expectation of the structural performance, e.g. tolerance to minor cracking of buildings, and also for a much higher quality service from their professional advisers. As a consequence, a number of court cases brought against professional advisers proved successful with the inevitable result that these advisers became more conservative in the advice which they gave. Surveyors and Engineers, when asked to value or assess properties suffering from suspected subsidence damage or structural movement, found it easier to recommend remedial works rather than appraise the properties more objectively, even when the damage was relatively trivial. By adopting this approach, they reduced the risk of legal actions against them for negligence. Finally and inevitably, many structural damage problems are identified when properties are put up for sale. The small
amount of time available during this process to assess problems of this sort places considerable pressure on all parties to deal with any problem promptly and to a standard which left no doubt as to the future stability of the property. Indeed, the major drought of 1975/76 caused such widespread damage that for many years after it, Lenders were cautious about lending on subsidence- and heave-damaged properties even after they had been repaired. Originally, Insurers and their Experts adopted an over cautious approach which meant that thousands of properties suffering from relatively minor damage, caused by subsidence or heave, were underpinned. In the vast majority of cases this has proved to be technically unnecessary. The problem could have been dealt with much more economically and objectively by taking the time needed to identify and deal with the actual cause of damage. However, the demand to get properties repaired promptly generally meant that this option was not pursued. Further dry summers have exacerbated an already unsatisfactory state of affairs to such an extent that there now exists a large industry geared solely to the underpinning of domestic properties suffering from ground movement. Statistics show that an extraordinary amount of money, running into hundreds of millions of pounds, has been spent on largely unnecessary underpinning works and general maintenance repairs. Most Civil and Structural Engineers would consider such sums to be substantially unjustified in the context of technically appropriate repairs.
1.3 The Institution initiative

1.3.1 Establishment of the Task Group in 1992
Initially discussions between a small number of Structural Engineers established that any repairs to properties damaged by subsidence or heave should be dealt with by the application of basic technical principles. However because the whole process was dictated by the expectations and demands of homeowners, Lenders and Insurers, it was clearly impracticable to deal with the problem solely in this way. There is no doubt that ground movement-related damage to buildings is basically an engineering problem but it is much
19 99
No. Claims (000)

15
influenced by the wish among owners and mortgage Lenders to ensure that the value of a building should not be significantly affected by damage which that building might suffer, from whatever cause. While the initiative for a Task Group was promoted by the Institution of Structural Engineers, it was decided to extend its membership to include other interested parties outside the Institutions membership so that the subject could be looked at on as broad a basis as possible. Accordingly representatives from these groups who were technically and professionally qualified and in particular familiar with subsidence or a directly related subject, were invited to participate.
1.3.2 Consultation with other bodies

Although the original Task Group had the benefit of two very experienced underpinning contractors among its number, it was decided that a full-day seminar would be held at the Institution of Structural Engineers with attendance restricted to delegates from contracting firms who were known to specialise in remedial and repair work to buildings, particularly those damaged by ground movement. This was held in November 1992 and over 80 delegates attended with representation from 23 different companies. Comments from this seminar were taken on board and incorporated into the Guide. Through the Council of Mortgage Lenders and the Association of British Insurers, the original Task Group consulted as widely as possible to ensure that all interested parties could comment, if they wished, as the framework of the Guide developed. In addition, the existence of the Task Group was advertised in the technical and national press and as a result many individuals and organisations made representations to the Task Group and, again these were all taken into consideration during the preparation of the Guide. A number of organisations and individuals were particularly asked to give their views on the subject and, where received, these were also carefully considered. A list of those organisations and individuals who contributed information and expressed views is given in Appendix H.
ties enter into a contract, usually an annually renewable one, whereby the Insured agrees to maintain the property in a reasonable state of repair and pay an annual premium to the Insurer for cover against the possibility of certain stated events causing significant damage to the property one being subsidence. If any of these events unfortunately occur, then the lay Insured naturally believes that the Insurer will solve the problem, often without really appreciating the precise terms of the insurance contract between the two parties. It is a fact that most Insurers are perceived by householders as offering exactly the same quality of cover and all are assumed to be reputable if anything they are thought to vary only on the premium they charge. In the case of domestic property the relationship is rarely one between equals. Invariably, when a claim occurs, the Insurer is in a more influential position than the Insured. Insurers know much more about legal, technical and insurance matters than their customer the Insured. Building damage claims, such as subsidence, are usually very traumatic experiences for householders. It is therefore important for Insurers to remember that as always, customer care is of paramount importance in this relationship, as between the fair Insurer and the honest Insured. Recommendations for good practice are given in Section 3.2
1.5 The Expert

Readers of the Guide will note that reference is made throughout the document to the professional Technical Expert Adviser (The Expert) (see 2.2.3). This is a deliberate decision in order that the Guide will not be seen as preferring one type of professional adviser to another. The most important criterion is the experience of the Experts rather than their professional qualifications. Clearly some professions are more likely to have the appropriate experience than others but it is recommended that this be a matter to be decided in each individual case (see 2.2.3).
1.3.3 Reforming the Task Group in 1998

Although the original 1994 Guide was successful in focusing diverse professional interests towards common guidelines for dealing with subsidence, heave and landslip, there have been since publication numerous developments in procedures and legislation which have highlighted the need to bring it up to date. In particular the 1994 Guide was not thought to give sufficient guidance on trees and tree management. It was therefore decided in 1998 to reform the Task Group, this time including arboriculturists, not only to amend and update the Guide, but also to write an entire chapter (Chapter 8) devoted to trees and tree management. Finally, although the 1994 Guide was intended to reassure Valuers and homeowners that minor cracking was of little consequence structurally and should not affect property values, over-caution on the part of Valuers and property owners remains. Insurance claims are increasingly being made as a result of this type of damage even though most Experts would regard the damage as being the natural consequence of normal movement in low-rise buildings. As a result, further attempts have been made in the new Guide to define this type of damage and movement more precisely with a view to bringing a greater degree of understanding and realism into the assessment of damage to low-rise buildings.
1.6 Codes of Practice, Standards and Regulations, etc.

Where reference is made in the text to such documents, the relevant versions are those current at the time of publication of this Guide. Such documents, however, are regularly revised and reference should always be made to the edition current at the relevant time. Likewise, this Guide reflects current practice at the date of publication of it and reference should always be made to an Expert for guidance on current good practice.
1.4 Customer care

Where a property is insured for subsidence and indeed other building fabric damage risks, the relationship between the Insured (the property owner) and the Insurer of the property is an important one. Chapter 4 deals in detail with insurance matters, but it is worth stating here the fundamentals of this relationship. It is one based upon mutual trust. The two par-
16
Chapter 2 Explanation of terms

2.1 Introduction 2.2 Terms 2.2.1 Technical terms 2.2.2 Insurance terms 2.2.3 The technical expert adviser (The Expert) 2.2.4 Glossary of qualifying bodies for Experts 2.3 Mortgage procedure the relationship between Lenders, Borrowers, Insurers and Valuers 2.3.1 The mortgage 2.3.2 The role of the valuer 2.3.3 Insurance arrangements 2.3.4 Standard house purchase reports 2.4 Supplementary reports 18 18 18 19 20 21 21 21 21 22 22 23
17
2 Explanation of terms
2.1 Introduction
Over the past 20 years, efforts have been made by interested parties, including Engineers, Insurers, Lenders, Lawyers and Surveyors, to define subsidence and heave and to distinguish them from settlement and other forms of movement in buildings. It has been generally agreed that there is a distinction. This Chapter attempts to explain these and other terms commonly used when dealing with building damage. These explanations have been derived from the attempts by others to define the terms. The terms given below are now believed to be commonly accepted but they are for general guidance only. It should be emphasised that these are not legally binding definitions and reference must be made to the terms of individual insurance policies which may use different definitions. It is still the case that some professional practitioners and groups define terms differently from those given below. It is therefore important to establish whether there is any difference in understanding of the terms used. The insured events within the scope of this report are subsidence, heave and landslip. In establishing whether damage has been caused by one of these insured perils, careful thought needs to be given to whether there has been some other factor, or combination of factors, which could have caused the damage to the building, such as roof spread, lintel failure or thermal movement.
Fig. 2.1 Idealised subsidence movement patterns
Fig. 2.2 Typical actual subsidence crack patterns
2.2 Terms
2.2.1 Technical terms Settlement
For insurance purposes settlement is defined as movement within a structure due to the distribution or redistribution of loading and stresses within the various elements of construction. This normally occurs in the early stages of the life of a building and may be associated with the initial compaction, consolidation, or movement in, the ground beneath the foundations due to the weight of the building. This initial settlement is not an insured peril. Cracking caused by this initial settlement is not normally a continuing problem. The cause of cracking and distortion occurring later in the life of the building, which may require remedial work, must be identified. Should initial settlement result in major structural damage, this would normally be dealt with under the terms of an NHBC warranty or equivalent.
mining decomposition of organic material extremes of climate change adjacent excavations
If subsidence is uniform throughout the foundations then major damage in the superstructure of the building is unlikely. However, if differential subsidence occurs, remedial measures to stabilise the foundations and to repair damage, may be required to bring the movement within acceptable limits. As well as the principal downward movement, there can occasionally be some lateral movement of the ground. The principal test to distinguish between subsidence or settlement of the site is to establish whether the downward movement of the ground would have occurred, at least to some extent, with no applied load from the building. If movement of the site would have occurred without the applied load, then damage is a result of subsidence.
Heave
Heave (see Fig. 2.3) is the volumetric expansion of the ground beneath part or all of the building. This is normally taken to mean upwards movement of the site caused by expansion or swelling of the subsoil. This can result from a number of causes such as: moisture increase in clay soils, e.g. from leaking drains or the removal or reduction of water uptake of trees. removal of or significant reduction in load frost
Subsidence
For insurance purposes subsidence (see Figs. 2.1 and 2.2) is defined as the downward movement of a building and its foundation caused by loss of support of the site beneath the foundations. This is usually associated with volumetric changes in the ground supporting the foundations, e.g.: compression of peat, other than that due directly to the self-weight of the building further compaction or consolidation of fill shrinkage or softening of clay soils washing away of fines in granular material
It should be emphasised that all these volumetric changes to the ground can only occur as a direct result of an external factor, e.g: change in ground water level leaking drains influence of trees or other vegetation
Fig. 2.3 Typical heave patterns
18
Heave recovery
Heave recovery is the whole or partial reversal of previous subsidence and may not necessarily be detrimental to the stability of the property (see section 8.5).
subtle differences of wording which only serve to confuse the public and those charged with administering claims.
Sum insured
This is the sum which the owner (the Insured) declares that the whole of the insured property will cost to rebuild. The whole property is normally defined as all the structures built on the site, i.e: house detached/attached garage outbuildings swimming pools and tennis courts drives, paths, garden and/or retaining walls, patios, fences
Landslip
Landslip (see Fig. 2.4) is the sudden movement of soil on a slope, or gradual creep of a slope over a period of time.
Damage threshold
This is the borderline which divides damage which is inconsequential and unlikely to be of concern from that which is likely to be of concern, particularly to Valuers at point of sale and to property owners generally. For property owners, the acceptability or otherwise of damage is often a subjective matter. However, Valuers and other professionals who appraise properties, need to be more objective otherwise properties with very minor inconsequential cracks could be marked down in value or could be the subject of unnecessary insurance claims. There is no universal agreement on what constitutes an acceptable damage threshold, since much will depend on issues such as the property type and construction, soil types and presence of vegetation. However, it is probably fair to say that a crack in a property which is 2mm or less in width and which does not vary by more than 1mm in width during the course of an annual seasonal cycle of ground movements, atmospheric and temperature changes, may be regarded as inconsequential. However, a number of cracks of lesser width may be a cause for concern. Hairline crack widths up to 0.25mm can for all practical purposes be ignored.
It does not include the value of the ground within the boundaries of the site. It is usually calculated by multiplying the total area of all floors of the house by a basic cost per unit area, with the figures commonly used nowadays being those published annually by the RICS Building Cost Information Service. Some Insurers also require above average quality fitments in a property to be taken into account, e.g: double glazed windows high quality kitchens high quality bathroom and bedroom fitments
2.2.2 Insurance terms

It is important when considering the points made under this heading to bear in mind the comments in Chapter 4.
The figure should also include the cost of employing a professional building advisor, e.g. Architect or Surveyor, to assist with the administration of the rebuilding contract and this normally adds about a further 15% to the basic rebuilding sum to make up the full sum insured. The RICS figures automatically include an amount for professional fees as well as costs incurred in demolition and site clearance where necessary.
The site
In most cases, insurance policies cover subsidence of the site and this is generally considered by the Insurance Ombudsman to be the prepared ground on which the building is erected after the foundation trenches have been dug and immediately prior to the construction of the building. This means that some Insurers may also give cover for subsidence resulting from defectively compacted fill beneath the building foundation. Some Insurers use the term land belonging to the building. This probably means adjacent gardens, driveways, patios, etc. as well as the ground directly below the property. This highlights that there can be important differences between policy wordings and their interpretation, and the Insured should always establish what cover they have with the Insurer concerned. Insurers, however, should try to avoid
Policy conditions
These are the general conditions applicable to the whole policy, and are set out in the policy booklet issued to house owners by their Insurers. They deal with the way the policy must be administered by both the Insured and Insurer; if they are not complied with, Insurers may be able to avoid liability under the policy.
Claims conditions
These conditions set out what needs to be done by an Insured when a claim is made under the policy. They also explain what rights the Insurer has in dealing with a claim such as seeking payments from other parties who might have been responsible for the damage, or getting a contributory payment from another Insurer who might also have been providing cover.
Fig. 2.4 Landslip
19
Exclusions
These may be exclusions which apply to the whole policy, e.g.: radioactive contamination war risks damage from sonic bangs
initial appraisal (see Chapter 6) further investigation (see Chapter 7) remedial works (see Chapters 8, 9 and 10)
However there are usually specific exclusions too, which relate to particular sections of the policy, e.g. the Buildings Section. For example, any of the following will probably be excluded from cover provided for subsidence, heave and landslip: damage resulting from demolition damage caused by structural repairs or alterations to buildings the insurance excess which is the first part of the cost of claim born by the Insured faulty or poor workmanship see below defective design the use of faulty materials in the buildings
Experts engaged to advise on subsidence and heave, particularly in assessing whether remedial works may or may not be needed, should have detailed knowledge of building construction and be experienced in investigating and appraising subsidence and any resultant damage. An Expert may be any one of the professionals described below, but should be capable of appraising and accepting responsibility for advising upon some or all of the following: scope of investigation required building design and construction foundation design ground engineering recognition of the severity and relevance of damage to buildings design and/or specification of remedial works, including site inspections during the execution of them giving an assurance in writing, upon completion of remedial work, that the work has been properly undertaken in the form of a Final Report to the Insured and/or a Certificate of Structural Adequacy. The assurance should not rely solely on a guarantee or warranty issued by a Contractor if required, recommend the appointment of an arboriculturist to advise on trees, tree physiology and water use the overall project management.
The normal exclusions for faulty or poor workmanship, defective design and the use of faulty materials in the buildings, if taken literally, would enable Insurers to avoid the vast majority of subsidence claims under their policies. For example, if a building does subside then the chances are that the workmanship, design or materials have proved inadequate in some way albeit that the building may be many years old and has shown no previous signs of movement. The intention therefore is to only apply the exclusions where these are the sole cause of the damage, i.e. without an intervening event, such as the activities of tree roots, leaking drains, or movement for some reason in the sub strata.
Complaints procedures
In the event of a complaint needing to be made about a claim, the Insured will normally be asked to follow the procedure outlined below: Refer the case in the first instance to the senior management of any firm of technical professional advisers involved, i.e. engineers or loss adjusters (see 2.2.3), before writing to the Insurer or Lender. If the complaint is not satisfied, write to the manager of the handling office of the insurance company. If the complainant is still not satisfied, they should write to the Head Office of the insurance company for the attention of the Chief Executive. If the problem still cannot be resolved, write to the Insurance Ombudsman Bureau or Personal Insurance Arbitrator, if the Insurer belongs to one of these. Both schemes relate only to personal insurance and not to commercial insurance contracts, but in approaching them an Insureds normal legal rights are not affected in any way.
2.2.3 The technical expert adviser (The Expert)

The investigation and rectification of subsidence damage can involve many specialist advisers. However, it is important for the owner of the property (and probably also the Insurer of the property) that a single party should have overall technical and managerial responsibility for seeing the matter through from the initial identification of damage through to the issuing of a Final Report to the Insured and/or a Certificate of Structural Adequacy. Such a technical expert adviser is referred to in this document as the Expert. The responsibility of the Expert is to be familiar with all aspects of a subsidence problem. For details of relevant professional bodies see 2.2.4. The Expert is obliged to demonstrate reasonable skill and care to be expected of an Expert advising on the type of work for which they have been engaged by the client. The Expert is normally required at three stages:
20
Experts will be concerned in establishing the cause of the damage or structural movement by detailed technical investigation involving examination and measurement of the building and the damage as well as instigation of any required geotechnical examinations of the ground on which the property stands. They should be capable of interpreting the results of those investigations and thus be able to distinguish between the effects and symptoms of subsidence and heave and other possible causes of structural damage or movement. Experts should also have appropriate Professional Indemnity Insurance. The Expert can be directly appointed by an Insurer, or alternatively indirectly via a Loss Adjuster. Experts appointed directly by Insurers are usually specialist consultants or alternatively Loss Adjusters who have in-house technical expert advisers. Where an Insurer appoints a Loss Adjuster to investigate a subsidence claim, if the Loss Adjuster does not have in-house appropriately qualified staff, they may employ the services of an external specialist consultant, usually on a panel basis. In this case, the Loss Adjusters Expert should still be required to fulfil the functions listed above, including on completion, the issue of a Certificate of Structural Adequacy, if required to do so. Most Insurers will take on the responsibility of appointing Experts but some Insurers will ask their Insured to do this. It is nevertheless very important that, in principle, before any Expert is appointed by an Insured and investigations started, the Insurer concerned is told about the damage. If the Insured does not already know of an appropriate Expert, then names of professionally qualified Experts can normally be given to enquirers by the relevant professional institutions. The Insured should be satisfied that the Expert has the appropriate experience and is prepared to act in accordance with the relevant terms listed above prior to being appointed. The types of professional advisers who may be able to act either as Experts or in support of Experts are considered in the following paragraphs. It should be noted that these advisers could all be employed by the same firm.
Chartered and Incorporated Engineers

Members of the Institution of Structural Engineers (IStructE)
or the Institution of Civil Engineers (ICE) have the most appropriate qualifications to conduct both the initial appraisal as well as any subsequent further detailed investigation. The latter requires a much greater technical expertise which is normally only possessed by appropriately experienced Structural Engineers, who may be employed by a firm of consultants or loss adjusters. Members of the IStructE cover a wide range of expertise so not all necessarily have the relevant expertise and experience to comment on foundation failure of low-rise buildings and on the implications of subsidence damage generally. The majority of Insurers prefer to engage Engineers with the relevant experience for initial appraisals, further investigations and property stabilisation, including underpinning if required. Engineers can also be used for specifying and supervising above ground repair works.
Architects
A small number of Architects do have sufficient experience of subsidence and heave matters to be able to undertake the initial appraisal, but the vast majority do not. Architects are generally not employed on subsidence claims unless substantial rebuilding of a property is involved.
Others
It should be emphasised that a lack of formal qualifications may not necessarily prevent an individual carrying out the initial appraisal if they have the relevant experience, but it cannot be emphasised too strongly that care should always be exercised when appointing an Expert to ensure that they can identify and appraise subsidence and heave damage, and distinguish it from other types of building/structural movement or damage.
Chartered and Incorporated Surveyors and Builders

As with Engineers, there are many disciplines within the surveying profession and, again, not all will have the appropriate background to carry out an initial appraisal. For instance, Chartered Building Surveyors qualified within the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors are likely to be more suitable than Valuation, Fine Art or Quantity Surveyors of the same Institution, although all may appear to have the same qualifications on paper. As an alternative to using Engineers, Chartered Building Surveyors and Chartered Builders may be used to specify and supervise above-ground repair works. Chartered Building Surveyors also have a role to play in connection with party wall legislation (see 10.3.5)
2.2.4 Qualifying bodies for Experts

The Institution of Structural Engineers The Institution of Civil Engineers The Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors The Chartered Institute of Builders The Arboricultural Association The National, London and Regional Tree Officers Associations
2.3 Mortgage procedure the relationship between Lenders, Borrowers, Insurers and Valuers
2.3.1 The mortgage
A Mortgage Deed is an agreement between a Lender and a Borrower usually in connection with a loan for a particular property purchase. The Lender agrees to provide a sum of money to the Borrower usually to be used in the purchase of a property in return for a promise by the Borrower to repay the loan, with interest over the agreed mortgage term, often 25 years. There will be other agreed terms and conditions including methods of repayment, the necessity to insure the buildings, the need to keep the property in good repair, a requirement to notify the Lender of any works which might affect the value of the property and the procedure if the Borrower defaults on repayments. All these items will be contained in a legal document known as a Mortgage Deed. Where a mortgage is given, the Lender has an interest in the property because it is the collateral or security for the loan, but has no right of interference with the purchasers rights as owner unless there is a failure to comply with the terms of the Mortgage Deed. The existence of the mortgage is entered on the Charges Register at the Land Registry against the address of the property. The Borrower (owner) cannot therefore dispose of the property by selling it without the prospective purchaser being aware that there is a legal charge over the property and hence the Borrower does not have an unencumbered right to sell it. During the course of the sale of a property, the vendor is normally required to complete a standard Law Society Preliminary Enquiries form about the property for the benefit of the purchaser. This form requires the vendor to state (amongst other matters) whether the property has, to the best of their knowledge, suffered from subsidence, heave or landslip.
Arboriculturists
In cases involving assessment of the effects of trees on buildings or requiring remedial action to trees, it will probably be necessary to consult a tree specialist. These specialists should be qualified arboriculturists who are normally members of a relevant professional association, which are given in 2.2.4.
Loss Adjusters
These are professional advisers appointed by insurance companies to advise impartially on the relevance of the claim within the terms of the policy. They are required to: investigate, quantify and administer the claim as quickly and efficiently as possible in accordance with the terms of the policy, and to try to avoid delays present the views of the Insured impartially to the Insurer, even if they are not in agreement with those views.
Unless the Loss Adjuster is a Chartered Engineer or Building Surveyor, they are unlikely to handle the technical aspects of a subsidence claim and will advise on insurance matters only, referring all technical matters to in-house or external Engineers and Surveyors. Some Insurers may choose not to appoint an Adjuster but may decide to administer the claim themselves and use a Consulting Engineer to advise directly on the technical aspects.
Local Authority technical officers

These, including Building Control Officers and Public Health Inspectors, have appropriate experience but their terms of employment restrict them to ensuring compliance with current legislation. They will normally refer the enquirer to one of the parties listed. The important point is to ensure that those who do advise have the necessary experience.
2.3.2 The role of the Valuer

Lenders will usually obtain a valuation on a property being considered for a mortgage loan. A Valuer reporting to a Lender will almost always be professionally qualified, being either a member of the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors or of the Incorporated Society of Valuers and Auctioneers. The Valuer will be expected to have knowledge
Loss Assessors
Loss Assessors are not normally associated with subsidence claims because of the technical issues involved but where engaged by the Insured to assist in the making of a claim, their fees would be met solely by the Insured.
21
and experience in the local geographical area in which valuations are carried out and to work within the Practice/Guidance Notes for Valuers produced by the two professional bodies mentioned above, subject to any specific requirements of the particular Lender. Typically the Valuer will: inspect the property, including factors such as its location and condition, which could have a significant effect on the market value advise the Lender of the open market value. This will involve obtaining as much sales evidence as is available regarding transactions in similar properties in the period immediately preceding the inspection. The analysis of this will assist in reaching an opinion on the appropriate valuation after taking all factors into account provide an opinion on the estimated current reinstatement cost of the building for insurance purposes. This will include any garages and outbuildings with the cost of the site clearance and professional fees. In reaching this sum, the Valuer will normally have regard to the figures produced annually by the Building Cost Information Service of the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors. These cover a wide spectrum of properties in different parts of the country and of different ages and quality. This topic is dealt with under 2.2.2.
judgment based only on a limited inspection. If it is obvious that movement has ceased and is unlikely to recur, the Valuer will report accordingly (see Chapter 6). However, in the event of a structural movement which appears to be progressive, or there is doubt as to the current or future position, the Valuer is likely to call for a report (see section 2.4) from a Structural Engineer, or possibly a Chartered Building Surveyor. In serious cases the Valuer may recommend the property be declined by the Lender.
2.3.4 Standard house purchase reports Mortgage valuation report

This is a report produced for a Lender and normally produced on an abbreviated pre-printed form. In reaching conclusions on the value of the property, the Valuer should not have regard to the amount of the loan. The report should comment on the apparent condition of the property within the scope of the limited inspection required to determine value. Normally it will give an open-market valuation, an opinion on the estimate of the reinstatement cost in the event of total destruction of the property and details of anything which is likely to cause damage to the property such as nearby trees, a steeply sloping site or a nearby river or stream. A comment on the future saleability of the property may be included. Any obvious major defects observed during the course of a limited inspection and other repairs which, if not dealt with promptly, may cause the condition or value of the property to decline, will normally be reported. Depending upon its lending policy, the Lender may require remedial work to be carried out before mortgage monies are released withhold a portion of the loan until work is completed require an undertaking by the Borrower to carry out the work within a reasonable period.
In all these obligations, the Valuers duty is to the Lender. However, where the Valuer knows that the prospective purchaser is relying on the report, the Valuer may also have a duty of care to the prospective purchaser. This duty of care will relate to the same services which the Valuer was instructed to provide to the Lender and only to those services. This may include the reporting of major factors which are, or ought to be, obvious in the course of a reasonably professional visual inspection where these are likely materially to affect the value of the property. Only Valuers are expert in marketability and value. If doubt exists, or if there are circumstances where the value of the property is likely to be reduced, the advice of a Valuation Surveyor should be sought.
2.3.3 Insurance arrangements

A Lender making a mortgage loan will require the property taken as security to be insured and for the perils covered to include subsidence, heave and landslip. In recent years Insurers have encouraged Lenders to take a greater role in evaluating structural movement insurance risks on their behalf. As a consequence, many Lenders have arrangements with Insurers whereby properties are automatically taken on risk by the Insurer without the need for individual cases to be proposed to them unless specified circumstances exist. Examples of specified circumstances would be where a property is affected by movement which appears to be continuing, or where there are circumstances which represent a risk of movement in the future, such as trees on shrinkable soils which are close to or within influencing distance of the property. In these cases, the Insurer may wish to consider the details prior to deciding whether or not to provide cover for the property. In implementing these arrangements, Lenders will usually require their Valuers reports to contain clear statements (often using standard phrases) as to whether any identified movement is considered to be continuing or longstanding/non-progressive, or as to future risk if this is thought to exist. Prospective Borrowers who are arranging insurance themselves rather than through the Lender, and who have been supplied with a copy of the Valuers report, are likely to use the Valuers comments when completing the Insurance Proposal Forms. Alternatively Borrowers would be advised to obtain their own report if continuing movement had been identified. Whilst structural movement requires special care both in assessment and resulting recommendations, it is important to remember that a Valuer is expected to make a snapshot
22
If it is unclear how extensive the works may be, or the full extent of disrepair cannot be readily assessed, then the Valuer may call for further investigation by an appropriate specialist and may recommend that no loan be made until the difficulties have been clarified. The purpose of a Mortgage Valuation Report is to provide a valuation at a particular point in time. It involves a limited inspection only of as much of the interior and exterior of the property as is accessible to the Valuer without undue difficulty. It has never been intended to be a detailed report on the condition of the property. The inspection will not cover subfloors or the roof void, apart from what is visible from the access hatch. There is no obligation to lift floor coverings, or to move furnishings or effects, or to test services. Whilst value is always influenced by condition, the valuation can only have regard to the matters revealed by the limited inspection. The intending Borrower will normally reimburse the Lender for its costs in obtaining the Mortgage Valuation Report but practice varies. The Lender will use the report to decide on whether or not to lend monies based on the security of the property. It is usual however for the Lender to make a copy of the report available to the prospective Borrower. Most Lenders encourage prospective Borrowers to obtain their own independent and more detailed reports such as the RICS/ISVA Homebuyers Report and Valuation, or a Building Survey as these will provide a much clearer picture of the overall condition of a property than the basic Valuation Report. It is often possible for the Borrower to arrange for one of these reports to be prepared by the same Valuer/Surveyor being used by the Lender, which may help to reduce overall costs. Details of other reports which can be obtained follow.
Homebuyer Survey and Valuation report

This type of report is intended to give general information on the condition of the property, but with the main focus on matters considered urgent or significant and those on which the
client should take action before making a legal commitment to buy. It is in a standard pre-printed format identifying the topics, both internally and externally, on which the surveyor is, expected to comment. Such reports can be arranged directly through independent firms of Surveyors, or through some Lending institutions if a mortgage is being sought at the same time. In this latter case the Surveyor will usually produce two reports for two distinct clients a Mortgage Valuation for the Lender and, under a separate private contract for which terms of engagement will need to be agreed, a Homebuyers type of report for the potential Borrower. This type of report is a cost-effective method of providing a potential buyer with basic general information on the condition of a building but which does not go into the sort of detail normally expected from a Building Survey. It is, however, based on a more detailed inspection than that required for a Mortgage Valuation. Opening up of the fabric of the building will not normally be done and the testing of services and other detailed investigations are also excluded. Some properties are too old and/or too large to be suitable for this kind of report, and in these cases a Surveyor may be unwilling to provide one.
assessing the influence of the vegetation on the structural stability of the property and any preventative or remedial work which needs to be carried out.
Terms of reference
The terms of reference need to be spelt out on an individual basis for all types of report. It is very important that the addressee and purpose of the report is clearly set out as this will nearly always dictate the scope of the inspection and the cost of the report. Mortgage Valuation and Homebuyers Reports are usually subject to standard terms.
2.4 Supplementary reports

Building Survey
This term has recently come into general use and replaces the term Structural Survey. A Building Survey is normally a report commissioned by and prepared for a private individual who is thinking about buying a particular property and is written by a suitably experienced Engineer or Surveyor and based on a thorough inspection of a property. It does not normally include disruptive exploratory opening up of finishes or fabric nor are the foundations usually inspected and this should be made clear in the brief and the subsequent report. A valuation is not necessarily a requirement of a Building Survey, but is nevertheless often included. This report will contain a very detailed account of the condition of a building and there will be an opportunity for the client to discuss their requirements with the Surveyor before and after the inspection takes place and to request tests on services such as electricity, drainage and central heating. These can be normally arranged by a Surveyor with the appropriate specialists although at extra cost. The whole procedure can be tailored to suit the client and can be extended, for example, to provide advice on extensions and/or alterations to the structure. A Building Survey is usually outside the arrangements for any mortgage and a Lender will therefore also require completion of their Mortgage Valuation document. Again, the two can often be carried out by the same firm, in which case a discount may be offered on the Building Survey fee. Fees for Building Surveys are not subject to any set scale and will depend on the age, size and complexity of the property and the amount of detail required. The scope of the Survey and terms of engagement need to be negotiated with the Surveyor before the work is commissioned.
Structural report
This type of report may be recommended by a Valuer/Surveyor if there are signs of structural problems, such as cracking, distortions or other signs of movement indicative of structural inadequacy or instability, which require more detailed investigation. It will normally be carried out by a Chartered or Incorporated Engineer.
Arboricultural report
This type of report may be recommended by a Valuer/Surveyor where vegetation is present which might cause or contribute to damage particularly if the subsoil is clay (see Chapter 8). However, it is most important that any arboriculturist works closely with a structural engineer when
23
24
Chapter 3 Concerns
3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 Introduction Customer care Property owner (the Insured) Lender Insurer Local Authority/utilities Neighbours Contractor 26 26 26 26 27 27 27 27
25
3 Concerns
3.1 Introduction
In the normal course of events, when a building suffers minor damage from wear and tear it is repaired by the owner at their own expense. However significant subsidence damage is normally insured under domestic insurance policies along with the majority of the other risks which can cause major damage such as flooding, storm, fire and explosion. The management of matters relating to subsidence and heave damage can be complicated because many parties become involved between the discovery of the damage and the completion of the remedial works. In dealing with these damage claims and remedial works contracts it is clear that different parties often have different concerns and frequently view the problem differently. This Chapter attempts to identify the different parties, other than the Expert, and to indicate the overall interests and concerns of each of these parties. By doing this it is hoped that everyone likely to be involved will then appreciate the rationale behind the viewpoints and decisions of others, bearing in mind that it should be the overriding aim of everyone that remedial work stabilises and repairs the affected property in such a way that insurance cover can be continued at normal terms. In short, the property should be restored to the same state it was in prior to subsidence or heave occurring. Following remedial works, no blight (notional loss in value of the property, see also 4.6.3) should attach to the property, although in the unlikely event of blight, it should be noted that insurance claims settlements would not include any payment for perceived reduction in value resulting from any form of blight. whether the damage is recent or long-standing the cosmetic appearance of the property as a result of the damage possibly even after the damage has been repaired the difficulties likely to be encountered while the repairs are being done, e.g. disruption to the household how long it will take to stabilise the property having to pay to rectify a problem and will probably be concerned about who will meet this cost whether any intermediate repair work will be undertaken during the investigation, e.g. easing doors payment of the insurance excess, generally 1000 how to appoint an Expert, although nowadays Insurers generally appoint and pay for a suitable Expert to act jointly and impartially on behalf of the property owner/Insured and the Insurers appointment of a suitable contractor to carry out remedial work guarantees or warranties on the repairs any future insurance cover difficulties in selling the property and a reduction in its value trees affecting the property being subject to Tree Preservation Orders the implications of their property or the adjoining property being a listed building or located in a conservation area, which may involve abnormal costs and statutory permissions the proximity of neighbouring properties their own trees having influence on neighbouring properties and vice-versa the reasons for monitoring and the length of the monitoring period
3.2 Customer care

Subsidence claims can be very worrying to property owners (the Insured), and all Experts and Contractors personnel should be aware that their actions can significantly affect the relationship between the Insurer and the Insured and that they are advised to bear in mind a number of aspects such as: Communication good communication is vital and time should be allocated for listening to an Insureds concerns, answering their questions and explaining to them how their claim will be handled at each stage and why, including agreeing with them the eventual scope of the works. Cordial relations should always be maintained between parties, including neighbours, who may have an interest, e.g. they may own trees that are implicated. Confidence establish the Insureds confidence in the fairness and competence of the Expert and other people dealing with their claim. Respect treat the Insured and their home with respect throughout the claim, particularly during the repair contract. Quality ensure that the contractors labour and materials are of the required quality to meet the agreed specification. Time provide a proactive service to the Insured to ensure that as far as possible each stage of the claim is completed within agreed timescales.
3.4 Lender
In general, Lenders become involved with subsidence, heave or landslip damage, if and when notified by an owner about such damage or the need to make a claim. When asking an Insurer for advice or asking for updates on the progress of a claim, they: tend to be concerned about the effect of the problem on the value of the property, the security against the mortgage, e.g. can the property be sold in its damaged state for at least the amount of the outstanding mortgage? may be concerned about the outcome of the claim affecting the relationship between the Lender and the Borrower. may be concerned who pays, where, so far as the size of the final account for the remedial works is concerned, the sum involved may be more than the claims settlement amount agreed. may be concerned about whether the damage is actually insured at all, i.e. is the damage due to an insured risk? If it is not, then the owner/Borrower may not be able to pay for the necessary remedial works and as a result these may not be done, thus possibly affecting the value of the property and, in turn, the security of the mortgage. may be asked to provide a mortgage on a property where a claim has been notified, and monitoring is being carried out to establish that there is a valid claim and no repairs have been done. In these circumstances Lenders will be reluctant to provide a mortgage since there is doubt whether a valid claim exists and that any money will be available for repairs to be carried out
3.3 Property owner (the Insured)

The owner may worry about: the cause of the problem and its physical implications, e.g. safety of the property
26
3.5 Insurer
The Insurer would be concerned about: whether the damage exceeds a certain minimum level and therefore is worth the time and expense of a detailed investigation by an Expert whether the damage has actually been caused by an insured risk in this instance has the damage been caused by subsidence or heave of the site the adequacy of the sum insured, and as a result payment of the correct premium whether the ground movement and/or the damage occurred during the policy period or existed before cover was arranged the potential cost of appraisal, investigations and the eventual remedial work needed the method of how the excess will be paid failure to comply with relevant policy conditions, such as late notification of the claim possible recoveries against Third Parties, e.g. tree owners and their liability insurers the operation of the Tree Root Claims Agreement (see Appendix E) legislation e.g. Party Wall, etc. Act 3.1 , CDM 3.2 (see Appendix G)
3.7 Neighbours
They may be concerned and become involved because of: the proximity of the affected property to their property the possibility of the problem affecting their properties either immediately or in the future if it is not dealt with appropriately and effectively neighbouring properties being affected during the remedial works or subsequently as a result of the remedial works, e.g. a property may be underpinned and rendered stable, yet it is known that the adjoining property may be founded on poor ground and so be likely to suffer damage in the future because of differential movement between the stabilised property and the unstabilised property the application of the Party Wall, etc. Act3.1 if an adjoining property is subject to underpinning and repair close to, or actually under a party wall the removal of a tree to prevent further damage to a particular property or if any subsequent heave could also affect properties other than the one being treated the saleability and stability of their properties being affected, whether or not an adjacent property is repaired, because evidence of defect in an adjacent property, or under it may be sufficient to affect the value of neighbouring properties their trees influencing their neighbours property
3.6 Local Authority/utilities

The Local Authority or the relevant utility may become involved if the damage or its cause threatens the health and safety of any person. This is likely to be the case if: the property is in a dangerous condition service supplies to the property such as the gas supply pipe or the drains, are damaged the ground beneath the property or in the immediate vicinity has suffered landslip, or is likely to do so in the future any trees involved are subject to Tree Preservation Orders the property is in a conservation area or is a listed building
3.8 Contractor
The Contractor is contracted to the owner to carry out the remedial works to the property. These may range from cosmetic repairs, such as filling cracks and redecoration, to preventative measures such as removing or managing trees or repairs to or improvement of the foundations such as underpinning. The more sophisticated the work, the more specialist skills the Contractor must have. The works should be properly designed and administered by the Expert so that the Contractor can undertake and manage the work efficiently. The Contractor will need to establish a number of matters such as if: the Contractor is expected to be responsible for the design of any of the remedial works the Expert who has designed or specified the works will be inspecting and administering the work during the contract and be available at short notice to advise on any difficulties encountered on site the site has been properly investigated and the cause of the problem established the extent and standard of the work has been properly specified arrangements for access, materials storage, working hours payments will be made on time in accordance with the contract with provision for paying the excess any particular legislation applies, e.g. CDM3.2 and the Construction Act3.4 the responsibility for meeting the cost of the works is to be met either directly or indirectly by more than one party. payment for subsidence related work forming the contract will be paid for by the Insurer. Any other work privately agreed between the Insured and the Contractor will be paid for directly by the Insured, to the contractor. Such work may involve a separate contract. the Contractor is likely to have to deal with any decoration or other work, outside the scope of the main remedial works contract a direct payment mandate will be signed.
Approval under the Building Regulations is required for underpinning, superstructure work and drainage installation. Minor repairs do not normally require approval, although the Local Authority should be contacted if there is any doubt. The Local Authority could become involved in the case of the building coming within the categories of Dangerous or Neglected Structure, with the service of Statutory Notices or in extreme cases by the undertaking of emergency works to remove immediate danger. Similar powers are available to the Local Authorities under the Housing Act 19853.3 where the property is tenanted, and in a poor state of repair. Local Authorities are responsible for administering Tree Preservation Orders (TPOs) and may need to be involved in tree removal or pruning. Trees located on the highway invariably belong to Local Authorities and if such trees are causing damage or posing a threat to property the Local Authority will become involved. Local Authorities normally employ their own arboricultural staff to advise on such matters. If a property is listed or in a conservation area the proposed works may need listed building consent, and involvement of English Heritage. It is recommended that the advice of the Local Authority Conservation Officer be sought at the earliest stage. Breaches of this legislation, upon conviction, could result in fines or a custodial sentence. Some Local Authorities have expressed concern about the use of partial underpinning. These concerns are now voiced less frequently, however the subject is dealt with in detail in section 9.5.
References
3.1 Party Wall, etc. Act 1996
27
3.2 3.3 3.4
Construction (Design & Management) Regulations 1994 Housing Act 1985 Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996 Part II.
28
Chapter 4 Insurance matters

4.1 Introduction 4.2 The insurance contract 4.3 Subsidence damage cover 4.3.1 Insurance cover and its continuity 4.3.2 Establishing a claim 4.3.3 Timing of subsidence damage 4.3.4 Reopening claims 4.4 Policy conditions and exclusions 4.4.1 General 4.4.2 Prompt notification 4.4.3 Non-disclosure 4.4.4 Sum insured 4.4.5 Under insurance 4.4.6 Maintenance and repair 4.4.7 Betterment 4.4.8 Floor slabs 4.5 Investigation of insurance claims 4.6 Handling of subsidence, heave and landslip claims 4.6.1 Procedure 4.6.2 Simple stabilisation measures 4.6.3 Continuity of cover after remedial works 30 30 30 30 30 30 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32
29
4 Insurance matters
4.1 Introduction
The explanations given in this Chapter are for general guidance only and they do not necessarily reflect the views of all Insurers or mortgage Lenders. In specific cases, reference must be made to the individual Insurer or Lender concerned. The majority of owners have their properties insured against subsidence, heave and landslip. Insurance provides them with the peace of mind that anything unexpected affecting the property which is covered by the building insurance will be repaired. Lenders, on the other hand, require properties to be covered by building insurance in order to protect their security. The basis on which the purchase money is lent is that the property will be maintained in a readily saleable condition so that if it needs to be sold, there is the best chance a sum equal to or exceeding the amount of the loan will be realised. Some Lenders require continuing proof that the property remains insured, hence the normal requirement that the insurance is arranged through the Lender or with the Lenders approval. Premiums paid through Lenders will usually be collected by instalments by adding them to monthly mortgage repayments. There is still an area of risk to both owners and Lenders when structural damage occurs as not all such damage is covered by building insurance, e.g. damage not caused by foundation movement but which has solely arisen from: poor quality building work inadequate materials inadequate design failure to maintain the property reasonably. as if it had not suffered the damage and the reduced market value of the property taking the damage into account. While repair and redecoration may give rise to improvements, it is not the intention of the policy to pay for betterment (see 4.4.7) or maintenance of the fabric of the building above and beyond that necessary to carry out reasonable repairs and redecoration following subsidence, heave and landslip movement. The extent of policy cover with regard to the above will depend on individual policy wordings.
4.3 Subsidence damage cover

As already noted, ground movement risks have only been included routinely in household insurance policies issued in the UK since 1971. This type of insurance cover is not routinely available outside the British Isles. People living in Europe for example, may have to live in properties showing subsidence damage, unless they are prepared to fund the repairs themselves, because no insurance cover is available.
4.3.1 Insurance cover and its continuity

Subsidence insurance is intended to cover the Policyholder against damage to the insured buildings caused by subsidence or heave of the site beneath the buildings, or landslip subject to the policy terms, conditions and exceptions (see Chapter 2). In principle, Insurers are only contracted to cover subsidence, heave or landslip damage which occurs after the date of going on risk. As a result, damage which originated before the date of commencement of cover may be paid partly or wholly by the previous Insurer depending on how long the current Insurer has been on risk (See Appendix E for details on the Subsidence Claims Agreement).
Examples of the above would include lintel failure, roof spread, etc. This is often expensive to repair and the lack of insurance cover may not always be understood by owners. However, these may be covered by insurance-backed warranties on new properties. In older properties such matters are maintenance issues which are not covered by an insurance policy.
4.3.2 Establishing a claim

In establishing whether damage has arisen due to subsidence, heave or landslip, consideration needs to be given to whether there has been some external factor, or combination of factors, which have influenced the ground beneath the foundations. It is not important at this stage to know the exact cause of the movement to enable a decision to be made as to whether damage is the result of subsidence. If cracking to the property is wholly consistent with ground movement because of an external factor, then it is clear that the movement of site must be giving rise to the damage which is occurring. A simple understanding of the mechanism of damage is sufficient at this stage to enable a claim to be considered (see Chapter 6). However a more precise understanding of the cause of damage will need to be determined to confirm policy liability and to allow appropriate remedial measures to be correctly designed (See Chapter 7). However, there might be an exclusion which applies which may invalidate the claim (see section 2.2). It must be emphasised, however, that it was never the intention of Insurers to pay to remedy damage which is an inevitable consequence of the inherent nature of a building, e.g. damage arising from regular thermal, minor seasonal or cyclical movement (see 2.2.1). This is as much a part of the normal and predictable characteristics of a building as, say, the swelling and shrinkage of woodwork which results in doors and windows sticking from time to time and then becoming free with a change of season.
4.2 The insurance contract

An Insurance Policy is primarily a contract between two parties, namely: the Insurance Company the Insurer the Policyholder and where applicable the Lender the Insured.
The business of insurance originated because people wished to safeguard their interest by contributing to mutual funds which could be called upon if an individual suffered loss or damage by an event which was covered under the insurance arrangement. Although several hundred years have passed, nevertheless the same basic principles remain. A property owner insures their property against specified events or perils such as subsidence, heave and landslip. An Insurance Policy protects the Policyholder against loss or damage caused by one of the insured events. In its most simple terms, this means that the Insurer will be placing the Insured back in the same position in which they were in but for the occurrence of the insured event. This can be done in one of two ways, i.e.: paying for the cost of repairing the damage if it is not possible to pay for the damage to be repaired economically, a cash settlement equal to the diminution in market value may be paid, i.e. the Insured may be paid the difference between the market value of the property
4.3.3 Timing of subsidence damage

Some difficulties may arise where subsidence-related movement, which initially seemed non-progressive at the time
30
cover started, continues, resulting in later damage. In such circumstances, it is impossible to repair the more recent damage without also repairing damage caused by the previous problem (see also section 9.5). Evidence of continuing subsidence, heave or landslip has a major impact on saleability and value which is of concern to both Lenders and Owners, particularly those who wish to buy or sell a house. It follows that investigation of subsidence, heave or landslip problems must be addressed quickly, that repairs must be satisfactory from an engineering point of view and that saleability at a reasonable price should be restored. Where saleability is likely to be permanently affected, Insurers may decide to make a once-and-for-all payment to cover diminution in value to restore fully the Insured and the Lender to their previous respective positions, rather than incur the cost of repairs, but in such cases and for obvious reasons, future cover for subsidence, heave or landslip would be excluded from the policy. Obviously Insurers accept that a claim will be considered under their policy provided subsidence, heave or landslip is shown to have happened and structural damage has occurred during the currency of their policy. Insurers will not pay for preventative measures such as underpinning, where no damage to the relevant part of the property has arisen.
the same cause and at the same time any payment within the policy excess.
In addition, there are also claims conditions within the contract. A failure by the Insured to comply with these conditions may entitle the Insurers to refuse to deal with the claim. The effect that the breach of any of the conditions by the Insured might have on a claim is explained in the following sections. In a domestic situation, Insurers will seldom decline to deal with a claim due to breach of a policy condition if that breach has been innocent in nature and not material to the loss and does not prejudice the Insurers position. They may, however, require a detailed explanation before a decision is reached and often such investigations do take time. Guidance on this matter is provided by the Association of British Insurers.
4.4.2 Prompt notification

When the Insured becomes aware of any damage, they should notify the Insurer as soon as possible and provide all the information that is reasonably required by the Insurer. The reasons for this are: steps can be taken to commence the investigation and perhaps also to prevent the damage getting worse delays can lead to the cost of the work increasing because of inflation in dealing with a claim, the Insurer is entitled to take over whatever legal right the Policyholder might have to recover the costs resulting from damage, perhaps from a negligent builder or the owner of a tree which has caused the damage. It is important that, for example, the tree owner or where applicable their Insurers are placed on notice as quickly as possible, both for legal reasons and also to allow the tree owners Insurers the opportunity to deal with the matter without their own position being prejudiced by delay (see Appendix E for the ABI Tree Root Agreement).
4.3.4 Reopening claims

Occasionally, further damage may appear in a property after repairs have been completed. Whether this new damage will be regarded as a new claim or a continuation of the earlier claim will be determined by the technical evidence. It is the view of insurers that any new damage will be considered as a new claim (with the appropriate excess being payable) unless the new damage has appeared in the same part of the property which had previously been repaired and is attributable to the same cause as before. Should a subsequent spell of dry weather occur, this may not be regarded as the same cause, bearing in mind that in the case of storm damage a second storm would be regarded as a separate incident. Generally for a claim to be reopened, the new damage must also appear within a relatively short period of time and probably no longer than two years.
4.4.3 Non-disclosure
The insurance contract is a contract of utmost good faith between the parties. This means that neither party is entitled to mislead the other when entering into the contract. There is an obligation on the Insured to disclose any material facts which would influence the Insurers judgment. A material fact is a fact which would have influenced the Insurers judgment in deciding whether to accept the particular property in question as a suitable risk and if so, at what terms. For example, the proposal form may ask whether there are any cracks in the property and, if so, their approximate width. In addition, the form may ask whether there are large trees or bushes within certain distances of the property. The effect of withholding a material fact is quite simply that the Insurers are not aware of all the details relating to the risk in order to assess it properly, and if these details come to light, then Insurers will not only not deal with the current claim but also the policy can be rendered void.
4.4 Policy conditions and exclusions

4.4.1 General
As previously stated, the policy is a contract between two parties the Insured and the Insurer and is renewable on an annual basis. Both parties are bound by the precise wording of the contract between them. They are entitled to rely on the wording of the contract and entitled also to the terms and conditions of that contract as appropriate. The policy wordings used by Insurers differ and small differences in wording either open up the policy to give wider cover, or alternatively tighten it up to provide narrower cover. It is important therefore that all parties are fully aware of the precise wording of the insurance contract upon which they are relying. Insurers should make sure that the policy is clearly worded. The policy normally excludes the following: damage resulting from demolition, structural repairs, alterations or maintenance to buildings damage resulting from faulty design and/or workmanship or the use of defective materials in buildings damage to groundbearing floor slabs, e.g. floor slabs supported by hard-core or other fill material, unless the foundations beneath the external walls of the building are damaged by the same cause and at the same time. damage to outdoor swimming pools, tennis courts, patios, terraces, drives, footpaths, walls, gates, hedges or fences unless the house, an outbuilding or garage is damaged by
4.4.4 Sum insured

The sum insured, which is the responsibility of the Insured, must reflect the cost of rebuilding a property. If it does not, Insurers have grounds for adjusting their liability under the policy.
4.4.5 Under insurance

Most policies provide cover to repair or rebuild a property on the basis that it is adequately insured at all times; this is known as cover on a reinstatement basis. Should the sum insured at the time the claim is made be significantly lower than the rebuilding cost, Insurers may wish to consider the extent of their liability under the terms of their policy. In most such cases the cover will revert to an indemnity basis, i.e. a deduction will be made for wear and
31
tear (see also 4.4.6). In cases where the policy contains an average clause, the Insured may also be required to meet a proportion of the cost of the remedial works, as reflected by the degree of under-insurance.
4.4.6 Maintenance and repair

A property owner (the Insured) who has been made aware that a defect needs repairing, or that a particular course of action needs to be followed to minimise future risk, has a responsibility to mitigate the occurrence of further damage by implementing the appropriate measures. Insurers will expect this to be done even if they neither required the relevant issue to be notified to them nor made it a condition of insurance. If the Insured has failed to reasonably maintain the property, this could affect the settlement of the claim. Failure reasonably to mitigate such damage or its consequences may permit Insurers to reduce the amount they pay under the claim (see also 4.4.5).
heave or landslip or whether damage is due to some other cause which may or may not be covered under the policy, and be required to comment on whether there is a possible breach of one of the policy conditions which might require further investigation, or alternatively the operation of one of the policy exclusions.
4.4.7 Betterment
Where the Insured has not reasonably maintained the part of the property which is the subject of the claim, Insurers may require a contribution from the Insured towards betterment or improvement.
4.4.8 Floor slabs

Most household insurance policies specifically exclude from subsidence cover any solid slabs resting directly upon the ground unless the cause of the damage to the floor has also resulted in damage in the superstructure. Lenders and Valuers should appreciate that minor amounts of slab movement are rarely of any consequence from a structural and serviceability point of view.
If an Insured wishes to retain the services of their own specialist consultant as a separate adviser to give a second opinion on any particular aspect, then this should be acceptable to all parties but it is likely that the Insured will have to pay for this separately from their own funds. Based on the initial visit, further detailed investigation may be needed so that the precise cause of the problem can be identified. Bearing in mind that subsidence, heave or landslip often results from factors, such as leaking drains, unmanaged or inappropriately sited trees, etc., efforts should be made to identify them and remedy any problems of the site so that the foundations can be stabilised. If, ultimately, the control of these factors does not work, consideration may have to be given to stabilising the foundations by underpinning depending on the severity of the damage. Investigations can be lengthy and often involve monitoring the property for anything up to 12 months or occasionally longer. If the Insured wishes to sell the property prior to completion of monitoring and repairs, it may be possible to transfer the insurance rights to a prospective purchaser. However, this will depend on the co-operation of a number of interested parties, as well as other factors such as the price being paid for the property, and whether liability has been accepted by Insurers. Documentation of the repair should include certification by the Expert at completion of the remedial work (see section 10.8). It is strongly recommended that the Insured should retain all documents relating to the repairs as subsequent purchasers may well ask for details.
4.5 Investigation of insurance claims

When a subsidence, heave or landslip claim is made by the Insured, it is essential that it is properly investigated. The following parties could be involved: The Insured usually the property owner Any of the Experts listed in Chapter 2.
4.6.2 Simple stabilisation measures

Detailed information on remedial measures is given in Chapters 8 and 9. The cost of tree management or removal is not covered by the insurance policy and consequently would have to be carried out at the owners expense. However, some Insurers will pay for the reasonable cost of tree works as part of the stabilisation process although this is outside the policy cover. In the case of damage caused by trees, once the property has been stabilised and repairs carried out, it would then be the owners continued responsibility to manage the trees to prevent future damage. Where leaking drains are a factor and the drains have not been accidentally damaged, e.g. damage is demonstrably due to defective workmanship to recently laid drains, then the insurance policy does not cover their repair. However, Insurers will generally pay for drainage repairs to help stabilise a property. Note accidental damage to drains is invariably covered under a separate section of the policy, whether subsidence damage has been caused or not. Where the cost of continuing tree management or repair to drains is at the owners expense and there is a failure to carry out recommended preventative works, this could influence the Insurers decision to deal with the claim and provide future cover. Once drains have been repaired and trees pruned or removed, a period of monitoring will be required. The cost of the monitoring will normally be funded by Insurers.
Often the insurance is in the joint names of the Lender and the Borrower and both parties will need to be involved. Experts have a duty to offer a professional opinion on the matters referred to them. The Insured should understand that in the context of subsidence, heave and landslip, the engineering input is more appropriate to the problems which are occurring below ground, with surveying input being more appropriate to the problems which are evident above ground. Both the engineering and surveying inputs could be made by one Expert (see 2.2.3 ) or a multidisciplined firm. Not all Engineers and Surveyors are suitably qualified and experienced to deal with subsidence, heave or landslip damage (see Chapters 2, 6 & 7).
4.6 Handling of subsidence, heave and landslip claims

4.6.1 Procedure
Where an Insured suspects subsidence, in most cases an Insurer will instruct a technical expert adviser (the Expert, see 2.2.3) to investigate the circumstances giving cause for concern. In this situation, the Insurer will usually pay for the cost of this initial appraisal, the purpose of which is explained in detail in Chapter 6. The Expert will: determine whether the damage arises from subsidence,
4.6.3 Continuity of cover after remedial works

On completion of investigation works and provided that the property is stabilised by the control or elimination of any influencing factors, a schedule of repairs will normally be prepared and contractors will be invited by the Expert to quote for the work. A contractor will normally be selected with the property owners agreement and repairs will then be carried out. All this, subject to any policy excess, will be undertaken at the Insurers expense.
32
In these circumstances, Insurers will generally continue normal cover and in the majority of cases would, as mentioned in 4.6.1 and 4.6.2, be prepared to offer insurance cover to any prospective purchasers. Indeed, where a subsidence damaged property has been properly dealt with, and a Certificate of Structural Adequacy is available from an appropriately qualified Expert, there should be no technical reason why any Insurer should decline or remove cover. Cover on buildings, which have experienced subsidence and have been underpinned, in whole or in part, is usually continued provided the cover is to the same owner. It should be appreciated that the Insurer may reasonably argue that insurance cover is an annually renewable contract which places no obligation on the Insurer to continue cover. This point is clearly worth resolving with an Insurer, particularly regarding subsidence cover, before entering into an insurance contract. If an owner changes Insurer then there is obviously no obligation on the new Insurer to give subsidence cover, even if it existed under a previous policy with another Insurer. The new Insurer may reasonably argue that there is no obligation to accept a high risk property but if a property has been properly dealt with, the risk should be non-existent or minimal. Owners should therefore be cautious about changing Insurers if the possibility of a continuing risk exists. However, the ABI Subsidence Claims Agreement to which most insurers subscribe significantly improves this situation (see Appendix E). If Insurers are prepared to pay for any reasonable repairs following damage and offer continued cover, the property should, in the vast majority of cases, continue to offer adequate security for a mortgage loan. However, this will depend on how it is perceived by a particular Lender from a marketability standpoint. A property offered as security for a mortgage loan needs to be regarded by a Lender as being reasonably readily saleable if it has to be taken into possession. Distortions in the structure and other signs of previous problems can influence this decision and some Lenders may not be willing to offer a mortgage on affected properties (see also 2.3). Where there is only nominal damage to the building and it remains substantially sound without any hazardous external features, the dwelling should remain mortgageable provided that Insurers are willing to continue insurance cover and such cover should not be unreasonably withheld or removed. Subject to policy terms, Insurers pay for remedial works but do not compensate the Insured for any notional loss of value of the property (usually referred to as blight), which is in any event, a matter subject to various market forces.
33
34
Chapter 5 The causes of damage to buildings

5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 Introduction Differential movement (buildings and services) Cracking due to movement of foundations Causes of foundation movements that may lead to structural damage 5.4.1 Settlement 5.4.2 Consolidation 5.4.3 Volumetric changes to soil 5.4.4 Instability 5.4.5 Erosion 5.4.6 Mining 5.4.7 Frost heave 5.4.8 Vibration 5.4.9 Chemical attack 5.5 Superstructure damage not due to subsidence 5.5.1 Thermal movement 5.5.2 Creep 5.5.3 Moisture movements 5.5.4 Roof spread 5.5.5 Timber rot 5.5.6 Masonry and brickwork damage 5.5.7 Poor design, detailing and workmanship 5.5.8 Fire 5.5.9 Lack of maintenance 5.5.10 Movement due to changes in load patterns 5.5.11 Accident 5.5.12 Calcium silicate bricks 5.5.13 Bookend effect/thermal expansion 5.5.14 Direct root action 5.5.15 Mundic concrete 5.5.16 Damage caused by subsidence of an adjoining building 36 36 36 36 36 37 37 39 40 41 42 42 42 43 43 43 43 43 43 43 44 44 44 44 44 44 45 45 46 46
35
5 The causes of damage to buildings

5.1 Introduction
The causes of structural damage to low-rise buildings are not always related to foundation and subsoil movement. Damage can result from a combination of different factors and this may complicate the diagnostic process. There follows a review of the structural damage related to the movement of foundations and subsoil including associated technical aspects. Differential settlement and the desiccation/rehydration of clay soils are seen as primary causes of damage of this type. Erosion and softening of ground, movement of slopes, decomposition and the compaction of ground and the presence of mines and natural cavities are less usual. Damage from vibration, frost heave, chemical attack and direct tree action is far less common. All buildings have cracks which occur for a variety of reasons, and in general terms they can be classified as follows. between the different materials and elements used in the construction. Equal movements of all elements, or proportional foundation movements producing a uniform angular distortion, although significant in terms of total movement, may not cause structural damage but may strain or fracture services entering/leaving the building.
5.3 Cracking due to movement of foundations

In engineering terms foundation movements may be caused by settlement, subsidence or heave (see 2.2.1). Insurers may provide subsidence cover (see 4.3.1). Some causes of foundation movement may not be covered by domestic insurance policies. The significance, severity, prognosis and remedial action are likely to be different for the various causes, therefore identification of the cause is essential.
Causes of cracks due to the movement of foundations

Settlement (5.4.1) Consolidation (5.4.2) fill vibration induced consolidation
5.4 Causes of foundation movements that may lead to structural damage

5.4.1 Settlement
For insurance purposes settlement is downward movement under applied load. Provided the acceptable bearing pressure of the soil is not exceeded, the settlement should be small, often no more than a few millimetres, but bearing capacity should not be the only criterion. Determination of the likely settlement under the predicted load is a more important factor. The effects of this initial settlement can be minimised by the inclusion of appropriate details to maintain the flexibility of services and, for example, later extensions to the structure. Any associated damage should manifest itself during the first few years after construction and should be easily repairable by redecoration. For granular soils the settlement will normally occur almost at once and can be predicted from the knowledge of the deformation modulus of the soil. For clay soils however, there are additional long-term components to settlement which involve the gradual squeezing out of pore water as the soil comes to equilibrium. Hence to obtain the total settlement of a structure founded on clay soil it is necessary to consider the effects of three separate components: Elastic (undrained) settlement Consolidation (movements associated with the dissipation of pore water pressures) Drained creep or secondary consolidation, which occurs at constant effective stress
Volumetric soil changes (5.4.3) clay soils other soils
Instability (5.4.4) slopes excavations
Erosion (5.4.5) fines natural cavities Mining (5.4.6) Frost heave (5.4.7) Vibration (section 5.4.8) Chemical attack (5.4.9)
Superstructure damage not due to subsidence

Thermal movement (5.5.1) Creep (5.5.2) Moisture movements (5.5.3) Roof spread (5.5.4) Timber rot (5.5.5) Masonry and brickwork damage (5.5.6) Poor design, detailing and workmanship (5.5.7) Fire (5.5.8) Lack of maintenance (5.5.9) Movement due to changes in load patterns (5.5.10) Accident (5.5.11) Calcium silicate bricks (5.5.12) Bookend effect/thermal expansion (5.5.13) Direct root action (5.5.14) Mundic concrete (5.5.15) Damage caused by subsidence of an adjoining building (5.5.16)
5.2 Differential movement (buildings and services)

Cracking occurs as a result of differential movement affecting either the foundations or alternatively occurring within or
36
Elastic settlement occurs instantly as the load is applied and, using simple elastic theory, can be estimated from the undrained deformation modulus of the soil, the bearing pressure, the width of the foundation and empirical influence factors which account for the geometry of the foundation and the distribution of stress with depth. Consolidation settlement is normally estimated from basic soil properties, e.g. the coefficient of consolidation, which can be measured in a standard oedometer test (BS 13775.1) or can be estimated from the soils liquid limit for normally consolidated soils. The total consolidation settlement can then be found by adding the compression of each individual layer over the depth of soil affected. The change in effective stress for each
layer can be estimated from tables which are based on elasticity theory. The rate of secondary consolidation per log cycle of time is normally considered to be constant, so that the total secondary consolidation of a stratum can be estimated from a creep coefficient based on long-term observations depending on the design life of the building and the period over which the observations were made. Simons and Menzies5.2 compared predicted settlements, based on methods recommended by different researchers, to observed settlements, and they concluded that the methods available to Geotechnical Engineers to predict settlements reliably are generally poor. From this is should be evident that such appraisals and predictions should be addressed with the utmost caution.
5.4.2 Consolidation Fill

Made ground can be extremely variable unless there is careful selection, controlled placement and compaction of fill materials, and serious problems can arise if construction takes place on filled sites. Uncontrolled tipping can leave voids and organic matter in an unconsolidated condition and further decay and deterioration leads to unequal and variable settlement characteristics, e.g. subsidence could occur on the first inundation. Buildings founded on unconsolidated and variable material are at obvious risk and this may be greatly increased by building across the borders between filled and virgin ground. Decomposition of organic material within fill material can cause methane gas generation and combustion. These problems are most likely to occur in fills containing domestic refuse or industrial wastes (see Fig. 5.1). The presence of gas or other chemical contaminants may have health and safety implications. The amount of self-weight consolidation of fill is dependent on the type of the original treatment and the material itself as well as other external factors such as surcharge and inundation. The period of time involved in such settlements can be 25 years or more. The inundation of fill materials due to variations in ground water tables or surface water collecting in the fill can bring about ground movement. This can be a particular problem with loosely backfilled ground. Another example is Pulverised Fuel Ash (PFA) which has been known to lose its consistency and become unstable when saturated.
Fig. 5.1 Landfill site
building have been dissipated enough, so their residual components can be adequately resisted by the surrounding, unconsolidated ground.
Secondary consolidation
After a building has experienced its initial settlement and the ground has undergone its primary consolidation, further consolidation may occur over a much longer period. This is referred to as secondary consolidation. Except in the case of peats, this secondary consolidation is rarely of any significant magnitude compared to the primary consolidation and for all practical purposes can in the vast majority of cases be ignored.
5.4.3. Volumetric changes to soil Clay soils

Desiccation of clay soils is often the cause of subsidence to buildings. The term desiccation is often associated with the complete removal of moisture. When used in association with clay soils, however, the term has a different meaning and it is any reduction in the soils moisture content associated with natural drying and/or extraction by vegetation. Shrinkage potential Unlike granular soils, clays tend to shrink or swell as their moisture content varies. The reason they do this is that the water is bonded to the surface of the clay particles, much as in a jelly, rather than simply filling the pores between the particles. The greater the proportion of clay minerals in the soil, particularly montmorillonite, the greater the potential for volume change. Areas of highly shrinkable clays in the South East of England are indicated in Fig. 5.2. The simplest way of obtaining an indication of the proportion of clay minerals and their ability to retain water within the clay structure of the soil is to measure its plasticity index, i.e. the range of moisture contents over which the soil exhibits plastic properties. The top of the plastic range is defined by the liquid limit, being the moisture content at which the soil begins to flow, and the bottom end by the plastic limit, the moisture content at which the soil stops being mouldable and begins to break up. As a very general guide, the higher the plasticity index the greater the shrinkage potential, but the correlation between these is poor over the range of changes in moisture content which occur within the field. Under field conditions a soil is often not fully saturated, and moisture held within the soil structure can be released without volumetric change. Shrinkage will only occur if soil drying occurs within the clay matrix, and will diminish as the clay dries towards its plastic limit. Conversely, an increase in moisture content will cause the soil to swell, but in most overconsolidated clays there is a limit to the amount of water that will be absorbed under natural conditions. Categories of shrinkage potential are given in the NHBC Standards Chapter 4.2 Building near trees5.3, but should be interpreted with caution for predicting actual shrinkage behaviour. BS 13775.1 provides further guidance.
Vibration induced consolidation

Granular soils can be prone to consolidation by vibration and this may result in subsidence. It is generally the ground-borne vibrations caused by influences such as earthquakes and pile driving that can cause damage to buildings and their foundations When assessing vibration as a cause of structural damage, it should be remembered that structures are far less sensitive than people. What may seem a serious vibration to a person may not cause damage to a building. Whilst vibration is rarely the sole cause of structural damage to buildings, it can cause cracking of plaster and between structural loadbearing units, and may result in subsidence of granular soils. It is unusual for clay soils to settle under vibrating loads unless they have a high sand content. Where vibro compaction and vibro consolidation techniques are used on new build projects to strengthen weak and compressible soils, particularly loose granular soils, silty or clay sands and silty soils, it should be appreciated that consolidation can also occur to soils beneath the foundations of nearby existing buildings and this may cause subsidence damage to them. Where poor ground is consolidated, it must be acknowledged that a building or structure can exert lateral forces beyond the limits of its footprint. It is essential that consolidation is undertaken to such limits that all lateral forces from the
37
Fig. 5.3 Cracks in desiccated clay soil showing shrinkage effects
Fig 5.2 Areas of highly shrinkable clays in the South East of England
The moisture content of the clay can only change if the stresses acting on the soil change. There are effectively two ways in which this change of stress can be brought about: external stress variation a change in the imposed loading, e.g. the addition of foundation loads or the removal of the overburden, or internal stress variation the propensity for the clay soils to absorb water, i.e. the pore water suction is increased within the clay by evaporation to the atmosphere and or extraction by roots, or alternatively pore water suction is decreased by the addition of water.
large trees can extract moisture from depths of 5m or more. Moreover the low permeability of high plasticity clays may prevent the moisture extracted during summer months being replenished by rainfall and upward migration of the water table during the winter months. Hence persistently desiccated soil develops under the tree which may increase in depth and lateral extent as the tree grows. When a soil is described as desiccated it may in fact have a moisture content that is only 1% or 2% less than in its natural state and even severe desiccation (see Fig. 5.3) is unlikely to reduce the moisture content of most UK clay soils by more than 10%. A reduction of the moisture content below the plastic limit (defined as the moisture content at which the clay ceases to be mouldable) allows air to enter the soil making it dry and friable, resulting in a pronounced effect upon the soils appearance. Near the surface desiccation often causes the ground to crack and in very shrinkable soils this can be dramatic, with cracks that are between 20mm and 25mm wide and 0.5m to 0.75m deep in dry summer months. It has been noted that London Clay with a normal moisture content just above the plastic limit of 30% near the soil surface, may fluctuate from 15% for dry summers to 40% for wet winters. A not unknown phenomenon is for a ground or basement level boiler room to dry out the clay stratum within its own vicinity and so cause its own subsidence. More recently the introduction of central heating in late 19th and early 20th century properties, some of which have shallow foundations, also causes drying out and shrinkage of the clay, in some cases leading to subsidence.
Desiccation In addition to the shrinkage potential of the soil, the volume change that occurs is dependent on the magnitude of the stress change. For most soils, there is a linear relationship between the volume change and the logarithm of the stress change. The increase in stress imposed on the soil by a low rise building supported on strip footings or trench fill is modest, say 20-40kN/m2 and the corresponding movement, i.e. settlement in firm clays, is of the order of a few millimetres. However the stress changes caused by desiccation are far greater, typically 300kN/m 2 and potentially as high as 1400kN/m2. These changes also tend to affect soil to a greater depth, particularly if there are trees or large shrubs present. It is quite conceivable therefore, for the movements associated with desiccation to be many times greater than those due to settlement under foundation loads, i.e. 100mm- 200mm for the effects of desiccation. Research indicates that the effects of evaporation to the atmosphere in firm clay soils are largely restricted to the uppermost 0.5m of soil. Grass and other short rooted vegetation can extend drying from 1.0m to 1.5m depth, and some
Fig. 5.4 Proximity of mature trees and bushes to residential property may be a threat
38
Effect of vegetation The roots of all vegetation, whether grass, herbaceous plants, shrubs or trees, take moisture from the soil to replenish the water lost from their leaves (see Fig. 5.4). During the summer, water uptake by vegetation is typically far greater than rainfall so that the soil is progressively drying (see Fig. 5.5). During the winter, deciduous plants lose their leaves and so have no water uptake; evergreen plants can continue some uptake, but the amounts are negligible compared to uptake in summer. As a result, during the winter rainfall is far greater than water uptake, so that the soil rehydrates. If the soil is clay, this produces a cycle of the soil drying and shrinking during the summer, and rehydrating and swelling during the winter. Two distinct types of soil movement should be distinguished: Seasonal movements, in which the rehydration and swelling in the winter is the same as the drying and shrinkage in the summer, with the soil returning to its natural moisture content (or field capacity) by the spring. The amplitude of this movement will be increased in a dry summer. In some situations, where the clay is of low permeability and soil drying is occurring to sufficient depth, the moisture is unable to penetrate to sufficient depth so that by the spring there is still a deep-seated zone of desiccated soil. Over successive years, the depth and lateral extent of this zone of persistently desiccated soil can gradually increase. A persistent deficit of this sort typically develops during the period of rapid growth prior to maturity of a tree. Thereafter it can be maintained for many years or decades through maturity. There may be a further increase in the persistent deficit in a period of prolonged drought. A single dry winter may create a semi-persistent deficit, but additional drying of this sort is often not maintained, with the soil reverting to its previous persistent deficit in subsequent years.
Fig. 5.5 Ground desiccation by tree roots
low permeability. This is commonly associated with a soil of high plasticity. However well developed structural cracks in the soil, particularly if filled with sand or silt partings, will aid permeability. Larger features, whether natural such as bands of sand or gravel, or manmade such as backfill of drains, can aid rapid water movement and have a major influence in minimising soil drying. Likewise, leaking drains or water mains can provide an additional source of water and minimise soil drying.
Other soils
Peat or soft silt may occur almost anywhere but is most likely in low lying fen, coastal, river estuary or valley and moorland areas. Perhaps the best way to regard peat is to think of it as reinforced water. It has high compressibility and may be displaced under load. Differential settlement can occur where peat layers are of a non-uniform nature and thickness and significant variations in depth may occur over very short distances. Lowering of ground water levels in peats, silts and loose granular soils whether permanent or temporary can bring about a significant reduction in the soil volume, often leading to subsidence of buildings. In fen areas where buildings are often constructed on natural surface crusts, drainage schemes can affect the stability of structures by removing moisture from underlying peat layers. Excavations for services can also have the same effect. Indications5.4 are that due to its high compressibility the secondary consolidation of peat can continue almost indefinitely, so its use for direct bearing of foundations to structures is not advised.
If the tree which has created a persistent deficit is felled, instead of the soil being dried during the next summer, the process of rehydration will continue, with the soil progressively rehydrating and swelling, producing upward movement of the foundations, commonly referred to as heave. The rate and duration of this process will depend on the permeability of the clay and the depth of desiccation. In extreme cases it can take at least 25 years, but more typically it is no more than a minor extension of seasonal drying with the process of rehydration complete in one or two years. Throughout this process, the rate of movement is gradually decreasing. Heave is no more than a long-term extension of the seasonal recovery. It follows that, whenever a tree has created a persistent deficit and a risk of heave, there will also be seasonal movement. If a property has been built prior to the development of the persistent deficit, there will be pronounced distortion of the building caused by the soil shrinkage and subsidence associated with the persistent deficit. This distortion will be corrected, at least partially, if the tree is felled and the persistent deficit dissipates. If a property is built on soil which is already desiccated, removal of the tree and resulting heave will lift the building to above its level at the time of construction It does not necessarily need a tree to be felled for a persistent deficit to diminish and heave to occur. Anything which causes a reduction in soil drying will mean that the recovery in the winter is greater than the drying and subsidence in the summer. For instance, pruning a tree which has created a persistent deficit will allow the soil to rehydrate and possibly heave, with a superimposed cycle of seasonal movement of reduced amplitude. Likewise, as a tree becomes overmature, its water uptake will decline. The development of a persistent deficit requires a species of tree which is capable of causing drying of a clay soil to sufficient depth. Species such as poplar, oak, willow and, amongst the conifers, cypress, are most likely to do this. Development of a persistent deficit also requires a soil of
5.4.4 Instability Slopes

The instability of sloping ground can result in sudden or gradual movement. The building design must take account of these movements to maintain structural stability. The assessment of slope stability requires specialised geotechnical expertise and this may be outside the experience of the average building professional. Natural clay slopes steeper than about 8 degrees can suffer from relatively rapid instability. Long term creep may occur on more shallow slopes. This is a complicated subject on which specialist advice is likely to be required. Landslip Landslip is a simple process whereby ground, which is at a higher level relative to the adjacent ground merely, slides down to a lower level (see Fig. 5.6). An avalanche is a dra-
39
Fig. 5.6 Landslip
e.g. adjacent to a cutting, an excavation or a steep slope, the clay will tend to absorb water and soften. This process can reduce the bearing capacity of the soil and may in extreme cases lead to an increased possibility of foundation loads, or even the weight of the soil itself, inducing a shear failure in the soil. More commonly this process may produce some small lateral movement as it allows soil to swell and move towards a loosely back filled trench, such as a deep drain trench. This softening will occur wherever the soil is below the water table for at least part of the year. In the UK this means that most excavations close to and below adjacent foundations are likely to induce some limited ground movements. Having softened and thereby expanded to fill any available voids, the soil would again be at equilibrium and unlikely to be affected by a sudden influx of water, for example from a leaking drain. However it is common practice to lay drains on a bed of granular material and in such circumstances, leaking water may erode the already softened clay.
matic, rapid and extreme example of a landslip. Some landslips occur suddenly and this most frequently happens after heavy rain or when frozen ground is thawing out. Coastline erosion is another natural mechanism which can lead to landslip, also of a dramatic nature. When a landslip occurs in the vicinity of a building located near the top of a slope (see Fig. 5.7), the effect on the property is virtually identical to subsidence, namely the ground moves away from beneath the foundations of the building and the building effectively subsides. Relatively shallow slopes can move over a period of time if the ground material is particularly susceptible to slipping. Slope creep Of greater relevance to most homeowners is the potential for relatively shallow clay slopes, say inclined up to about 8o, to migrate slowly down hill. There is very little information available on this phenomenon and it is a current BRE research topic. It is thought that damage caused by slope creep is commonly and wrongly diagnosed as clay shrinkage, but is possible that the two phenomena are related, e.g. desiccation cracks that open up in periods of exceptionally dry weather may not close completely. This fissuring (see Fig. 5.8) will allow the water to enter the ground during wet weather thus encouraging rehydration and therefore heave. The water will lubricate the clay along the fissures thus encouraging movement down hill. Dehydrated ground will normally rehydrate, but ground that has moved downhill will not move back up.
Escape of water from drains

Moreover while an excess of water has little influence on clay soils below the water table, it may have a significant effect on desiccated soils. Hence where there are large trees nearby, a long-term leak from a drain or water supply (see Fig. 5.9) can reduce the state of desiccation in the soil locally, producing recovery and heave.
5.4.5. Erosion Movement of fine soil particles

Internal erosion due to water seepage is a below ground level activity caused by ground water transporting fine soil particles to another location such as where back-filled excavations exist or at the interface between different strata.
Excavations
Cutting away of sloping ground can likewise remove the support at the top or the bottom of the slope and so cause the ground to become unstable. Even temporary excavations for drains at the top or bottom of a slope can upset the balance. Where the lateral stresses acting on clay soils are reduced,
Fig. 5.7 Landslip the result of slope stability
Fig. 5.8 Fissures can be an indication of slope instability
40
Fig. 5.9 Effect of broken or leaking drains
Ground movements due to water flow occur mainly in sandy or silty soils, the movement being caused by the removal of small particles which reduces the density of the remaining soil. The consequent loss of ground from beneath foundations may lead to subsidence or in extreme cases collapse of the part of the structure. Ground movement by leaching or erosion in made ground or natural granular soil will characterised by a zone of loosened material. Some common causes of erosion due to water seepage are: groundwater seeping into fractured sewers or culverts carrying out excavations or ground water pumping below the water table, without taking adequate precautions to prevent the loss of fines seepage of water from leaking mains or drains which transport fine particles to a different location positioning of soakaways too close to the building discharging of rainwater pipes into or onto the ground (see Fig. 5.10) water seepage causing solution of minerals from the ground, commonly known as leaching leaching of water and soils into backfill material, placed around subsurface services commonly known as the French drain effect
permeability prevents migration of the sand silt content except by slow seepage. It is therefore unlikely that erosion would be the cause of subsidence in clay soils.
Natural cavities
The formation of natural cavities in the ground can result from a series of processes, but the majority are formed by dissolution, cambering and marine erosion. The action of both surface water and ground water on soluble rock is the main cause of natural cavities in this country. Natural cavities may be air-, water-, rock- or soil-infilled. There is an inherent risk of subsidence when foundations are placed above these features. The most common cause of subsidence associated with natural cavities is the upward migration of the void, often caused by the destabilisation of the cavity infilling material. The commencement of subsidence often follows the introduction of surface water or changes in ground water levels. A comprehensive review of instability due to natural underground cavities in Great Britain has been prepared for the Department of Environment by Applied Geology and they also hold a database of over 20,000 listed natural cavities. Natural cavities commonly occur in areas where there are soluble rocks such as chalk and limestone. These may be found at the surface or close beneath the surface strata. Mudstone rocks containing soluble salt or gypsum may be prone to the formation of natural cavities as well as areas where rocks have a soluble matrix or cement. They often occur where strong jointed rocks such as sandstone and limestone overlie mudstone marl and clay. Fissures are formed in the rock by the cambering process, especially where there are steep slopes. The clay moves down the slope causing the overlying rock to fracture and form cavities. In coastal areas natural cavities are formed where competent jointed rocks form a cliff line and become subject to marine erosion.
Surface erosion may take place as a result of loss of material in strong winds or by flowing water, e.g. floodwater. Wind is most likely to affect fine sands and silts upon which external groundbearing elements are founded. Erosion can normally be prevented by encouraging the growth of vegetation, placing of paving or by other methods blanketing the erodable soil. Foundations at normal depths are not usually affected by surface erosion from wind. Surface erosion by flowing water can be severe, particularly if structures are sited on slopes or at the bottom of valleys, where normal foundation depths of 900mm to 1200mm can prove inadequate for cases of erosion by flood water. Such erosion should be prevented by providing adequate drainage or other forms of surface protection, particularly in the paths taken by the periodical discharge of flood water. Unless they have a high sand silt content, clay soils are unlikely to be effected by leaching or erosion since their low
5.4.6 Mining
The effects of mining are discussed in detail in Appendices A and B. The physical removal of below-surface deposits can result in foundation subsidence. Mineral and rock deposits which have been mined in the past include coal, salt, limestone, tin and iron, etc. and historical records should be checked for evidence of these activities. Modern longwall coal mining and the older pillar and stall methods are described in Appendix A.2. Longwall mining may distort and crack a property as the surface subsidence wave passes. The building may then be left in a reasonably stable condition. If the site is situated on the edge of the mining area, resulting differences in level can be unacceptable. Shallow pillar and stall workings do not normally have an immediate effect on foundations. However deterioration of the pillars and outside influences such as ground water can lead to the collapse of the working and serious surface damage many years after the causative mining (see Fig. 5.11). Reinstated opencast mining should be considered as a backfilled site, but may have special problems, e.g. deterioration of mudstone fill in water. Such sites can often have a considerable depth of fill. Metalliferous mining is outlined in Appendix A.3.
Fig. 5.10 Poor provision for the discharge of rainwater has resulted in erosion and foundation subsidence
41
Fig. 5.11 Effects of shallow pillar and stall mining
5.4.7 Frost heave

Soils that are subject to expansion when frozen can include silts, chalk, silty sands and some clays. Winter freezing of ground in the UK is normally confined to depths of less than 0.5m. During severe and prolonged periods of cold weather, freezing may affect the ground to depths approaching 1m. In these extreme conditions the ground in the vicinity of a heated building is most unlikely to freeze because of the heat stored in the ground under and adjacent to the building. The main area of concern arises with unheated buildings on frost-susceptible soils in areas where severe winter conditions are likely and precautions may then be needed. Inadequate insulation where refrigeration or cryogenic plant is close to the soil can lead to localised frost heave.
diminishing with distance. Whilst damages in the past have been awarded against operators, recent improvements in pile driving techniques have considerably reduced the risk of damage to adjacent structures Nevertheless an element of risk still exists which can be minimised by taking adequate precautions and assessing the risk of damage before work begins. CIRIAs Technical note TN 1425.5 provides details of ground-borne vibrations from piling. Further useful information is given in BS 52285.6 and BS 64725.7. Less common causes of vibrations that may affect low-rise buildings include: out-of-balance machinery reciprocating engines rock blasting earthquakes explosions
5.4.8 Vibration
Vibration causes particles to accelerate from a static position. They reach a peak velocity and then displace before recovery. Further cycles of movement follow until the energy decays or is dampened. The maximum velocity that is the peak particle velocity is expressed in mm/s and is often used as a criterion for damage to buildings. It can also be used to determine discomfort levels for occupants of buildings. The peak particle velocities are based upon frequencies between 5 and 50Hz, which is the range most commonly encountered in buildings. The level of human perception of vibration occurs when the peak particle velocity is in the order of 0.3mm/s, the vibration becomes annoying at 2.5mm/s and unpleasant or even painful on reaching 5.00mm/s at the higher frequencies. Damage to decorations, plaster cracking, etc. might be expected to occur when the peak particle velocity is between 2.5mm/s and 7.0mm/s at the higher frequencies and 20mm/s at the lower frequencies, i.e. 5Hz. Vibrations may be airborne, i.e. caused by wind, which except in the case of explosions will normally result in no more than door or window rattle, and even in extreme cases little or no structural damage to well designed buildings in good condition. Several causes of ground-borne vibration which can cause damage to buildings and their foundations are noted: Road traffic-induced vibration is usually the result of a bad road surface, e.g. potholes Trains create larger ground-borne vibrations in their immediate vicinity, which lead to complaints by owners and occupiers of nearby buildings. Recorded velocities indicate that whilst levels of discomfort can be high, very few are likely to cause damage to buildings, other than minor cracking of plaster, etc. Pile driving causes shock waves that decay quickly in soft ground, but can be refracted or reflected in firmer or hard ground. The structural condition of the surrounding properties may be affected, with the risk of damage
Vibrations caused by machinery are usually dampened by using special mountings to prevent damage and nuisance to occupants and buildings. If structural damage is suspected, expert advice should be sought at an early stage to investigate and where necessary recommend solutions. This will help limit or prevent further damage, particularly if the structure is in an unsound condition. A schedule of condition carried out on adjoining buildings before using vibration techniques can help avoid disputes later by identifying existing damage and the likelihood of a building being sensitive to vibration.
5.4.9 Chemical attack

The expansive reaction between chemicals in some kinds of soils in contact with concrete can cause foundation movement. Some fill materials used below ground floor slabs in the past may also be subject to various expansive chemical reactions which can result in the lifting of slabs and the walls they support, Heave of floor slabs supported on sulphate-rich fill material is particularly common. On rare occasions sulphate attack can weaken foundation elements such as piles and result in failure. Sulphate attack on concrete is one of the most common forms of chemical attack and is addressed in BRE Digest 3635.8. Sulphate attack can only occur when water is present. Aqueous solutions of sulphate attack the hardened concrete causing it to expand. Sulphates occur naturally in some soils, e.g. London Clay, Lower Lias, Oxford Clay, Kimmeridge Clay and Keuper marl. Additionally some backfill materials such as colliery shale, brick rubble with adhering plaster and some industrial and mine wastes are rich in sulphates. A high or fluctuating water table will normally saturate the
42
whole of the foundations and could cause general uplift from the chemical attack, but this is known to be very rare. However where the source of water is internal leakage or external run off the damage may be concentrated in the wettest areas. Sulphate attack penetrates concrete only slowly and massive concrete is therefore less susceptible to damage from sulphate attack than thin sections. The rate of attack is increased if moisture can be lost by evaporation or leakage from one or more of the concrete surfaces and continuously replenished by another. Basement culverts, retaining walls and ground floor slabs without damp proof membranes are more vulnerable than piers, trench foundations or piles. The risk of sulphate attack can be reduced by ensuring that the concrete has low permeability, i.e. using a low free water/cement ratio in the mix and/or by using a sulphate-resisting cement. Methods of testing and classify soils for sulphate content are given in BS 13775.1. Chemical reactions within fill beneath a building can cause expansion of the fill material. Unhydrated lime or magnesia will produce volume expansion in the presence of moisture. Fill materials that contain a significant amount of clay, e.g. colliery spoil, can swell if they are placed in a dry condition and then subsequently become wet. Materials that contain old blast furnace slags or broken concrete may be affected by sulphate expansion when in contact with ground water. Recently produced blast furnace slags are not generally susceptible to causing sulphate attack, but all such materials should be checked before use. In the presence of air and moisture, sulphides in the form of pyrites can oxidise to form soluble sulphate. This can obviously contribute to the problems of sulphate attack on concrete. With pyrites in the presence of calcite there is a danger of expansion due to the growth of gypsum crystals. This has been identified in the Teesside area where natural shale has been used as hardcore. Since 1990, a few cases of a new form of sulphate attack, the thaumasite form of sulphate attack (TSA), have been discovered in buried concrete including three domestic properties in the Cotswold area. An expert group, set up by the Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions to produce interim advice and guidance on the implications for existing buildings and structures and for the design and specification of new construction in the UK, reported in 19995.9. The group considered that the numbers of buildings and structures potentially at risk from TSA in the UK was small. TSA will only occur in buried concrete when all the primary risk factors are present simultaneously and developed to a significant degree. These primary risk factors are: Presence of sulphates and/or sulphides in the ground Presence of mobile groundwater Presence of carbonate, generally in the concrete aggregates Low temperatures (generally below 15C)
5.5 Superstructure damage not due to subsidence

5.5.1 Thermal movement
The expansion and contraction of differing building materials without the provision for such movement may cause cracking or distortion (see Fig. 5.12). A further example includes brick facing panels to concrete frames that have no allowance for movement.
5.5.2 Creep
Building materials can deform slowly under load for a long period of time. This can result in fracture and distortion. Timber components such as floor joists and beams are particularly susceptible to this effect. A further example of this is where reinforced concrete frames in buildings compress under load over a period of time, but the enclosed brickwork facing panels, where constrained between the floor slabs, bow outwards due to the reduction of the storey height.
5.5.3 Moisture movements

The drying out of materials, especially in new houses, can cause quite noticeable cracks. Cracks can also occur in older properties following the introduction of central heating, which can cause drying shrinkage. Calcium silicate bricks (see 5.5.12) and some other concrete masonry products are particularly prone to initial shrinkage cracking. Movement joints in walls formed from susceptible materials, such as concrete blocks, can limit shrinkage cracking. The initial moisture expansion of new clay bricks can be substantial and is an irreversible chemical process unlike normal reversible moisture movement. This is usually only an aesthetic problem but in some instances can be sufficiently serious to warrant its consideration at the design stage, e.g. in long panels of brickwork.
5.5.4 Roof spread

Inadequately tied pitch roofs can spread quite appreciably towards the eaves under the action of dead, live and wind loads, causing external walls to distort and sometimes crack (see Fig. 5.13).
5.5.5 Timber rot

The deterioration of heavily loaded timber members supporting part of the building may result in instability or damage e.g. rot (see Fig. 5.14).
5.5.6 Masonry and brickwork damage

The formation of sulphates in mortar can occasionally cause walls to crack. Old coal fired chimneys are susceptible to this effect. Severe frosts have occasionally caused the expansion of moisture filled external cracks (see Fig. 5.15). The deterioration and rusting of embedded metal, such as old wall ties, is more common and can also cause masonry damage as shown in Figs. 5.16 and 5.17.
Additionally there are a number of secondary factors which influence the occurrence and severity of TSA and its effects: Type and quality of cement used in concrete Quality of concrete Changes to ground chemistry and water regime resulting from construction Type, depth and geometry of buried concrete
Advanced TSA is easy to identify visually as it typically exhibits a white pulpy mass at the surface of the affected buried concrete. TSA in its earlier stages through to more advanced stages may be identified using various analytical techniques in the laboratory. The structural consequences of TSA are rarely of serious concern in respect of public safety, as most buildings and structures would exhibit warning signs of distress.
Fig. 5.12 Cracking due to thermal movement
43
Fig. 5.13 Roof spread (non-subsidence) causing roof ridge sagging
Fig. 5.14 Timber beam collapse due to dry rot (non-subsidence)
Fig. 5.16 Crack damage to brickwork due to rusting and expansion of embedded steel section (non-subsidence)
Fig. 5.15 Frost damage to brickwork (non-subsidence)
5.5.7 Poor design, detailing and workmanship

Inferior design and detailing and the use of poor quality materials and workmanship may eventually bring about cracking, e.g. the replacement of original bay window assemblies for double-glazed units can cause settlement and distortion of the bay above the ground floor window panel.
Fig. 5.17 Crack along lintel due to rusting of embedded steelwork (non-subsidence)
5.5.10 Movement due to changes in load patterns

Cracking can occur from redistribution or increases in the loading of a structure, e.g. if structural alterations have been carried out without proper appraisal (see Fig. 5.20), or if a heavy material is stored in part of the building.
5.5.8 Fire
Severe fires can cause expansion, cracking, bulging, distortion and spalling of structures. Fire-induced cracks often mistaken for subsidence can occur in the outside wall behind a chimney flue (see Fig. 5.18).
5.5.11 Accident
Accidents through influences such as flood, storm impact and explosion can be the cause of structural damage (see Fig. 5.21).
5.5.9 Lack of maintenance

The saturation of masonry due to leaking gutters or poor pointing/rendering can cause delamination and cracking especially when combined with frost action (see Fig. 5.19).
5.5.12 Calcium silicate bricks

These bricks have a predominant characteristic of contraction, which will tend to occur if they are saturated before laying
44
Fig. 5.18 Fire induced crack in a wall containing chimney flue (nonsubsidence)
Fig. 5.20 Pointing repair of brickwork cracks following sagging of lintel at ground floor ceiling level (non-subsidence)
Fig. 5.19 Cracking in render due to moisture penetration
and subsequently dry out. This is an irreversible effect with the result that unrestrained brickwork will change size and crack if inadequate movement joints are provided.
5.5.13 Bookend effect/thermal expansion

Recent reports have purported to identify movements in some older terraced properties, where the internal party walls lean away from the centre of the terrace towards the ends, with the consequence of the end of terrace gable walls being substantially deflected. Such distortion can be accompanied by lateral and diagonal cracking to the front and rear elevations.
5.5.14 Direct root action

The growth of trees and root systems in very close proximity to structures can result in distortion and damage. The forces exerted by growth of the base of the trunk and roots near the surface are comparatively small compared to the weight of a house and damage would normally be limited to lightweight structures such as low, freestanding walls and paths (see Figs. 5.22, 5.23, 5.24 and 5.25).
Fig. 5.21 Cracking due to vehicle impact damage (non-subsidence)
45
Fig. 5.22 Damage to kerbs and surfaces of a poorly constructed carpark, caused by structural roots of a cherry tree (P. G. Biddle)
Fig. 5.25 New brickwork showing wall repair following collapse after direct tree action
Fig. 5.23 Direct root action damage to wall (Islington Council)
is liable to enter and then proliferate within the drain, often leading to blockage. Further expansive growth of a root may be able to enlarge the defect, but will not initiate damage to an intact drain.
5.5.15 Mundic concrete

Concrete made incorporating mining and process waste aggregates can suffer serious deterioration, particularly where moisture and oxygen from the atmosphere are also available. The generic name given to this class of aggregate is Mundic derived from the Cornish word for iron pyrites (FeS 2 ), although the term is now used to cover a group of waste product aggregates of this type. The problem was first identified in a significant proportion of buildings in Devon and Cornwall, although it is now realised that the problem also exists to a lesser extent in other parts of the British Isles. The Cornish experience suggests that the problem, where present, is most likely to affect domestic and similar low-rise buildings built pre-c.1950 using concrete or concrete products incorporating locally available Mundic aggregates. The problem has particularly affected some types of manufactured concrete blocks, but also some cast in situ concrete where mundic has been used as aggregate. The problem mainly affects the superstructure of buildings, particularly external walls built in concrete blocks, rather than foundations. The evidence of deterioration frequently displays a chequer board crazing on surface finishes such as, rendering and plaster or on the exposed faces of in situ concrete. The RICS has published a useful Guide5.11 on the Mundic problem.
Fig. 5.24 More direct root action damage to wall (Islington Council)
The greatest risk of direct damage obviously occurs close to the tree from the growth of the main trunk and the roots. This damage will diminish with distance and the risk of direct damage can be minimised by taking precautions during construction. BS 58375.10 gives recommendations for the minimum distance between the structure and the trunk. Maintaining these distances should avoid direct damage to a structure, including foundations from the future growth of the trunk and roots. When building closer than the distances recommended in BS 58375.10 precautions should be taken to allow for future growth. These precautions may involve reinforcing foundations to resist lateral thrust and bridging systems to allow sufficient clearance for future growth. Localised root growth can be encouraged by water leaking from drains. If there is a pre-existing defect in a drain, a root
5.5.16 Damage caused by subsidence of an adjoining building

Where an otherwise stable property is damaged as a result of an activity on an adjoining site, e.g. subsidence, the owner of the stable property must reasonably have a claim against his neighbour. This may be covered by the neighbours third party insurance.
46
References
5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.6 5.7 5.8 5.9 BS 1377: 1990: Parts 1-9: Methods of test for soils for civil engineering purposes. London, BSI, 1990 Simons, N. E. and Menzies, B. K.: A short course in foundation engineering. Guildford, IPC Science & Technology Press, 1975 National House Building Council. Standards: Chapter 4.2 Building near trees. Amersham, NHBC, 1999 Tomlinson, M. J.: Foundation design & Construction 5th Edition Harlow, Longman Scientific & Technical 1986 Head, J. M. and Jardine, F. M.: Ground-borne vibration arising from piling. London, CIRIA, 1992. CIRIA Technical Note TN 142 BS 5228: Part 4: 1992. Code of practice for noise and vibration control applicable to piling operations. London, BSI, 1992 BS 6472: 1992. Guide to the evaluation of human exposure to vibration in buildings (1Hz to 80Hz). London, BSI, 1992 Sulphate and acid resistance of concrete in the ground. Watford, BRE, 1991. BRE Digest 363 The thaumasite form of sulfate attack: risks, diagnosis, remedial works and guidance on new construction. Report of the Thaumasite Expert Group. London, DETR, 1999 BS 5837: 1991. Guide for trees in relation to construction. London, BSI, 1991 RICS The Mundic problem: A guidance note, Surveyors Holdings Ltd, 1994
5.10 5.11
47
48
Chapter 6 Initial appraisal of the property

6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 6.5 Introduction Objectives of the initial appraisal Suitable professional experts for the initial appraisal Damage threshold and the significance of cracks Procedure for the initial appraisal 6.5.1 Basic factors 6.5.2 The age of the property and any alterations 6.5.3 The type of movement and pattern of any cracking 6.5.4 Proximity of property to trees and large woody shrubs 6.5.5 Proximity of the property to sloping ground 6.5.6 The likelihood of leaking drains 6.5.7 Likelihood of the property being on subsidencesensitive soils 6.6 Identification of subsidence crack patterns 6.6.1 Identification of cracks related to various types of buildings 6.6.2 Characteristics of subsidence cracks 6.6.3 Decorations 6.7 Report 50 50 50 50 53 53 54 54 55 55 56 56 57 57 58 60 61
49
6 Initial appraisal of the property

6.1 Introduction
The initial concern as to whether or not a building is suffering subsidence usually occurs when one of a number of alternative situations arise. Basically these occur when: The householder or property owner, having noticed cracks personally, consults an Expert to inspect and advise on the damage observed in the building. At this stage the owner may or may not suspect that the damage is associated with subsidence, and indeed it may not be. The owner may suspect that damage has occurred as a result of subsidence and therefore notify their Insurer, or their Lender if there is still an outstanding mortgage. If the Lender is contacted first then they should, and will almost certainly, refer the matter on to the buildings Insurer. At this stage the Insurer will either appoint a suitable Expert to carry out an initial appraisal or may advise the owner to do so. It is usual for the Insurer to make the appointment, or at least approve the owners choice of Expert, so as to minimise the risk of conflicting advice and costs. Prior to putting up a property for sale, damage to the building fabric may be identified by the Estate Agent when advising the vendor of the marketability of the property. The damage may be identified by a Valuation Surveyor during the course of a sale when acting for a prospective purchaser or Lender. The Lender will then decide what further action may be required. To determine whether the subsidence is significant or likely to become so, to the extent that further more detailed investigation is justified in order to determine the repairs required. To identify the requirement for further investigations. Careful appraisal at this stage could significantly improve the quality of any subsequent investigation work. To consider possible repairs. Where the Expert is appropriately experienced, or has been specifically briefed by the Insurers, the Expert may be required to comment on whether there is a possible breach of any of the policy conditions which might require further investigation, or alternatively the operation of one of the policy exclusions.
6.3 Suitable professional Experts for the initial appraisal

It is important that any Expert to be consulted is adequately experienced and appropriately qualified. Persons likely to be competent to undertake the initial appraisal are listed below and are described in greater detail in 2.2.3: Chartered & Incorporated Engineers Chartered & Incorporated Valuers & Surveyors Chartered Builders Chartered Loss Adjusters Architects Local Authority Technical Officers Other Experts
Once the possibility that the property may be affected by subsidence is raised, then there are three principle stages of a technical appraisal and subsequent actions that should be pursued. Stage 1. Is anything more than repairs to the superstructure required? If no then do repairs If yes go to stage 2
It is anticipated that not all who undertake the initial appraisal will be eligible to proceed with the more detailed investigation into the cause of the problem and be able to consider alternative solutions as outlined in Chapters 7, 8 and 9. If, after the initial appraisal, it is decided that a more detailed investigation is required then this is best undertaken by a Chartered Structural or Civil Engineer with appropriate experience.
Stage 2. Can the cause be removed to achieve stability? If yes take appropriate action, e.g. repair drains, manage trees If no go to stage 3
6.4 Damage threshold and the significance of cracks

On occasions buildings may be subjected to differential ground movements. These movements can result in damage which is of concern and which is therefore considered to be above the damage threshold or serviceability limit. These are the cases of subsidence which definitely require more detailed consideration and that need to be subjected to the initial appraisal described in this chapter. An acceptable level of cracking, i.e. a damage threshold, has not been defined to date. As a consequence, this has resulted in confusion amongst owners, (particularly householders), Insurers and Lenders as to what constitutes a serious subsidence problem which requires assessment and possible attention, as opposed to what is merely minor structural movement of no serious consequence. Prior to the introduction of subsidence cover by Insurers in the early 1970s, minor cracks resulting from trivial movements, however caused, were attended to by houseowners as part of on-going maintenance. In more recent times though, even minor cracking has raised houseowners concerns, not necessarily for aesthetic reasons, but more on account of the anxiety generated because the true structural significance of damage was not appreciated by the houseowners, prospective purchasers, Valuers, Insurers or indeed Lenders. Often the worst was assumed, with the result that the values of the properties were being significantly marked down in the minds
Stage 3. Consider underpinning
These stages are explained further in the following Chapters.
6.2 Objectives of the initial appraisal

Irrespective of how the initial concern arises, the principle objectives of the initial appraisal are where possible: To make a preliminary assessment as to whether the damage is significant. To consider if anything more than repairs to the superstructure is required. To consider if the damage may be due to foundation movement, i.e. heave or subsidence or due to some other cause which may or may not be an insured peril covered under the policy. If the damage is thought to be due to foundation movement to consider the possible mechanism of that movement. To consider if the cause of the movement can be resolved at this stage to achieve stability although this may be deferred until the further investigation.
50
Table 6.1 Classification of visible damage to walls, with particular reference to the potential serviceability/seriousness of the structural distress Approximate crack width (mm)
Category of damage
Definition of cracks and description of damage
Up to 0.1
Cracks defined as HAIRLINE; generally considered to have negligible structural implications, and can be expected to occur in almost all buildings at any location. They are not generally related to subsidence/foundation movement. (Refer to BRE publication Cracking in Buildings6.2 by R. B. and L. L. Bonshor). Cracks defined as FINE. These cracks may occasionally have some structural significance, but are not usually deemed serious. Often these cracks are more visible inside buildings than in external brickwork. Would generally be located at points of structural weakness in a building, e.g. window/door openings. Indicates slight foundation movement, particularly if isolated. An array/series or large number of closely located fine cracks is unusual, but could signify more substantial foundation movement (see Fig. 6.2). Cracks defined as MODERATE. These cracks are likely to have some structural significance and will almost always occur at points of weakness or hinge points. Generally cracks will be visible internally and externally and will indicate foundation or other structural movement enough to distort door and window frames and make doors and windows stick. Weather tightness may be an issue that needs to be investigated as may be the structural integrity of the building (see Fig. 6.3). Cracks defined as SERIOUS. There will almost certainly be some compromise of the integrity of the structure and weather tightness may be impaired. Serious distortion may be occasioned to door and window frames, and glass fracturing is possible, as could be service fractures and strains (see Fig. 6.4). Cracks defined as SEVERE (see Fig. 6.5). Structural integrity severely compromised floors, sloping walls leaning or bulging; bearings of beams, lintels suspect. Pipe fractures and straining likely windows broken. Cracks defined as VERY SEVERE (see Fig. 6.5). Potential danger from failed or fractured structural elements and for instability. Safety issues must be considered.
0.2 to 2
2 to 5
5 to 15
15 to 25
Greater than 25
of all parties. This became most detrimental on property values when Valuation Surveyors, Lenders or Insurers were scared off, because most property sales were invariably relying on one or more of these parties for sales to be achieved. It is also fair to say that, as a result of the increase in personal expectations over the last 20 years or so, of what people perceive to be their entitlement from a house, the tolerance level of householders with regard to minor cracks has decreased sharply. At the same time awareness of subsidence increased with the result that cracks which were previously ignored began to assume disproportionate significance. However houseowners not contemplating selling their properties are often considerably more tolerant of minor cracking once it has been explained that the cracks are not defects likely to affect the serviceability of their property. Even relatively severe cracks, if they are static, can be tolerated when they are out of sight (see Fig. 6.1). The question of any effect on a propertys value can then be assessed more objectively. The important questions are: When should cracks and other evidence of structural movement be considered significant? Does the damage result from subsidence? How do owners assess the damage or get advice on it?
Fig. 6.1 Crack in roof space wall (subsidence)
Many attempts have been made to categorise the importance
of cracks by their size. This has particularly arisen with regard to subsidence movement because of the special interest in this subject and the possible costs that can occur for resulting repairs. The Building Research Establishment Digest 2516.1 contains a table Classification of visible damage to walls with particular reference to ease of repair of plaster and brickwork or masonry which has been modified over the last 10 years.
51
Fig. 6.2 Typical moderate subsidence crack in brickwork
This is a helpful table and Task Group members have developed the recommendations in it as Tables 6.1 & 6.2 (see page 56) for guidance when considering crack severity and possible repair in low-rise buildings. Other informed opinions have taken the view that cracks of less than 2mm are trivial in structural terms provided they are not varying in size seasonally by more than 1mm, or are not part of an array of cracks of greater total size, which is in part or whole increasing in size. Some opinion may permit this limit to be up to 5mm after monitoring has shown that the crack is not progressing. However, it is often difficult to persuade houseowners that cracks of less than about 2mm to 5mm are of no structural importance provided they are stable and the cause has been identified and dealt with. Even the slightest hairline crack in decoration is nowadays viewed with alarm by a houseowner, primarily because of the possibility of the cause being subsidence. The actual location of a crack often influences its acceptability. A hairline crack in a lounge ceiling can cause greater concern to a houseowner, compared with the same crack in the ceiling of the kitchen or in the wall of a secondary bedroom. Yet, as has been said before, relatively large cracks are often tolerated without any comment in a factory or commercial premises. The lay-persons perception of crack size and importance is somewhat subjective. Since the 1970s, a considerable number of properties have been underpinned even when they have only had very minor cracking in the fabric, despite the perceived view that such damage was unlikely to progress to a more serious state. It is now generally accepted by Experts in the matter of subsidence damage that it is not really the size of the crack or cracks that is important, but whether it is likely to increase in size if nothing is done. If a crack has reached or is likely to approach 5mm in width at its greatest dimension then it is essential to be satisfied that: the stability and integrity of the property has not been affected by the damage, and the damage is not likely to increase yet further
Fig. 6.3 Typical internal heave cracks moderate to serious
Provided these two important factors are satisfied, then the size of the crack or its effect on the appearance of the property
Fig. 6.4 Serious cracking
52
Fig. 6.5 Typical examples of severe and very severe damage
is primarily cosmetic and only justifies localised treatment. In the case of an array of cracks, the above factors need to be satisfied if the widths of individual cracks total 15mm or more. Cracks in the order of 2mm to 5mm are sometimes described as being at the damage threshold or serviceability limit beyond which the houseowner, Lenders and Insurers may consider that further technical investigation or assurance is required. Cracks below this size, provided they are not increasing in size should be considered as acceptable. It should be remembered that there is an economical life for a building, depending upon the quality and type of initial construction and its subsequent maintenance. This could be as little as 3040 years for some types of construction, but usually averages about 100 years. Localised deterioration and damage may occur for many reasons during the course of that period. Cracking, whether caused by subsidence or any other factor, is one form of deterioration and must be assessed objectively just like any risk.
balanced and a fair presentation of the facts at hand. The Expert should discuss with the property owner the history of the property including any structural modifications and/or extensions and when the damage first occurred. Following the discussion with the property owner and other interested parties the appraisal should be carried out if at all possible by the Expert on their own and not encumbered by others. This should allow the Expert to consider the problem clearly with the minimum of detractive influences. It is accepted that the initial appraisal may not diagnose precisely the cause of every possible case of subsidence, but from the considerable experience gained over the last 20 years it has been possible to identify the main criteria which determine most subsidence cases. The more important criteria to consider in the appraisal are: The age of the property and any alterations The type of movement and pattern of any cracking The proximity of the property to trees or large wood shrubs The proximity of the property to sloping ground The likelihood of leaking drains The likelihood of the property being on subsidence sensitive soils Proximity of property to old mine workings
6.5 Procedure for the initial appraisal

6.5.1 Basic factors
There are a number of basic factors to be considered in the initial appraisal and these should be addressed objectively. It is incumbent upon the appraiser when carrying out and reporting upon the initial appraisal that the views given are
These are discussed in detail in the following sections.
53
Table 6.2 Classification of visible damage to walls with particular reference to type of repair, and rectification considerations
Category of damage
Approximate crack width
Definition of cracks and repair types/considerations.
Up to 0.1
HAIRLINE Internally cracks can be filled or covered by wall covering, and redecorated. Externally, cracks rarely visible and remedial works rarely justified.
0.2 to 2
FINE Internally cracks can be filled or covered by wall covering, and redecorated. Externally, cracks may be visible, sometimes repairs required for weather tightness or aesthetics. Note: Plaster cracks may, in time, become visible again if not covered by a wall covering. MODERATE Internal cracks are likely to need raking out and repairing to a recognised specification. May need to be chopped back, and repaired with expanded metal/plaster, then redecorated. The crack will inevitably become visible again in time if these measures are not carried out. External cracks will require raking out and repointing, cracked bricks may require replacement. SERIOUS Internal cracks repaired as for MODERATE, plus perhaps reconstruction if seriously cracked. Rebonding will be required. External cracks may require reconstruction perhaps of panels of brickwork. Alternatively, specialist resin bonding techniques may need to be employed and/or joint reinforcement. SEVERE Major reconstruction works to both internal and external wall skins are likely to be required. Realignment of windows and doors may be necessary. VERY SEVERE Major reconstruction works, plus possibly structural lifting or sectional demolition and rebuild may need to be considered. Replacement of windows and doors, plus other structural elements, possibly necessary. Note: Building & CDM Regulations will probably apply to this category of work, see sections 10.4, 10.6 and Appendix F. building-owner will have no recourse to the Warranty (see also 4.4.2). Although the buildings Insurer and the Lender, if one is involved, will need to know promptly of the existence of structural damage, they will primarily wish to know whether the damage has significantly affected the value of the property in the case of the Lender or whether it results from an insured risk in the case of the Insurer. It may be that the problem has arisen from an uninsured risk and so responsibility for rectifying the property will fall to the houseowner without assistance from the buildings Insurer. In most cases it is reasonable to assume that movements due to initial settlement will have ceased in properties which are 5 years or more in age, and that inherent defects likely to cause subsidence will have manifested themselves and been discovered, e.g. poor construction, leaking drains, soft spots in the ground. However, for properties that are at least 5 years old, the Expert undertaking the initial appraisal should consider the next four factors in the order in which they are presented. The first two should be obvious to inspection. The other two may not be so obvious and may depend very much upon the experience and local knowledge of the Expert.
2 to 5
5 to 15
15 to 25
Greater than 25
6.5.2 The age of the property and any alterations

Relatively new houses are untested and it is therefore necessary to adopt a particularly cautious attitude to such properties if cracks or other evidence of structural movement are found to exist within the fabric. As has been said earlier, initial settlement affects almost all properties during the first year or so after construction, but damage resulting from initial settlement should never give rise to anything more than cracks of hairline or slightly greater size. Cracks of more than 2mm in width, especially if there are a number of cracks in any one wall should be viewed with suspicion. Cracks of more than 5mm are always suspect in any property. For the purpose of the initial appraisal, a new property should be defined as a property of less than 5 years of age. Younger properties which display evidence of cracks of 2mm or more in width or other structural movement should be referred to an Expert for further investigation and comment. This is particularly necessary if the property was redecorated a year or so after construction and cracks have developed afterwards. It is highly likely that a privately-owned domestic property which is less than 5 years old will have the benefit of an insurance-backed warranty scheme such as the NHBC scheme and, irrespective of who identifies the damage, the building owner is advised to report the existence of the damage to the Warrantor. Failure to report evidence of major structural movement once it is observed, and certainly within the first 10 years after construction, can mean that the
6.5.3 The type of movement and pattern of any cracking (dealt with in detail in 6.6.2)
54
6.5.4 Proximity of property to trees and large woody shrubs

Some 60% of all subsidence problems have been found to be attributed to trees and large shrubs extracting moisture from a shrinkable clay substratum. As a consequence, a property constructed on clay in the proximity of trees can suffer structural damage of a subsidence nature. In a drought year this can be up to 70% of all claims. If the Expert knows definitively from local knowledge that the property is not constructed upon clay then the proximity of the trees is unlikely to be a significant contributing factor to the damage. The likelihood of damage arising from moisture extraction because of tree roots growing close to, or beneath a property, is very complex and depends upon: the species, crown size, and condition of the tree or trees their proximity to the property and depth of the foundations of the property the climatic conditions the nature of the substratum
have a natural tendency to move from high level to low level as part of the normal erosion process. The likelihood of movement occurring will depend upon many complex geotechnical factors beyond the scope of this Guide. In simple terms steep slopes tend to be more sensitive to movement than shallow slopes. Soil slopes are more sensitive to movement than solid material such as rock, but even rock must not be dismissed as it may have internal fractures and fissures that could permit ground movement. Substrata consisting of clay interspersed with thin layers of Table 6.3 Trees & buildings6.3
Each of these factors can be very variable, and their interaction becomes even more variable and unpredictable. As a result, very occasionally roots can cause building movement leading to damage at very considerable distances from a tree. The maximum distances recorded by the Kew Root Survey6.3 for a number of species of tree is shown in Table 6.3 (see also section 8.2). If trees are at a greater distance, they can almost certainly be ignored. If they are closer, their possible involvement in damage should be considered and investigated whilst appreciating that the risks are very remote. Small ornamental trees and shrubs may also cause damage if they are very close to a building with shallow foundations. This risk of damage will increase the closer a large tree is to the building. Buildings with shallow foundations will always be more vulnerable. However, a large proportion of trees can co-exist in close proximity to a building without ever causing damage. Even with fairly detailed investigations, it is not possible to make an accurate prediction as to which trees from amongst the total population will actually initiate damage. The development of damage is far too unpredictable, and for this reason, and with current knowledge, it is not possible to produce meaningful guidelines on a safe proximity for trees. Instead, one must investigate the possibility that a tree might be involved whilst remembering that, if they are involved in 60% of claims, some other factor is involved in the other 40%. However large and obvious the tree, the possible involvement of other factors should always be given equal consideration. The NHBC has produced guidelines6.4 for the design of foundations for new houses but this should not be used for assessing the relevance of trees in the vicinity of an existing property. Obviously the depth of the foundations of a property is unlikely to be established during a purely visual inspection of the property. However, if cracks are present and if they appear to indicate subsidence, then the likely position of maximum subsidence should be established. The vicinity of the property should also be inspected to see whether trees are present nearby and whether they are of a species likely to cause problems. The distances of any trees from the property are important criteria. Trees, which are very close to the property, i.e. within 1.2m, may cause local damage as a result of the mechanical action of tree growth pressing against the structure, whether or not the substratum is shrinkable clay (see Fig. 6.6). Greater distances are applicable when lightweight structures (porches, conservatories, etc.) are involved as they often have shallower foundations.
Species Apple/Pear Ash Beech Birch Cypress Cherry Damson Elm Hawthorn Holly Horse Chestnut Laburnum Laurel Lime Magnolia Maple Oak Pine Plane Plum Poplar Sycamore Spruce Walnut White Beam/Rowan Willow Yew
Distance (m) Trees beyond this distance are unlikely to be relevant 10 21 15 10 20 11 11 30 12 6 23 9 6 20 5 20 30 8 22 11 35 17 7 14 11 40 5
6.5.5 Proximity of the property to sloping ground

Buildings situated on or at the top of sloping ground can be sensitive to ground movement because sloping ground may
55
Fig. 6.6 Pyracantha and other large shrubs have the ability to cause damage when grown in close proximity to buildings (R. Finch)
Fig. 6.7 Subsidence at house corner due to leaking drains
sand that permit water to percolate through the ground are particularly sensitive to ground movement. Such landslip occurring in the vicinity of a property can result in subsidence. Indications of an unstable slope include: displacement and/or out-of-plumb fence posts, trees, etc. fissures on the surface of the ground local slumped areas of ground surface
Alternatively where drains are located close to and below the foundations, material can be washed out into the drains from beneath the foundations so creating voids which again result in subsidence.
Although properties on, or at the top of a slope, are likely to be most at risk from ground movement of this sort, properties close to the foot of sloping ground may also be sensitive to the results of the landslip if the ground should move dramatically towards the property. Slopes created by recent ground excavation or filling operations should also be viewed with great caution. Excavations undertaken at the foot of an embankment can cause instability, as can load material placed on a slope, particularly towards the top. If a slope or embankment already has a drainage system within it, the blockage of the system or interference with it can alter the ground water conditions, which in turn might give rise to instability and landslip. Granular materials, such as sand and gravels, can remain stable for long periods of time provided they are not physically washed away by surface water. Slopes of up to 30 for such materials are normally not a problem. However, in the case of a clay substratum much shallower slopes can be sensitive to ground movement and it is advisable to be wary of ground which has a slope greater than about 8 where clay is known to be the substratum. Even steeper slopes may be unstable if the clay is fissured. Reference should be made to an Engineer with suitable geotechnical experience for proposing advice on this subject. Although the initial appraisal will not be capable of identifying whether the ground is likely to move or not, it will identify the presence of sloping ground and particularly whether a property shows any past signs of downhill movement.
Properties built before around 1970 will invariably have drains constructed with rigid joints. This type of drain is particularly susceptible to developing leaks. In more recent times drains have normally incorporated flexible joints which are less likely to leak, but broken pipes or bad drain laying can be a common problem with either rigid or flexibly jointed drains. Consequently, it should not be assumed that defective drains are unlikely to be a cause of subsidence just because a property is less than 20 years old. As the initial appraisal does not involve the excavation of trial pits, any assessment as to whether leaking drains are likely to be the cause of the problem will be somewhat subjective, but should be reported if suspected.
6.5.7 Likelihood of the property being on subsidencesensitive soils (local knowledge)

It may be known to those making the inspection that a clay substratum or other ground conditions exist in a particular area in which problems have occurred. Large scale geological maps will assist in establishing the subsoil stratum but it is possible that the initial appraisal might not be undertaken by an Expert capable of interpreting geological maps such interpretation is best undertaken by a suitably experienced Structural or Civil Engineer. It should be appreciated that the majority of subsidence problems affecting low-rise buildings, however caused, generally occur within the top 4m5m of ground level. Geological survey maps do not accurately show shallow deposits, hence individual investigation is invariably required. Knowledge of the substratum is particularly useful if tree root penetration beneath foundations or in the vicinity of foundations is thought to be a problem. As well as knowing of the existence of shrinkable clay in any area the knowledge of the existence of other factors such as the presence of peat, current or past mining operations, quarrying, etc., all constitute valuable local knowledge which can considerably assist the person undertaking the initial appraisal. A non-specialist Expert having such local knowledge, e.g. a Valuation Surveyor, Architect, etc., may be able to put the problem in context. Sometimes a cursory visual inspection of adjacent similar properties can identify problems common to the area or a particular type of property. Such defects may not necessarily be caused by subsidence, nor would a defect necessarily affect the property being specifically examined merely because the defect is present on other similar properties. Nevertheless it is a good indicator that a general problem might exist. On occasions local knowledge should be treated with caution, as there is always a temptation to assume that all prop-
6.5.6 The likelihood of leaking drains

If a property displays subsidence-type cracks then the likely location of the subsidence should be identified from the crack pattern and a superficial examination made of the relevant area outside the property to see whether drains are likely to be present in the immediate vicinity (see Figs. 6.7 and 5.9). Leaking drains can cause subsidence in two ways: Water can leach out into the ground and soften the substratum beneath the foundations so that the ground in the vicinity of the leak is incapable of supporting the weight of the building, thus resulting in subsidence. This mechanism can happen irrespective of the depth of the drains relative to the foundations.
56
erties in an area are likely to be blighted by the same problem. Just because properties in one part of an area suffer from subsidence due to the known presence of potentially troublesome underlying stratum, e.g. peat, those in another part may not.
6.6 Identification of subsidence crack patterns

6.6.1 Identification of cracks related to various types of buildings
Subsidence causes foundation movement, but the evidence of such movement is normally noticed first in the form of cracks appearing in the superstructure of a building. The vast majority of domestic properties in Britain, and the older commercial and industrial buildings, have been built in masonry, i.e. stonework, brickwork, or blockwork. Masonry is a material that is good at resisting compressive forces such as direct loading, but weak at resisting tensile forces. Modern masonry structures suffering from movement invariably develop cracks, but different types of movement tend to give different crack patterns. Thermal and shrinkage movements do not generate the same types of crack patterns as subsidence (see Fig. 6.8). Buildings which are framed, e.g. in steelwork, or clad with timber boarding, metal sheeting, or which have tile or slate hanging do not display evidence of subsidence as readily as do buildings constructed of masonry. Fortunately in Britain low-rise domestic properties which have cladding on the external elevations tend to have internal masonry, even if it is plastered or rendered. Hence, it is still usually possible to identify subsidence movement within buildings clad externally with sheeting by examining for cracks on internal wall surfaces. Caution should be taken always to check that the walls are not themselves covered in cladding, e.g. dry lined, etc., which can be done by sounding them. In practice subsidence cracks are best identified where possible by examining external masonry elevations (see Fig. 6.9) because this allows large areas of a wall to be viewed at once, particularly on two- or three-storey buildings. Only relatively small areas of wall can be examined in each room in turn inside such a building and it is possible that internal decoration will, in any event, have been repaired thus hiding all but the most recent cracks within a property. External cracks are more likely to be easily identified, even when the masonry has been repointed (see Figs. 6.10 and 6.11). Standing back from an external elevation it may be possible to note cracks which have been repointed along with any other distortions in the coursing of the masonry which would indicate past movement. External examination also allows complete crack patterns to be easily identified (see Fig. 6.12). Since the end of the 1950s it has become more usual to construct masonry walls in cement mortar as opposed to the old lime mortar used in Victorian times and in the following half century. Cement mortar is relatively brittle compared with lime mortar and so tends to show distortions and structural movement by forming conspicuous cracks (see Fig. 6.13). Cracks in cement mortar can usually be easily noticed even when as little as 0.5mm in width. By contrast, lime mortar is somewhat more plastic and so can accommodate slight distortions of the masonry without showing small cracks. However, lime mortar joints in masonry tend to weather more rapidly than cement mortar joints and so need to be pointed or repointed approximately every 20 years. The pointing usually consists of the harder cement-based mortar and therefore more recent subsidence movement tends to show up by cracking of the brittle pointing.
Fig. 6.8 Crack in stud wall due to sagging or shrinkage of supporting timber joist (non-subsidence)
Fig. 6.9 Crack in external house wall (subsidence)
Fig. 6.10 Repointed cracks in render
Fig. 6.11 Individually repointed cracks can be conspicuous
57
Fig. 6.12 External view - complete crack patterns
Fig. 6.13 Subsidence cracking in an industrial building Fig. 6.14 Crack in bedroom wall (subsidence)
6.6.2 Characteristics of subsidence cracks

Subsidence cracks are generally identified by the following characteristics: They tend to be diagonal in direction (see Figs. 6.14 and 6.15). They tend to be wider at one end (a) than at the other (b) (see Figs. 6.16 and 6.13). They always start and are widest at a free edge, such as the corner of a house, the top of a wall or the end of a wall, or the edge of a door or window (see Fig. 6.16 (c)). The free edge can be at the foundation level in rare cases such as heave. They tend to travel around openings (see Fig. 6.16). They often extend below DPC level (see Fig. 6.9).
There are a number of pointers which the Expert should look for: Cracks are always widest at the end which meets the free edge (see Fig. 6.13).
Fig. 6.15 Crack in bathroom wall (subsidence)
58
Fig. 6.16 Common crack patterns associated with subsidence
Cracks may extend from the free edge to another free edge, or may disappear at an intermediate location within the area of the wall. It is, however, only the narrow end of the crack which will disappear at any intermediate point in the wall (see Fig. 6.16). A crack which exists on an external elevation will almost certainly be matched by a corresponding crack or cracks on the inside of the wall. Such internal cracking may have been made good in the past by filling and redecorating but it must, in the vast majority of cases, have existed at some time. A crack on one side of a wall does not always correspond exactly on the other side. It is more likely to correspond if the wall is of solid construction, but where a wall is of cavity construction the crack might be displaced by some distance to another location on the other side of the wall. It is important to appreciate that a wall cannot crack on one side from subsidence without also cracking on the other. Openings in a wall, such as doorways or windows, tend to attract subsidence cracks because they find it easier to travel around the opening than to fracture the adjacent masonry (see Figs. 6.17 and 6.18). Openings in a wall should be looked upon as part of the crack pattern, e.g. a crack arriving at the bottom right hand side of a ground floor window will often continue at the top left hand side of a window, but will be a little bit wider. In each case the window has merely been incorporated into the crack. Sometimes a wall will display a single large crack being, say, 1mm wide at DPC level near the ground and extending up to a higher level edge where it may be 10mm or 15mm wide. Alternatively, the same amount of distortion may cause a series of cracks to fan out from near the same position at ground level. Such a series is normally referred to as an array. Where two or more cracks result from the same amount of foundation subsidence they will be narrower than a single crack caused by the same amount and pattern of subsidence. It is important when considering cracks that the total number of cracks mak-
ing up an array are identified and the sum of their maximum widths at the free edge or edges should be added to get the equivalent single crack width. Cracks which arrive at a free edge will continue around the edge and either up or down the adjoining wall, depending upon the type of subsidence which is occurring (see Fig. 6.19). It is important to appreciate that a property suffering from subsidence may be experiencing the effect at more than one location. This can result in a complexity of cracking which is sometimes difficult to interpret. Fig. 6.19 illustrates the crack patterns which might result from two separate leaking drains, one either end of a gable wall.
The manner in which the building is moving will often become more clear if the person undertaking the initial appraisal draws sketches of the external elevations of the property, and, if possible, also of the internal elevations marking the cracks on the sketch, noting particularly the locations where cracks meet free edges, as well as points of maximum and minimum crack widths. This should enable the location of the movement to be identified with some accuracy, but in some circumstances may require level monitoring, see 7.3.4. Where heave cracks have occurred (normally as a result of tree removal permitting a shrinkable clay substratum to swell again) they tend to have a similar pattern to subsidence cracks but in reverse. Figs 6.3 and 6.18 illustrate typical examples of heave cracks. However, cracks resulting from heave can display complex patterns. Much depends upon which part of the building is heaving relative to another. Care should be taken when interpreting heave movement to confirm which parts of the structure are moving and which are stable. Heave cracks may not display a diagonal tendency to the same extent as subsidence cracks and can frequently be almost vertical but, like subsidence cracks, they are always tapered, with one end wider than the other. It is also possible that the tree may have caused initial subsidence cracking
59
which might have been repointed, confusing the crack patterns. Once the location, or locations, of the movement have been identified, there are two simple procedures which often help to confirm the diagnosis without having to excavate trial pits or cut into the fabric of the property: Firstly, if it is possible to sight along the horizontal bed joints of the masonry on the relevant external elevations, then it should be possible to see if the coursing dips down from the point where the crack or the array has been identified (see Fig 6.20). This procedure tends only to identify a discontinuity in the wall and it is important that the section of wall which is actually subsiding is identified. It will always be the part under the diagonal crack, which will be the part of the wall closest to the free edge. Secondly, and possibly a less reliable method, is to place a spirit level on internal floors in the vicinity of the movement to see whether the floors dip down towards the location where it is thought that the subsidence has occurred, or alternatively rise up in possible heave conditions. When checking floor levels it should be appreciated that timber floors in particular can sag and distort for various reasons not at all associated with subsidence, and in the case of long, standing subsidence, floors may have been relevelled many years before so that any distortion which did exist has been removed. Concrete floors can suffer from their own particular problems, e.g. sulphate attack, creep/sag of prestressed units, settlement of fill under the over site slab, etc. Plumb line and level surveys would normally constitute part of the further investigation but on some occasions it may be appropriate to perform such surveys at this stage. Detailed information is given in Chapter 7.
Fig. 6.17 Typical subsidence crack at window
6.6.3 Decorations
Knowing the age of internal decorations can be very useful when diagnosing the importance of subsidence damage. Cracks in a new decorated property would suggest recent movement and may give rise to greater concern than minor cracking in much older decoration. In the latter case, the movement at least indicates the total degree of movement which has occurred since the decoration took place, but does not necessarily indicate whether movement is recent or long standing or, for that matter, whether it has been gradually occurring over a number of years since the previous decoration or is a more recent phenomenon. In properties where heating has been provided by open fires or paraffin stoves, decoration can look much older than is actually the case. This is also common in properties where the occupants are smokers. Paraffin stoves also discharge a lot of moisture into the atmosphere which can maintain timber in floors, etc., at a relatively high moisture content which then results in exaggerated drying shrinkage and cracking in surfaces in summer. Recent installation of central heating can cause a building to become drier. Where a property has suffered subsidence in the past, but where internal decoration or external pointing is clearly in the region of 5 years old and no fresh movement is noticeable, then the subsidence is likely to have stabilised. Hairline cracking, i.e. less than 0.5mm wide, at positions where previous cracking has occurred should not automatically be assumed to be of structural importance or to be indicative of continuing movement. When a wall has cracked, for whatever reason not necessarily subsidence it is fractured and although is probably quite stable the mere repointing or filling and redecorating over a crack will not mechanically rejoin the two bits of masonry either side of the crack. Hairline cracking is very rarely of any importance from a structural point of view. Seasonal variations between hot and cold and wet and dry periods can cause very slight flexing of the fabric of the structure which can manifest itself as hairline
Fig. 6.18 Heave movement causing cracking and separation of soffit board after running up the edge of window
60
Fig. 6.19 Typical multi-problem subsidence
based on the evidence gathered and considered. The Expert is not expected to be infallible but should exercise all such reasonable skill, care and diligence as is to be expected of a properly qualified and competent expert experienced in this type of work. Great care should be taken in the preparation of the report not to overlook important issues or to give assurances that cannot be supported. The extent of the report may range from a single page letter to a tome depending on the problem presented to the Expert. The layout of the report will therefore reflect the degree of the problem and the extent of the damage. The report will be read by persons who are not necessarily experts in building structures and should be written with clarity in mind with clear unequivocal conclusions. BRE Digest 2516.1 gives very good advice on the reporting of damage and assessment of severe damage.
Fig. 6.20 Change in level of brickwork along terrace showing indications of structural movement
References
6.1 Assessment of damage in low-rise buildings: With particular reference to progressive foundation movement. Revised edition. Watford: BRE, 1990. BRE Digest 251 Bonshor, R. B. and Bonshor, L. L.: Cracking in buildings. London, CRC Ltd. 1996. BRE Publication BR 292 Data from Cutler, D. F., Richardson, I. B. K.: Tree roots and buildings, 2nd edition. Harlow: Longman Scientific & Technical, 1989 National House Building Council. Standard Chapter 4.2 Building near trees. Amersham: NHBC 1999
cracking at the point where the old crack previously existed. In such instances a crack of up to 2mm wide should not normally give cause for concern providing it is of a seasonal nature and not progressively increasing in size.
6.2
6.7 Report
Following the initial appraisal a brief report is required. This should include:
6.3 6.4
The reason for the report The limit of the report, e.g. preliminary based on external inspection only A brief description of the problem The likely cause of the problem including comment on any other possible causes A statement on the severity of the problem Possible prognosis with reasons including any reservations Any further investigation required Recommended course of action Any likely repairs required with estimated costs
Often the report is required to confirm that the movement has stopped or, in the jargon, is non progressive, i.e. is not likely to get much bigger but can still move. A response to this should be carefully framed with supporting evidence. The Expert should remember that the report is their opinion
61
62
Chapter 7 Further investigations

7.1 Objectives 7.2 Scope of further investigations 7.3 Assessment of which parts of the foundation or superstructure are stable 7.3.1 Full crack record 7.3.2 Distortion survey 7.3.3 Crack monitoring 7.3.4 Level monitoring 7.4 Soil investigation procedure 7.4.1 Trial pits 7.4.2 Boring and hand augering 7.4.3 Probing penetration testing 7.4.4 Soil examination 7.4.5 Soil tests 7.4.6 Assessment of desiccation from soil tests 7.4.7 Assessment of shrinkability 7.4.8 Calculation of heave/shrinkage potential 7.4.9 Assessment of permeability and rate of moisture recovery 7.4.10 Identification of root samples 7.5 Predisposing factors, and diagnosis of their involvement 7.5.1 Trees 7.5.2 Slope 7.5.3 Drains 7.5.4 Traffic, or potential causes of vibration 7.5.5 Other building operations 7.5.6 Changing environmental factors 7.6 Final report 64 64 64 64 64 64 67 68 68 68 69 70 70 70 71 71 71 71 71 71 72 72 72 72 72 73
63
7 Further investigations
7.1 Objectives
The preliminary appraisal should have identified whether damage has been, or may in the future be, caused by foundation movement, and identified possible causes for that movement. Further investigations are intended: to confirm, or determine, the exact cause of damage to determine the extent of subsidence/heave within the building to determine whether it is likely to continue: progressively (in the same direction) seasonally (annual cycle of subsidence and recovery) sis of the crack pattern (see section 6.6). As confirmation of this, a full written record of the damage should be made, usually in the form of a sketch or detailed plan of each elevation, and exploded plan of each room showing walls and ceilings. The location and dimensions of every significant crack should be recorded, noting the position where crack widths are measured. Examination of damage should include a record of previous damage, including assessment of whether historic damage is consistent with current problems, or indicative of some other cause.
7.3.2 Distortion survey (see also BRE Digest 3447.2)

Damage is unlikely to have occurred unless there has been significant differential movement between different parts of the property. If it is assumed that brickwork was constructed level in the first instance, any departure from level will indicate differential movement which has occurred. Variations in level can be detected by levelling along a convenient brick course, preferably as close to DPC as possible. Measurements can be taken with a water level, but as a precision optic level and staff will be required for level monitoring (see 7.3.4), it is usually easiest to use the same equipment. Readings should be taken at regular intervals around the building, perhaps every 2m in areas of little movement, but at closer 1m intervals if significant differences are apparent. Readings to either side of door or window openings are desirable. Results can be calculated either relative to an arbitrary point, for instance adjacent to the front door, or relative to the highest or lowest point on the brick course. They can be shown either as + or - values on a simple plan, or by vertical bars on an isometric plan (see Figs. 7.1 and 7.2). Measurements can also be taken internally on a floor slab, either just around the periphery of each room or with a lattice of measurements over the whole area. The level survey can be supplemented by a verticality survey of external walls. As this needs to measure the full height, a builders level is inadequate; a plumb bob or theodolite with an offset staff should be used (see Figs. 7.3 and 7.4), with measurements taken at about 1m intervals. Sets of measurements should be taken at each corner, and midway along each wall. Results are usually best presented by horizontal bars on an isometric drawing of the elevations. Both level and verticality surveys are based on the assumption that walls were originally constructed with horizontal courses and vertical perpends. This is normally a reliable assumption. However, it must be appreciated that any recorded distortion could have occurred at any time in the life of the building, or be a legacy of the original construction; they may not indicate recent movements. Results from distortion surveys can be difficult to interpret and requires experience and skill to do so. The whole pattern of movement should be considered rather than individual pieces of evidence.
to determine whether any continuing movement will be worse, similar, or less significant than existing damage if unacceptable movements are likely to continue, to determine the most effective remedial solution to stabilise the property and repair any damage to confirm the adequacy of remedial action
7.2 Scope of further investigations

Radically different investigations may be necessary for different causes and for the various remedial options. For this reason, only some of the investigations described in this chapter may be appropriate for a particular case. The preliminary appraisal may have identified which are required. If not, they should be identified at the outset, and then modified as necessary as further information becomes available. As investigations proceed and the probable cause is confirmed, the scope of investigations may need to be modified so as to ensure that the information which is obtained is relevant to the particular cause and probable remedial action. For instance: If trees are identified as a potential cause, before control of trees can be considered as a potential remedy, investigations need to establish whether or not a persistent moisture deficit is present (see the effect of vegetation in 5.4.3) Where underpinning is identified as the probable remedial measure, investigations should include: the foundations, ground and water conditions in areas of subsidence/heave a suitable bearing structure, including ground and water conditions within which the underpinning system will be controlled
At all times the cost-effectiveness of investigations should be appraised so as to ensure that all necessary information is obtained, but without waste of resources on unnecessary work. A fixed pattern of investigation for all cases of subsidence is unlikely to be appropriate.
7.3.3 Crack monitoring (see also BRE Digest 3437.1)

Crack monitoring (see Fig. 7.5(i) to (v)) has been the traditional form of monitoring, because adequate accuracy can be achieved without relying heavily on skilled operatives and specialist equipment. As well as its use in diagnosis, crack monitoring has value in confirming that remedial action to stabilise foundations has also been effective in stopping further crack movement. When used for this purpose it may be possible to delay the start of crack monitoring until after remedial action has been taken, but as information on the behaviour of cracks may also be useful for diagnosis, an early start to crack monitoring is desirable. Crack monitoring is particularly necessary if the damage relates to superstructure problems rather than subsidence. Superstructure repairs and redecoration (section 9.6) should not start until crack monitoring has demonstrated that significant crack movements have ceased.
7.3 Assessment of which parts of the foundation or superstructure are unstable

This element of the detailed investigation is effectively a recording of the degree of damage and distortion at the time of investigation, supplemented by monitoring any further changes that are occurring.
7.3.1 Full crack record (see also BRE Digest 3437.1)

The initial investigation is likely to have been based on analy-
64
Fig. 7.1 Typical results for a level distortion survey, with levels presented in millimetres relative to an arbitrary zero datum adjacent to the front door (P. G. Biddle)
Fig. 7.2 Level distortion survey presented on an isometric plan, using the same values and datum as in Fig. 7.1 (P. G. Biddle)
65
Fig. 7.5 (i) Measurement using a crack measuring gauge (basic)
Fig. 7.5 (ii) Measurement using pencil marks (basic) Fig. 7.3 Plumb survey in progress
Fig. 7.5 (iii) Measurement using glass tell-tales (not recommended) Fig. 7.4 Measurement of out of plumb
If the results of the exercise are to be useful, the readings must be accurate, i.e. capable of detecting movements of less than 0.1mm. The only reliable way to achieve this is with the aid of instruments measuring off fixed markers; glass telltales (see Fig. 7.5(iii)) are insufficiently accurate and too vulnerable to vandalism but specialist calibrated tell-tales (see Fig. 7.5(iv)) are effective. Callipers, either with an electronic digital display or with a vernier scale, provide adequate accuracy. The most suitable markers are the small stainless steel studs intended for use with a Demec strain gauge (see Fig. 7.5(v)), glued to brickwork, plaster or other surface with a fast-drying epoxy resin. Alternatively, round-head brass screws can be used, provided measurements are always made at the same position on the shank of the screw, for instance just behind the screw head. Even more accurate measurements can be obtained with a Demec strain gauge, but the limited range of the instrument makes it less suitable for cracks showing large movements. Also human error of up to 0.2mm may occur with readings using studs and callipers.
Fig. 7.5 (iv) Measurement using calibrated tell-tales (good)
Any monitoring exercise for a specific purpose should not in principle extend for a greater period than 12 months, although exceptionally it may be necessary to extend the period to 18 months or possibly 2 years. The longer period may
66
marked in such a way as to allow readings or interpolation to the nearest 0.1mm. Lightweight staffs supporting a modified steel tape are available to allow single-handed operation (see Fig. 7.7). the level should be a precision instrument, accurately collimated, with a mean square error accuracy of 2mm for a 1km run. A parallel plate micrometer provides even greater accuracy.
Fig. 7.5 (v) (top) Demec strain gauge studs on wall and (bottom) Demec strain gauge in use (good) (P. G. Biddle)
Accuracy is improved if exactly the same procedure is followed for each set of readings, i.e. using the same operator and equipment, and setting up in the same position. Markers should be attached at regular and appropriate intervals around the building, for instance at each corner, plus 2 or 3 intervening positions along each wall, at the corners of any projecting elements and at the junction with any extensions. Markers on internal loadbearing walls, which can be observed through a door or open window, are often useful. In most situations it will be found that parts of the building are showing little or no differential movement, and one of the markers in this part of the building can be selected as the datum. However, if the whole building is moving, particularly if more than one cause may be operating at the same time, an independent datum will be required. In some situations it is sufficient to use an accurately identifiable part of a manhole surround, particularly if this is deeply founded. A manhole cover, which may be moved, is not reliable. For greater reliability, a deep datum may be required; this should be located in an area where the ground is unlikely to be subject to movement (for instance from tree roots or slope instability) and founded at a depth of at least 3m. The results of level monitoring are usually best presented as a graph, plotting the movements against time for each location.
occasionally be required when monitoring the result of tree management.
7.3.4 Level monitoring (see also BRE Digest 3867.3)

Some Experts argue that level monitoring is a preferred option to crack monitoring; they say that because subsidence damage is caused by movement of the foundations. It is therefore logical that investigations should include direct measurement of these movements. It will show exactly which parts of the building are moving and by how much, and so should be an important element of most investigations. Different causes of subsidence produce different patterns of movement, e.g.: trees or other vegetation seasonal, subsiding in summer and recovering in winter. The amount of subsidence and recovery may not be equal heave as a result of tree removal progressive upwards, at a diminishing rate settlement, erosion, mining subsidence, slope instability progressive downwards, possibly accelerating in wet weather
In addition, if trees or shrubs are involved as a cause of damage, and remedial action requires control of this vegetation (see section 8.3), level monitoring will be the most effective method of demonstrating the adequacy of the remedial action. If the results of level monitoring are to be valuable they must be accurate, aiming to achieve a closing error around a typical building of less than 1mm. To achieve this, readings should be taken to the nearest 0.1mm, and should use suitable equipment, such as: markers which are firm and robust, and provide an accurately defined location from which to measure. A brass or stainless screw of adequate length, mounted into a plastic plug close to ground level, will usually prove adequate. a staff which should mount accurately on the marker and can be held vertically against the wall, consistently to exactly the same position (see Fig. 7.6). It should be
Fig. 7.6 Level survey in progress
67
Fig. 7.8 Typical trial pit
Fig. 7.7 Bidpod levelling staff in use on level distortion survey enabling levelling to be done by one person only (P. G. Biddle)
distortion survey. Depending on site conditions, they can be machine or hand dug. Using a mechanical excavator obviously saves time where access permits, but care should be taken to establish the position of any underground services beforehand and it is obviously safer to dig by hand. Trial pits with unstable sides or in excess of 1.2m will require appropriate side support under the Health & Safety at Work, etc. Act 19747.7. Care must be taken that they do not undermine the foundations significantly. A vertical trimmed face makes it easier to inspect and identify individual strata within the trial pit. Information obtained from a trial pit should include: Dimensions and details of the construction of the foundations A good description of the ground beneath the footing A description of the ground alongside and above the foundations Presence of services, roots, etc. Presence of ground water (levels found and final standing levels)
Ideally level monitoring should be started as soon as possible. The frequency of subsequent readings will depend on individual circumstances, but intervals of 6 to 8 weeks are usual. As results become available, preliminary conclusions can be made, and refined as further readings are taken. If vegetation control is adopted, it will usually be desirable to continue the monitoring to demonstrate whether the action which has been taken has been effective (see section 8.5). Readings each spring and autumn will usually be sufficient for this purpose. If markers are inconspicuous, they can be left indefinitely on a building so that readings can be taken at any subsequent occasion.
7.4 Soil investigations procedure (see also BRE Digest 3227.4)

Physical investigations can be relatively expensive. They are however, a very important element of the overall investigation and should be carried out efficiently and economically to obtain accurate technical information and they should be properly targeted. The information obtained should be interpreted by an Engineer with appropriate experience of geotechnical matters. The various methods of physical soil examination include those discussed in the following sections.
Simple in situ strength tests7.8 can be carried out using, for example, a shear vane. Soil samples can be taken for testing, e.g. to establish the shrinkage potential, etc. Trial pits should be backfilled as soon as possible and not left open in the weather for days or weeks. Materials should be replaced in approximately their original sequence, and well compacted in layers.
7.4.2 Boring and hand augering (see also BRE Digest 4117.9)
Hand auger borings can be used as a means of extending trial pit depth, but they do not allow the soil to be inspected in situ. Hand augering usually only permits the taking of disturbed samples (see Fig. 7.9) and only permit a subjective assessment of the consistency of soil strength at relatively shallow depths. The recovery of undisturbed samples, required for laboratory testing, requires the use of light cable percussion techniques (see Fig. 7.10) or demountable rigs (see Fig. 7.11) where site access is limited. These rigs are normally necessary where sampling is to be carried out at depths in excess of about 3m. When using cable percussion rigs, in situ testing can be carried out, e.g. standard penetration tests. As with trial pits, the location of boreholes is best determined in the light of information from the level distortion survey. Sufficient boreholes will be needed to determine the pat-
7.4.1 Trial pits (see also BRE Digest 3817.5 & BS 59307.6)
Trial pits (see Fig. 7.8) are used to obtain details of the foundations and adjacent soil conditions. Their number and location will depend on the circumstances of the case, and are usually best determined in the light of the results of the level
68
Fig. 7.9 Hand augered borehole sample showing change in soil profile from sand to clay
Fig. 7.10 (i) Window sampler being driven into the ground by percussion hammer
Fig. 7.10 (ii) Window sampler full of sample
tern of any variation in conditions across the site, If underpinning is contemplated as the remedial measure, the depth of boreholes must be sufficient to establish a suitable bearing structure. Where tree root action is suspected, a comparison hole away from the potential influence of the tree may be needed, provided soil conditions across the site are likely to be sufficiently uniform to allow meaningful comparisons.
7.4.3 Probing penetration testing

The investigation of the depth of hard strata below weak soil is often carried out using the probing method. In its simplest form, the probe is a sharpened steel rod which is pushed or driven into the soil until it meets resistance which will be offered by a hard stratum. This method may be used effectively when establishing the extent of soft soils overlying harder ones. More sophisticated forms of probing have been developed. The two principal types are: The dynamic probe (see Fig. 7.12), which is driven into the soil by means of a hammer blow. Dynamic probing can be used to interpolate soil conditions between borehole positions The static probe which is forced into the soil by static load
With the static probe, a rod is pushed into the ground and the resistance at the tip is measured. Static probing is known by a number of terms including the cone penetrometer test. This test is relatively quick to carry out and is obviously economical by comparison with boring, sampling and laboratory testing. Continuous soil profiles can be established by interpretation of the ratio of frictional and cone resistances. All forms of probing can give unreliable results in soils containing occasional gravel, cobbles or boulders as these can easily be mistaken for bedrock. The cone penetration test was originally developed for use in alluvial soils but its use has
Fig. 7.10 (iii) Window sampler being retrieved by manual jack Fig. 7.10 Percussion window sampling equipment (Geocore)
69
Fig. 7.11 Drop hammer rig for small site investigations (Mini Soil Surveys)
been widened to include other materials such as chalk and clays. Depth of penetration is limited by the thrust available for pushing the penetrometer into the ground.
Fig. 7.12 Small scale dynamic probe equipment in action (Geocore)
7.4.4 Soil examination

To achieve the maximum benefit from soil tests, it is important to record the following information when carrying out a physical soil investigation: The type of material and its position, colour and smell The predominant particle size The state of compaction and the presence of vegetable matter The soil structure and texture, e.g. fissured or stratified Any major obstacles encountered The moisture conditions The presence, depth, and condition of any roots The likely load bearing capacity of the soil at various depths
7.4.6 Assessment of desiccation from soil tests (see also BRE Digest 4127.11)
It is important to establish the extent and depth of any desiccation but this is not always easy. Various methods are available: Comparison of moisture content profiles. It should be appreciated that, within the zone of seasonal change of moisture content, considerable variations can occur at different times of year. Boreholes drilled in the autumn can determine the total extent of soil drying; boreholes drilled in the spring will only determine any residual persistent deficit. Comparison of moisture content with index properties. For some over-consolidated clays with high liquid limit, there is an approximate relationship that the onset of desiccation occurs with a moisture content of less than 0.5 # liquid limit, with the onset of significant desiccation at 0.4 # liquid limit. Local correlations between moisture content and plastic limit may also be relevant in some situations. Comparison of soil strength profiles. Desiccation of a clay soil causes increase in the undrained shear strength. As the fissuring of a clay soil affects its overall strength, these tests should be on small samples, such as results obtained with a hand held penetrometer. Effective stress or suction profiles.
7.4.5 Soil tests

Suitable samples should be taken at appropriate intervals from trial pits or boreholes for further laboratory testing. The number of samples, and the interval between samples, will depend on the type of tests. For moisture content determination, samples at close intervals (every 0.2m or 0.25m) are desirable, to allow accurate determination of the moisture content profile. The greater cost of other laboratory tests may dictate wider intervals, but it should be commensurate with the type of information which is required. The following tests may be appropriate:
70
Soil classification tests, to determine, e.g. liquid and plastic limit Moisture content determination, e.g. with depth. Soil suction (see BRE Information Paper IP4/937.10). Triaxial Sulphates and pH Organic content
The detection of desiccation in clay soils can be more difficult than is often assumed. As each of the techniques has its own disadvantages, one should use as many different criteria as possible, and only conclude that desiccation is present if the various tests corroborate each other. Of these tests, measurement of soil suction is usually the most reliable method. However, it is also the most expensive, and, unless a compariIStructE Subsidence of low rise buildings 2nd edition
son profile is determined away from all potential causes of desiccation, assumptions must be made about the equilibrium profile. Accuracy diminishes if samples are less than 90% saturated, and anomalous results can be obtained in clay which overlies a drained sand.
7.4.7 Assessment of shrinkability (see BRE Digest 2407.12)

The extent to which a clay soil will shrink or swell with changes in moisture content depends on many factors, most particularly the proportion of the various clay minerals within the soil (each of which differ in their properties), the proportion of non-shrinkable particles (those with a diameter greater than 425m), and the way in which the soil cracks to create a natural soil structure. The plasticity index of the soil is generally used to provide a rough indication of the shrinkage behaviour, with high index indicating high shrinkage potential. This potential will be realised if the soil is dried over the full range from its liquid to its plastic limit, so that there is a close correlation between shrinkage and plasticity index over this range. However, over the range of change in moisture content induced by vegetation, this correlation is not reliable.
Some roots are far more obvious and easily seen than others. Sampling, particularly if only a few roots are taken, may not include all roots which are present. Even if all roots are sampled, their proportion will not necessarily reflect their influence on soil moisture content. Many roots are ephemeral and die. Ideally the iodine test should be used to check whether the root is alive, but even this test is not entirely reliable, as the root can remain alive in the soil for many years after a tree has been felled (with the root inactive throughout this period). Live roots may remain inactive in the soil, only becoming active in periods of drought.
If root samples are taken, they should only be collected from below foundation level, and should ensure that all potentially relevant roots are sampled, i.e. from the full depth of observed root activity and an adequate number taken to assess all species which might be present.
7.4.8 Calculation of heave/shrinkage potential (see BRE Digest 4127.11)

Clause 7.4.6 has noted the problems in making a qualitative assessment of desiccation. Similar, and additional, problems occur for obtaining a quantitative measure of shrinkage. BRE Digest 4127.11 describes the method of calculation, either based on moisture content or soil suction profiles. However, it must be appreciated that the results obtained are only estimates, and at best only provide an approximate magnitude of any potential heave. In particular, both methods rely on using a water shrinkage factor to convert the moisture deficiency to vertical heave. This value is not constant with depth, and will also differ with the shrinkage potential of the soil.
7.5 Predisposing factors, and diagnosis of their involvement

Various factors are particularly likely to cause or contribute to subsidence damage. The relevance of all such factors should be assessed. In the light of initial investigations, the need for any further more detailed investigations of particular aspects can be identified, and then undertaken. Diagnosis of the cause of damage should take account of all of the available information. It should be consistent with all of this information, or there should be a rational and reasonable explanation to account for any anomalies. If there are any unexplained inconsistencies, additional investigations should be undertaken to resolve the issue.
7.4.9 Assessment of permeability and rate of moisture recovery

The rate of recovery of a soil from desiccation is dependent on its permeability. The length of time for a desiccated soil to return to full field capacity is dependent both on the rate of recovery and on the depth of desiccation. Although tests are available for the permeability of a soil, they are not usually appropriate for site investigations. Instead, a qualitative assessment must be made on the basis of examination of the soil conditions and soil structure. Gross features such as bands of sand or gravel can provide means of rapid moisture movement and allow rapid rehydration. Smaller features, particularly the cracks which form between the soil peds, can also allow rapid moisture movement, particularly while the cracks are still open. Even after closure, the cracks are often lined with coarser sand particles, which improve soil permeability. A clay which has been disturbed so as to destroy its natural structure, e.g. puddled clay, may have an exceedingly low permeability.
7.5.1 Trees
Although trees are one of the commonest causes of subsidence damage, their behaviour and interaction with soil conditions is very variable and unpredictable. For this reason, no hard and fast rules can be given on whether a tree, growing under any particular conditions or at a specified distance from a building, is, or might in future be, involved as a cause of damage. Table 6.3 shows the maximum distance at which trees have been recorded as causing damage. Any tree beyond these distances can probably be ignored, but the possibility of the involvement of trees at closer distances should be considered. However, just because a tree is at closer distance it does not follow that it will be involved as a cause of the damage. Diagnosis of the involvement of a tree or other vegetation should be based on the crack or level monitoring (see 7.3.3 & 7.3.4) showing a clear pattern of seasonal movement. The monitoring should also have determined the extent and distribution of this movement. The identification of which tree, trees, or other vegetation is the cause of this movement requires detailed consideration of the tree; this information is best obtained by an arboriculturist, and should include consideration of: the proximity of the tree to the building, but noting that no definitive guidance on the risk of damage at any specified distance is available. the distribution of movement within the building. Localised movements imply a small tree or shrub in the close proximity to the area of movement; more widespread movements imply a larger tree capable of exerting an influence over a large area. Movements are normally greatest close to the tree, but variations in soil conditions can produce abnormal results. identity of the tree. Some genera of trees are considered to be more likely than others to cause soil drying and
7.4.10 Identification of root samples

Root samples which are taken from trial pits can be identified by specialist laboratories. This identification can indicate which species of tree have roots at a particular location. However, it should be appreciated that: The roots which are sent for identification are conducting roots, which are not themselves active in water uptake. Water uptake may be occurring at some other more distant location. Any water uptake may only be from the readily available water in structural voids in the soil, or may be adequately compensated by incoming water from other sources. Water uptake by active roots does not necessarily indicate that soil drying and shrinkage is occurring.
71
Table 7.1 A tentative classification of the water demand of different genera of trees (after P. G. Biddle) Highest water demand (deepest and furthest extent) Broad-leafed genera Apple Beech Cherry Maple Pear Robinia Sw. chestnut Whitebeam Ailanthus Alder Birch Gleditsia Holly Hornbeam Laburnum Walnut Catalpa Elder Fig Hazel Liquidambar Magnolia Mulberry Tulip tree Lowest water demand (shallowest and least extent)
Eucalyptus Oak Poplar
Elm Mountain ash Thorn Willow
Ash H. chestnut Lime Plane
Coniferous genera Fir Larch Maidenhair Monkey-puzzle Pine Spruce
True cypresses
Lawson cypress Leyland cypress
Wellingtonia
Cedar Red cedar
Juniper Hemlock Yew
damage7.13 (see Table 7.1). However, as there can be considerable variation between individuals, any classification of this sort can only provide general guidance. the crown size of the tree (crown height and spread), as a general indication of the total leaf area. The greater the leaf area, the greater the potential to lose water from the leaves during transpiration. Crown size is far more relevant than overall height. the vigour of the tree, determined either from its shoot extension growth or from the amount of tissue laid down in the annual growth rings. This provides an indication of overall efficiency of the tree and whether it is transpiring at its maximum potential. the history of the tree. This includes consideration of its age, previous growth rate, previous tree surgery work such as crown thinning, crown reduction or pollarding, or damage to the root system. The overall distortion in the property (determined from the level distortion survey, see 7.3.2), should be consistent with any potential previous involvement of the tree. the depth of foundations determined from trial pits, and the vulnerability of the building to damage. root identification (see 7.4.10)
full details of the subsoil to a depth of at least 6m. measurement of the angle of the surface of the clay (which may not correspond to the soil surface). any change in conditions or increased load on the upslope side. any change in condition or excavation on the downslope side.
7.5.3 Drains
If leaking drains are suspected, the level distortion survey should reveal subsidence in proximity to the drain, and level and crack monitoring should show progressive movement. If movements of this sorted suspected, the condition of the drain should be checked. CCTV scans provide a reasonably cheap and effective method. A water test will determine the rate of leakage along the pipe. Many old drains may have deteriorated and leak, without necessarily causing subsidence damage. The condition of these can also be checked by CCTV and water tests.
7.5.4 Traffic, or potential causes of vibration

It is unusual for vibration to cause significant damage. If it does occur, there should be a close correlation between the development of damage and the occurrence of the vibration.
If heave is suspected, as much information as possible should be derived from any stump remains, or from old plans or aerial photographs. The level monitoring should show a pattern of progressive upward movement, although, by the time the problem is first recognised, the rate of this movement may be very slow or have already ceased. The level distortion survey is likely to show an upward trend in the locality of the previous tree.
7.5.5 Other building operations

Any changes within a building may cause damage. This includes: changes in temperature or humidity, causing thermal or volumetric change in materials. structural alterations, causing changes in foundation load, or deflections in the superstructure. additions, causing initial settlement of foundations.
7.5.2 Slope
Slopes can be unstable, particularly if the underlying soil is clay. Any form of slope instability will cause a progressive downward movement, possibly combined with lateral movement of the foundations. These movements should be detectable by level and crack monitoring, and by a level distortion survey. If the site is sloping and instability is suspected, the following information should be sought:
Any damage of this sort can usually be traced to the changes that have occurred.
7.5.6 Changing environmental factors

The properties of some types of ground, for example sands, clays, and peat can be affected by changing water levels,
72
whether a result of natural occurrence, services construction or abstraction activity. Consideration in any investigation, should be given to the risks of damage that could be caused by these altered states that can be occasioned by such as the French drain effect through backfill to service trenches, change in water abstraction activities, like the London rising levels of ground water or temporary/permanent construction works in the locality.
7.12 7.13
Low-rise buildings in shrinkable clay soils: Part 1. Watford, BRE, 1980. BRE Digest 240 Biddle, P. G.: Tree root damage to buildings, Vol. 1 Causes, diagnosis and remedy; Vol. 2 Patterns of soil drying in proximity to trees in clay soils. Wantage: Willowmead Publishing Ltd., 1998
7.6 Final report

On completion of the investigations, a report should be issued. This should: Identify the cause of damage. The cause should be consistent with all of the results, and sufficient information should be available to ensure that the correct cause has been identified. Consider the future prognosis if no remedial action is taken. If remedial action is required, identify the options and their technical merit. Estimate the costs of these options. Identify whether any other action is required, e.g. further specialist advice.
The Expert will normally project manage the necessary remedial action (see Chapter 9, particularly section 9.4). On completion, the Expert should be able to give the owner an assurance that in their professional opinion, the property will remain structurally stable and free from significant movement in the future. The assurance would assume no changes in the propertys environment or use and also that the property will be reasonably maintained. The assurance would be a considered professional opinion and not a warranty or guarantee. It can take the form of a Certificate of Structural Adequacy (see section 10.8 and Appendix C). Such an assurance, when given, should encourage Lenders, Insurers and Valuers to accept the property with little if any effect on value because they will have the benefit of knowing that an in-depth assessment of the problem has been made and that the structural relevance of the matter has been objectively evaluated.
References
7.1 7.2 7.3 7.4 7.5 7.6 7.7 7.8 7.9 7.10 7.11 Simple measuring and monitoring of movement in lowrise buildings: Part 1: Cracks. Watford, BRE, 1989. BRE Digest 343 Simple measuring and monitoring of movement in lowrise buildings: Part 2: Settlement, heave and out-ofplumb. Watford, BRE, 1989. BRE Digest 344 Monitoring building and ground movement by precise levelling. Watford, BRE, 1993. BRE Digest 386 Site investigation for low-rise building: procurement. Watford, BRE, 1987 BRE Digest 322 Site investigation for low-rise building: Trial pits. Watford, BRE, 1993. BRE Digest 381 BS 5930:1981. Code of practice for site investigations London, BSI 1981 Health & Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 BS 1377: Part 9: 1990. Methods of test for soils for civil engineering purposes: In situ tests. London, BSI, 1990 Site investigation for low-rise building: Direct investigation. Watford, CRC, 1995. BRE Digest 411 Crilly, M. S., Chandler, R. J.: A method of determining the state of desiccation of clay soils. Watford, BRE, 1993. BRE Information Paper IP4/93 Desiccation in clay soils. London, CRC Ltd. 1996. BRE Digest 412
73
74
Chapter 8 Trees and tree management

8.1 Introduction 8.1.1 Nature of damage 8.1.2 The tree: crown-root balance 8.1.3 Water use and pruning 8.2 Roots 8.2.1 General 8.2.2 Interpretation of root spread data 8.2.3 Roots and drains 8.3 Remedial work on trees 8.4 Root barriers 8.5 Monitoring after remedial action to trees 8.6 Tree management for prevention of subsidence 76 76 76 76 76 76 77 78 78 82 82 82
75
8 Trees and tree management

8.1 Introduction
8.1.1 Nature of damage
Direct damage to structures by physical growth of the trunk, branches or the base of the tree, where roots tend to enlarge and buttress is often very easy to diagnose (see 5.5.14). Root action in subsidence damage is normally secondary, involving loss in volume of certain soil types on drying. These are usually shrinkable clays (see 5.4.3). This is less easy to diagnose, since there may be other factors contributing to uneven soil drying. Drain blockage by roots is considered in 8.2.3. It follows that removing branches temporarily reduces the evaporating surface area of leaves supported by a tree, and hence reduces water usage. Regulation of water use by trees can be achieved through pruning. Inappropriate removal of twigs and branches may lead to rapid compensatory regrowth. Expert arboricultural advice is needed, since effective methods of management vary from species to species.
8.2 Roots
8.2.1 General
Roots give both mechanical support for the tree and take water and dissolved minerals from the soil. Much of the mechanical support is provided by the larger roots. In many species, these are themselves surprisingly narrow, even the largest roots often not exceeding 10cm in diameter at 1m from the trunk (see Figs. 8.1 and 8.2). They are also much more shallow than might be expected (see Figs. 8.3 and 8.4). Roots may be classified as structural (the thicker ones) providing mechanical support, and fine conducting roots. Conducting roots also contribute to the stability of the tree. Cutler et al. 19908.1, in the Kew Tree Root Survey carried out following the storms in SE England of 1987 and 1990, reported that root diameters measured at 1m from the trunk for a sample of 760 individual trees, 4% had only fibrous
8.1.2 The tree: crown-root balance

Trees are normally long-lived. During their life span they pass through three stages: the juvenile stage, of relatively rapid growth this slows to a more or less steady rate of size increase during the mature phase the third stage is one of senescence, and slow decline, with very reduced growth in some parts, and dieback in others.
The size of the trunk and crown are in balance with the root system. Damage to either affects the other. Removing a small part of the crown may lead to moderate regrowth. Cutting out a large proportion may, among other things, permanently stunt the tree. It could cause physical instability if cutting is unbalanced, or stimulate vigorous and often juvenile regrowth. The response to cutting depends on the species and the time of year when the crown is cut. Cutting roots without compensating by reducing crown area can put the tree under water stress. Great care should be taken if it becomes necessary to cut roots. Loss of stability, or entry of disease organisms may also ensue.
8.1.3 Water use and pruning

The trunk, branches and twigs provide a means of exposing leaves to sunlight, away from the shade of smaller plants. Leaves use water and minerals provided through a plumbing system that extends from the roots through the trunk, along the branches and twigs. Water in the leaves combines with CO2 from the air, using energy from sunlight and the agency of chlorophyll, producing substances that are used to build cells and tissues and their contents. This plumbing system is renewed or added to each year by division of cells (vascular cambium) to the inner side of the bark. In temperate regions this gives rise to growth rings. The new wood and phloem (inner bark) formed add to the tree diameter. Phloem cells transport soluble synthesised materials. If large areas of bark are damaged, down to the wood, the water flow can be seriously disrupted. (There could also be problems in moving soluble food reserves between root and crown). Water vapour passes through regulated holes in the leaves (stomata) to the air and in so doing provides part of the power enabling flow of water to occur from the roots through the tree. The heat loss through this transpiration helps keep the leaf within its functional temperature range in hot weather. The size of the stomatal pores is under the control of the tree, and plays a part in regulating the rate of water movement. Given adequate water supply and good drying conditions during the day, the amount used by a tree is closely related to the total leaf surface area. Different tree species have different water requirements. These are often reflected in the differences that can be seen in leaf size, shape and texture. There is no direct connection between the height of a tree and its water uptake.
76
Fig. 8.1 Sequoia sempervirens uprooted by 1987 storm showing extent of root plate scale post marked in 0.5m intervals (P. Gasson)
Fig. 8.2 Horizontally spreading structural roots of a mature beech exposed by erosion these roots have probably increased abnormally in diameter as a result of their exposure (P. G. Biddle)
Fig. 8.4 A more appropriate representation of a root system - at this scale individual roots would be too small to depict, but the overall root mass would be very shallow but extensive (P. G. Biddle)
There is no simple relationship between tree height and root spread. Small trees with dense crowns may have a wider root spread than taller trees with sparse crowns. In all the survey results analysed at Kew in preparation for Tree Roots and Buildings8.2, the authors found no correlation between root spread and tree height for any of the species studied. The data from the Kew Tree Root Survey8.1 should be interpreted with care. Practically all of the data collected for were for trees growing in shrinkable clay soils, where it was thought that the tree might be responsible at least in part for some subsidence. These trees which have caused damage are a very small proportion of the overall tree population, the vast majority of which are growing as close or closer to buildings with no apparent consequential subsidence. Table 6.3 shows the maximum roots spreads which have been recorded. These are often mistakenly taken as being a safe planting distance. Use in this way is statistical nonsense. They indicate that at any greater distance it is very unlikely that a tree would be involved in damage to buildings. The original data show that, in the vast majority of cases, the trees implicated were very much closer to buildings than the maximum recorded distance. Very few trees out of each sample were at or near the maximum distance. The distance figures within which, for example 50% or 75% of trees of a particular sort were recorded as being implicated in damage are just that they do not represent percentages of risk of damage. It might be assumed that, by taking the figure that accounted for 90% of the recorded instances as a reasonable distance for that sort of tree to be from a low-rise structure, one was accepting a 10% increase in risk of damage. A moments consideration of the points raised above will show the fallacy in this argument. Added risk is very difficult to assess. In this example it would be a small fraction of 10% at most. The data provide an historic record of what has been found. Although they give some guidance as to whether a particular type of tree might be implicated in subsidence, to be certain a proper investigation is always needed. Equally, it is unwise to use the data predictively. They may be used prudently when selecting trees for particular circumstances, but do not prescribe how or where the roots will grow. An essential element in the process of assessing whether current damage might be in part due to a particular tree or trees is to find and identify roots from in an inspection pit at the region of failure of the structure (see section 7.4). If it has been proved that a tree is partly or totally the cause of subsidence damage, other features of the tree and the position in which it is growing should be taken into account in assessing the necessary remedial treatment.
8.2.2 Interpretation of root spread data
Fig. 8.3 Popular concept of tree root system (P. G. Biddle)
roots. In 23% the thickest roots ranged between 2cm5cm in diameter, and a further 40% had thickest roots in the range 5cm10cm. Roots over 10cm in diameter occurred in only 33% of the sample. This means that in general, structural roots forming the main framework of the root system are relatively narrow. They might be dismissed as of little significance and cut while working in the ground. This could lead to instability in the tree. Further observations were made on root depth of a sample of 3,469 trees. In 15%, the structural roots were less than 0.5m deep, and in 31% between 0.5m1m deep. Just over 50% were found mainly between 1m2m deep, and only about 4% had roots extending deeper than 2m. The common perception is that the larger roots are normally deeper that the data indicate. Again, there is the possibility that important structural roots may be severed without realising the seriousness of the consequences. Fine roots are responsible for much of the water uptake. They also provide some mechanical support, and frequently extend to greater depths than the larger roots and occupy very large volumes of soil. They require an oxygen supply to respire. Compacted and waterlogged soils provide poor rooting conditions and limit areas where roots may occur in the soil. Roots of a solitary tree in an open level field can be expected to radiate fairly evenly from the trunk (more so in conifers than other trees) in good uncompacted soil. Generally it is almost impossible to predict where the roots may be growing. This is because their distribution is influenced by competition from other nearby trees and shrubs, variability in soil conditions and slope of the land. They are also affected by the direction of main source of water supply and prevailing wind direction. In urban settings root growth is limited by physical obstructions and compaction.
77
8.2.3 Roots and drains

It is improbable that roots penetrate drains that are watertight and have no leaking joints. If water condenses on cool drain pipes, roots may be attracted and give the appearance of attacking a drain. Uneven changes in soil volume caused by roots may bring about movement of drain pipes, leading to leaking. Replacing leaking systems with modern drains, using flexible joints where necessary will normally solve the problem. Consequently, unless the tree from which the roots grew is likely to become involved in other damage, it needs no remedial treatment provided drains are repaired using appropriate materials.
wise nothing should be done without the written agreement of the local authority, and then only agreed work should be carried out. If a tree is the cause of damage, and consent to take necessary action is refused, the local authority may be liable to pay compensation for loss or damage caused or incurred in consequence of that refusal. TPOs made under the new Town and Country Planning (Trees) Regulations8.3, introduced in 1999 change the liability for compensation. There are two main options for remedial action: Fell the offending tree(s). This may not be necessary, and indeed may be detrimental to the environment and the value of the property. In the case of trees of high amenity value it should be considered as the last resort. It will immediately stop all further root activity. The roots may take several years to die, and could give rise to sucker shoots, but they will immediately cease all water uptake unless suckers are allowed to develop. The soil will start to rehydrate. Provided the influence is primarily seasonal, rehydration will usually be complete by the spring after the tree was last growing, i.e. if a tree is felled in the spring, moisture recovery will already be complete; if felled in the autumn, rehydration will be complete by the following spring. If there was a persistent soil moisture deficit, recovery will take longer, e.g. the winter of 1975/1976 was unusually dry and aggravated the effects of the dry summers either side of it. Prune the offending tree(s). The objective of this treatment is to reduce the leaf area of the tree, and thus its ability to transpire and lose water. If the extent of seasonal soil drying is reduced, it will reduce the amplitude of seasonal movement.
8.3 Remedial work on trees

The site investigations described in Chapter 7 should have identified: whether trees are involved as a cause of damage if they are, which tree or trees are involved.
Where trees are involved as a cause of damage, one option for remedial action is to deal with the cause so as to restabilise the foundations. This is usually a cheaper option than underpinning, but, if it is to be effective, it must be properly implemented with a full understanding of the objectives and methods. Arboricultural advice is likely to be essential. Remedial action with trees can only be effective if the influence of the tree on the soil is primarily seasonal, i.e. if the soil rehydrates fully, or to near field capacity, each spring. If there is a deep-seated persistent moisture deficit, any action to reduce the influence of the tree will allow the soil to rehydrate and swell, causing heave of the foundations. It is not feasible to try to balance the moisture content so as to prevent both heave and subsidence. Recovery from a slight persistent deficit, which is complete within 1 or 2 years, will probably be acceptable. However it should be appreciated that heave recovery can be beneficial in many instances by closing recent cracks. But if recovery is likely to take an unacceptable time and produce continuing significant damage, underpinning with full anti-heave precautions is the only viable option. No form of tree management will be effective in such instances. For this reason, site investigations must identify: which trees are involved, so that these can be targeted for remedial action whether there is a persistent moisture deficit to indicate whether there is a likelihood of heave.
It is necessary to reduce this amplitude to below that which can be tolerated by the building, so that crack movement is stopped or kept to an acceptable level. There are potential difficulties: The amount of pruning must be adequate to prevent unacceptable movement, whilst avoiding excessive work to the tree. Most trees will respond to heavy (or even moderate) pruning by vigorous regrowth (see Fig. 8.5) which restores the previous leaf area. It will therefore be necessary to repeat the treatment before an unacceptable amount of regrowth has occurred, and to continue this treatment as long as the tree remains. In principle it is recommended that, tree management in urban areas on clay soils, should occur about every 3 to 4 years depending on arboricultural advice. This imposes a continuing responsibility on the tree owner to organise and finance the work. The tree must be amenable to the extent of pruning which is required. The tree must continue to be a benefit to amenity; pruning irrevocably spoils many trees.
Table 8.1 presents some of the information gathered by the Kew Tree Root Survey8.1. The records relate to trees which were thought to be connected with damage to buildings; they are historical and should not be used predictively. The distances given in Column 3 (in metres) are based on various factors. The figures presented take into account the percentage of cases of all damage recorded at such distances for trees of that sort, and the relative frequency of planting the sort of tree in relation to the frequency of damage reported in the survey for such trees. The natural vigour of the type of tree in question has also been taken into account. Just as maximum root spread figures can be readily misapplied, so can these they do not provide a management tool. They should be used only to assist in planning the next steps of an investigation leading to determination of the appropriate action, and if necessary, remedial treatment, as defined below. They should never be used to decide whether a particular tree should or should not be felled. Before any work is undertaken it is essential to determine whether the tree is subject to a Tree Preservation Order (TPO) or in a Conservation Area. The local authority can advise. In some situations, if it can be established that the tree is a nuisance in the legal sense, exemptions may apply, but other-
In rare situations other options such as root barriers, root severance, or artificial control of soil moisture may be viable (but see 8.1.2). However, these methods are usually less reliable and harder to implement, and may have undesirable side effects. Specialist advice should be taken before considering such methods. Arboricultural expertise is required when deciding whether to prune or to fell. This should consider: The amenity of the tree, or other value which it provides. With a tree of very high value, it may be better to accept the cost of underpinning, so as to retain the tree and its amenity value. Conversely, a tree of low value is probably best felled; recurrent costs of pruning will not be justified. The ability of the species to tolerate the necessary amount of pruning. Some species, for instance London plane, are very amenable whereas others are very diffiIStructE Subsidence of low rise buildings 2nd edition
78
Table 8.1 Records for trees that have been thought to be implicated in damage Normal mature height in clay soils in urban setting (m) 8-10 23 20 12-14 15-25 12 6-8 20-25 18-20 10 12-14 16-25 7-9 8 18-24 5-7 17-21 16-23 20-29 25-30 6-8 25-28 15-18 20-24 12-15 8-12 15-24 8-12 Column 3 (see section 8.3, p78) (m) 4-6 10 9 4-5 3-4 3-6 3-6 12-19 10 5-7 3 10 7 3-6 8-11 5 12 18 8 8-10 3-6 20 7 12 8 5-7 18 5
Sort of tree
Notes relating to trees recorded in Kew survey
Apple, Malus; Pear, Pyrus Ash, Fraximus Beech, Fagus Birch, Betula Cypress, Cupressus, Chamaecyparis Cherry, Prunus Damson, Prunus Elm, Ulmus False Acacia, Robinia Hawthorn, Crataegus Holly, Ilex Horse Chestnut, Aesculus Laburnum, Laburnum Laurel, Prunus laurocerasus Lime, Tilia Magnolia, Magnolia Maple, Acer species (see Sycamore) Oak, Quercus Pine, Pinus Plane, Platanus Plum, Prunus Poplar, Populus Spruce, Picea Sycamore, Acer pseudoplatanus Walnut, Juglans regia Whitebeam/Rowan, Sorbus Willow, Salix Yew, Taxus
Smaller fruit trees can be managed readily, even closer than indicated Roots often very shallow; crown tolerant to pruning Rarely implicated in damage; scarce on clay; old trees may become unstable because of root rot Low implication in damage; older trees tolerate only light pruning Soil close to trees dried excessively; cast shade and may be undesirable at these distances 6m for vigorous varieties; very shallow roots; tolerate only light pruning Shallow rooted; tolerate only light pruning 12m for those persisting in hedges limited in height by Dutch elm disease Initially fast growing; older trees tolerate only light pruning; drops branches Soil close to hedges may dry excessively; tolerates heavy pruning Rarely implicated in damage; tolerates heavy pruning Tolerates heavy pruning and readily managed at closer distances; may shed branches May be short lived; rarely implicated in damage Tolerates heavy pruning Manageable at closer distances, tolerates heavy pruning Rarely implicated in damage Refers to larger species; tolerates heavy pruning and can be managed at closer distances; smaller species or varieties may be grown much closer to buildings One of the more problematic genera Rarely implicated in damage Tolerates heavy pruning and can be managed at closer distances May be shallow rooted One of the more problematic genera; roots close to trees can be shallow; tolerates heavy pruning Rarely implicated in damage Often seeds into inappropriate places; tolerates heavy pruning Rarely implicated in damage Relatively unproblematic; tolerate heavy pruning One of the more problematic genera; tolerates heavy pruning Rarely implicated in damage
79
cult to manage under a reasonable pruning regime. The health, condition and vigour of the tree as an individual, and its response to treatment. The age of the tree. A tree which is very young, with massive potential for future growth, will be ill-suited for long-term pruning. Alternatively, a tree which is old and dying is probably not worth retaining (although it is dubious whether such tree would be causing subsidence). The practicality of ensuring future maintenance.
If pruning is adopted, arboricultural advice is also required to determine the most appropriate method. This may involve one of the following: crown thinning selectively reducing the density of branches by a specified percentage, whilst retaining the overall height and branch spread (see Figs. 8.6 and 8.7) crown reduction reducing the overall size of the crown by a specified percentage (see Figs. 8.8, 8.9 and 8.10) pollarding extreme shortening of main structural branches (see Figs. 8.11, 8.12 and 8.13).
Fig. 8.6 Crown thinning before and after (London Borough of Camden)
Fig. 8.5 (a) before
Fig. 8.7 Crown thinning (Islington Council)
Fig. 8.5 (b) after Fig. 8.5 Large mature oak tree before and after heavy crown reduction by about 50% (R. Finch) Fig. 8.8 Crown reduction before and after (London Borough of Camden)
80
The choice of method will depend on the species of tree, its reaction to the different methods, the severity of pruning which is required, and the options for future management. The choice should depend on individual circumstances, and so no definitive guidance can be given. If something must be done but none of these methods is appropriate, it may be better to replace the tree with a more suitable species. Likewise, no definitive guidance can be given on the severity of pruning. Each case must be taken on its own merits. In general terms the leaf area must be reduced sufficiently to ensure that, by the time the tree has regrown and next requires pruning, its leaf area is still significantly below that which initiated the damage. A balance needs to be struck which takes account of the severity, the time interval before the tree is next pruned, the ability of the tree to tolerate the regime which is imposed, and the appearance of the tree after pruning. However, it must be sufficient to ensure that adequate stability of the foundations is achieved, and can be maintained in subsequent years. Those trees in the vicinity that are not involved in damage need not be pruned unless there are sound arboricultural reasons to do so. Where they have adequate space and are not interfering or are unlikely to interfere with buildings, all that is needed is a regular, documented check for safety and disease, followed by appropriate action. The duty of care of the tree owner is thus discharged. Trees of high amenity value enhance property values in the area and should ideally be accommodated where possible (see Fig. 8.14).
Fig. 8.9 Crown reduction (Islington Council) Fig. 8.11 Pollarding before, after, and after one year (London Borough of Camden)
Fig. 8.10 Crown reduction and thinning (Islington Council)
Fig. 8.12 Regrowth after pollarding of trees close to property
81
8.5 Monitoring after remedial action to trees

Regardless of whether a tree(s) has been felled or pruned, it is desirable to monitor to confirm that the action which has been taken has been effective in restabilising the foundations. If the tree has been felled, there is the need to confirm that significant heave does not occur and that no other trees and vegetation are continuing to cause movement. If the tree is being pruned, monitoring is required to demonstrate that the amplitude of movement has been reduced to an acceptable level. Monitoring should be continued through at least one summer after the pruning. For both these purposes, level monitoring (see 7.3.4) should be the preferred option. It is particularly useful if level monitoring has commenced prior to the action on trees, so that one can compare movements occurring before and after the action of trees (monitoring recovery movement through the winter can establish the extent of seasonal movement occurring; there is no need to monitor through a growing season before taking action with trees). In addition, it may be beneficial to monitor cracks to confirm that the stabilisation of the foundations has also been effective in preventing further significant crack movement. Once it has been confirmed that adequate stability has been achieved, superstructure repairs and redecoration can be put in hand (see section 9.6). If trees are being pruned, it is desirable that level monitoring markers should be left in place as a means of checking on the adequacy of future tree management. Once it is confirmed that the foundations have been adequately stabilised, it may be appropriate to issue a report which:
Fig. 8.13 Regrowth after pollarding (Islington Council)
identifies the original problem identifies the remedial action taken if trees have been pruned, specifies the future management regime confirms the action which has been taken has been effective in stabilising the foundations.
The history of level monitoring will be an invaluable part of such a report.
8.6 Tree management for prevention of subsidence damage

There are no sound economic grounds for widespread and indiscriminate pruning of trees in case their growth could lead to subsidence in the future. The cost of such work would far outweigh the cost of remedial treatment in those instances when direct connection between subsidence damage and trees has been established. Individual circumstances are paramount, and the possible interaction of each tree and building should be considered on its own merits, as part of the general care of the tree.
Fig. 8.14 Modification of wall to accommodate tree growth (P. G. Biddle)
References
8.1 8.2 8.3 Cutler, D. F., Gasson, P. E., Farmer, M. C.: Windblown tree survey: analysis of results Arboricultural Journal, 14 (3) pp265-286 Cutler, D. F. Richardson, I. B. K.: Tree roots and buildings. 2nd edition. Harlow: Longman, 1989 Town and Country Planning (Trees) Regulations 1999 SI 1892
8.4 Root barriers

The use of root barriers should be avoided if possible. To be effective they must extend for the full distance of possible root spread. Roots have been known to grow through backfill and under a barrier of 2.8m depth (see Fig. 8.15). If used, they need to extend above ground level. Roots have been seen to grow above barriers and re-enter the ground on the far side. Points at which barriers are breached for services may allow root penetration. Root barriers may alter ground water flow, which can give rise to other problems. Microporous barriers are not yet fully tested. When inserting root barriers, care must be taken to minimise damage to roots.
82
Bibliography
Biddle, P. G.: Tree root damage to buildings, Vol. 1 Causes, diagnosis and remedy; Vol. 2 Patterns of soil drying in proximity to trees in clay soils. Wantage: Willowmead Publishing Ltd., 1998
Fig. 8.15 Effect of root barrier
83
84
Chapter 9 Subterranean, substructure and superstructure repairs

9.1 Introduction 9.1.1 Scope 9.1.2 Options for remedial works 9.1.3 Expectations of remedial works 9.2 Ground stabilisation 9.2.1 Scope 9.2.2 Repair of drains and leaking water mains 9.2.3 Control of ground moisture content 9.2.4 Soil moisture management 9.3 Main topics of remedial works to foundations 9.3.1 Scope 9.3.2 Traditional mass concrete underpinning 9.3.3 Beam and pier 9.3.4 Mini-pile systems 9.3.5 Jacking building back into previous position 9.3.6 Post-tensioned and reinforced collar beams 9.4 Guidance notes for engineers, contractors and others responsible for remedial and underpinning works contracts 9.4.1 Traditional mass concrete underpinning 9.4.2 Beam and pier underpinning 9.4.3 Piles with beams or rafts 9.4.4 Jacked piles 9.4.5 Contractor proposals, workmanship and quality control on site 9.5 Partial underpinning 9.6 Repairs to superstructure 9.6.1 General 9.6.2 Floors 9.6.3 Repair of plasterwork to walls, ceilings, etc. 9.6.4 Doors/window realignment 9.6.5 Cosmetic repairs 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 87 87 87 87 88 88 89 94 94 95 96 98 98 99 100 101 101 101 102 102 103 103
85
9 Subterranean, substructure and superstructure repairs

9.1 Introduction
9.1.1 Scope
The previous Chapter dealt with some of the principle arboricultural issues associated with damage to foundations of lowrise buildings. This Chapter now seeks to deal with all of the aspects of repair to the building including the peripheral structural influences such as drains and sewers. The contents of this Chapter covers a wide range of subjects. Care has been taken to introduce readers to certain elements early in the Chapter and to then expand upon them later in the Chapter. An individual building is a single composite unit founded on a substratum. However, for the purposes of repair, it can be conveniently subdivided as three basic elements namely: Subterranean drains, sewers, services Substructure foundations, cellars, basements Superstructure the fabric of the building. Within this Chapter the actual methods of repair are discussed and advice is given on what sort of rectification processes to use and, importantly, where to use them. Note that all work in relation to large trees and shrubs has been dealt with in Chapter 8. illustrates the recommended sequence for assessing a building displaying damage and, where necessary, making recommendations for remedial works. However, if seasonal movements exceed the acceptable structural and serviceability threshold (see Chapter 6, Table 6.1) and result in major damage, special consideration may be required.
9.1.3 Expectations of repair works

It is often the case that people have different expectations of the standard of remedial works depending on their personal association with those works. Remedial works to commercial and industrial premises will frequently be accepted at standards which are below those acceptable in a domestic property. This can pose problems for those undertaking remedial works, which are of their very nature a repair exercise. This is not to excuse poor workmanship, but it is important that the parties to remedial works contracts fully appreciate and agree the standards of work to be achieved. Experience over the years has shown that the standard and extent of remedial works to be expected under an insurance policy claim can be a basis of disagreement between the building owner and the Insurer. Some property owners are pleasantly surprised at the extent of their entitlement under their policy, whilst others expect their property to be virtually rebuilt at the Insurers expense, sometimes to a standard far above that which the property enjoyed even before the damage occurred in the first place. It is also not unknown for owners to claim for damage that has clearly not been caused by subsidence or any other insured peril. Hence it is important that the scope of the work and its standard is determined and understood as far as possible between Insured and Insurers, or their representatives, before work commences and preferably even before estimates for the work are obtained. The smooth running of a remedial works contract, such as the repair of subsidence-damaged buildings, is very much dependent upon those responsible for and involved in the pre-contract investigation, administration, design, supervision and execution of the works. Once the Owner, Expert, Contractor and Insurer have agreed the extent and standard of the works and a programme for its implementation, then these should only be varied in exceptional circumstances, and then only on the express instruction of the Expert administering the contract. All the parties involved should be made aware of the reasons for any variation. It should be noted that variations inevitably increase costs and time and can be a source of dispute.
9.1.2 Options for remedial works

When a building has suffered movement or damage, there are three options available that may be considered separately or in combination. They should be approached in the following sequence: It is necessary to establish that the property is basically stable. Properties experience minor structural movements in their fabric from time to time, the most common being the seasonal shrinking and swelling of timber elements such as floor joists and timber partitions. This can often result in minor cracks in ceilings, wall plaster, etc. If the property is basically stable then it can be agreed that further repair to the superstructure of the building is required; these may be purely cosmetic repairs, such as filling of cracks followed by decoration. If it is thought that the movement has affected the structural integrity of the building, action may involve actual structural repairs, such as bonding of brickwork. The cost of repairing such damage will normally only be met by an Insurer if it is agreed that the damage arises from an insured risk. If, after investigation by a suitably experienced Expert, it is thought likely that progressive movement of the foundations could continue, then the next step should be to consider ground stabilisation to prevent further deterioration of the ground upon which the building is standing. This could include such action as the repair of drains, pruning or removal of adjoining trees, etc. after which superstructure repairs would be undertaken as previously described. The last and most extensive and expensive option, if the previous two options are considered unlikely to be successful, will probably be direct remedial works to the substructure of the building, e.g. by underpinning its foundations. If a solution of underpinning is to be considered the Insured should be made fully aware of the disruption inevitably caused and the possibility of having to vacate the property for the duration of the works. It is for this reason that underpinning should only be considered as the final option.
9.2 Ground stabilisation

9.2.1 Scope
This course of action is best considered as remedial work or modifications to features in the vicinity of the property but which do not form an integral part of the building structure. Such items would be, for example, attention to major vegetation and trees within influencing distance of the building, or drains and sewers which are sufficiently close so that leakage from or into them could affect the ground in the vicinity. The presence of subterranean streams and old filled ponds can also be included in this category. Typical examples of action in this category are dealt with in the following sections.
9.2.2 Repair of drains and leaking water mains

The replacement of worn out, badly maintained or poorly constructed drains is not a matter for an insurance policy.
A flowchart is given at the beginning of this document which
86
However, accidental damage to drains is often insured. An insurance company would wish to establish that the reason for the damage of the pipes is indeed accidental in origin, typically where pipes have been affected by an unforeseen external factor. This may include damage by tree roots, trafficking over shallow drains or perhaps even general ground movement. Damage to shallow drains may be the result of poor drainage design. Drains may also be damaged by additional builders work to the original structure, for example, the construction of an extension or even the erection of a fence or garden wall. Where damage by subsidence to a building occurs as a direct result of leaking drains, some Insurers may consider the damage to the building under the Escape of Water section of the policy. Where drainage repairs are required these should be put in hand as quickly as possible. Where the cost of drainage repairs is not covered by an insurance policy, but yet drains are allowed to continue leaking, there may be a detrimental effect on the foundations of the building. Early action is therefore essential to mitigate the loss. If this is not done then subsequent damage may not be covered if wilful neglect of maintenance is the principle reason for the damage. Where soil rehydrates as a result of other causes, typically leaking gutters and path-shedding of water towards the property, the cost of rectifying these defects is not normally a matter for the insurance policy to respond to, although if subsidence damage occurs as a result of these other causes, a valid claim may still arise unless there has been wilful neglect on the part of the owner. Lack of attention to drains can cause subsidence by permitting water to escape into the ground and so soften the substratum beneath the foundations of a property. Once softened, it is possible that the ground may not be capable of supporting the load of the building and so the building might subside in the vicinity of the leaking drain (see 6.5.6). Leaking drains can attract tree roots to their vicinity, often close to foundations, and assist sulphate ingress if appropriate materials are present in the ground. Alternatively, a defective drain may permit water from the ground to leak into it and this might wash away the ground from beneath adjacent foundations, so causing subsidence. Repair of the drains, or laying new drains and grouting up the old ones should prevent further leakage into or from the ground. However it may still mean that some subsidence could continue for a year or so after the remedial works have been carried out because the ground would need to dry out and consolidate where it has been softened. If the ground beneath the foundation has been washed away then merely repairing or replacing the drain may not be sufficient to prevent movement in the future and pressure grouting of the ground or underpinning may be required. Leaking water mains should only be dealt with by the water authority or one of their approved contractors.
9.2.4 Soil moisture management

The removal of moisture from the ground by tree roots is by far the most common cause of subsidence damage to buildings. As has been referred to previously, this occurs most frequently to properties constructed on shrinkable clay soils. The ability to be able to control the moisture content of the ground despite the activities of the trees in the vicinity would clearly have substantial benefits. Experiments have been undertaken in an attempt to develop systems for controlling, or more precisely managing, the moisture content of the ground. To date no method of rehydration has been proven to be commercially satisfactory. However research into methods of rehydrating soils are continuing.
9.3 Detailed explanation of the main topics of remedial works to foundations

9.3.1 Scope
This section applies to work carried out upon the structure of the building or the ground immediately beneath it, such as: providing new foundations normally termed underpinning improving the quality of the ground beneath the foundations by injecting cementitious grout into the ground normally termed pressure grouting jacking the building back into position a procedure which requires very careful assessment.
Over the last twenty years, many tens of thousands of properties have been underpinned throughout Britain, particularly domestic properties. As a result many techniques for underpinning have been developed to a high degree of efficiency by specialist Engineers and Contractors. Imperative to all underpinning works is the necessity to have a thorough appreciation of the ground conditions beneath the property in question. The quality of the ground will almost certainly have been the primary cause of the subsidence in the first place. An adequate site investigation to determine the character of the substratum is essential to establish: the depth and nature of the poor quality ground and of the ground to be used for support the depth and type of the existing foundations to the property the presence or otherwise of ground water this can affect the works and can also alter the ground characteristics both during and even long after the remedial work has been undertaken whether there would be any advantage in undertaking remedial works at a particular time of the year to account for seasonal variations.
9.2.3 Control of ground moisture content

Some older properties have relatively shallow foundations and as a consequence the substratum can dry out simply by evaporation of moisture from the ground during particularly dry summers without the involvement of trees or other vegetation. If this evaporation causes shrinkage of the substratum, as can be the case with some types of clay, then subsidence may occur. For additional information refer to 5.4.3. Concrete flags or in situ concrete paths of 1.5m in width around a property which has foundations less than 1m in depth is frequently sufficient to cure all but the most extreme cases. Likewise, it should be appreciated that removal of surrounding paths or adjacent buildings can suddenly encourage seasonal movement by permitting drying and wetting of the ground on a seasonal basis to occur in ground which was previously relatively dry but stable. Additionally the rain shadow effect caused by lightweight canopies or overhanging dense vegetation can lead to excessive drying of soils where rainfall fails to reach the ground. The investigation should also note the location and type of below ground services in the area which could interfere with remedial works. The type and extent of the site investigation will almost certainly depend on the individual circumstances. In most instances of minor subsidence, a simple series of trial pits with some hand augering to a depth of about 3.0m will suffice, subject always to the need to establish the depth of the stable stratum. In other cases the investigation will need to be much more sophisticated and extensive, particularly if piling techniques are envisaged. Site investigation techniques and their suitability for different circumstances are dealt with in Chapter 7. No remedial ground works should be contemplated without a site investigation being carried out beforehand. A suitably experienced Engineer is the most qualified Expert to advise on the type and extent of the investigation required and hence on the most appropriate underpinning system for the particular sub-
87
stratum conditions. The most commonly used underpinning systems are described in the following sections.
9.3.2 Traditional mass concrete underpinning

Block underpinning is very commonly used in instances where the total depth of excavation does not exceed 1.5m2m. This depth must be carefully considered by the Expert in light of health and safety issues during construction (see Section 10.4). For greater depths, other forms of underpinning tend to be more economical and less hazardous to install. Block underpinning does not require any specialist equipment and can be undertaken by the average competent builder provided he is properly briefed by the Expert, although in practice the operation is best done by an experienced or specialist Contractor. The method involves the insertion of individual blocks of concrete beneath an existing foundation (see Figs. 9.1 and 9.2). Such blocks normally form a continuous footing beneath the existing foundation. They are inserted in lengths of approximately 1m and in a sequence so that no more than one third of the existing foundation is unsupported at any time. Sometimes even more conservative spacing of blocks is advisable. Alternatively blocks may be inserted at isolated locations around a property with the original ground remaining in place between the blocks and the existing foundations spanning across between the individual blocks (see Fig. 9.3). The preferred arrangement is for the blocks to form a continuous footing because that way any tendency for slight differential movement to occur between the blocks is virtually eliminated. This is not always the case with individual isolated blocks detached from each other and with no opportunity to interact. However, in some cases isolated blocks may well be all that is required. Continuity between adjacent blocks is not normally required but can be achieved if necessary by toothing (see Fig. 9.4). The sequence of excavation and casting of the blocks by either of the above methods should provide adequate support at corners and points of load concentrations, particularly during temporary conditions.
Fig. 9.1 Mass concrete underpinning in progress
9.3.3 Beam and pier underpinning (beam & pad underpinning)

This is similar to the isolated block system described in 9.3.2 but it incorporates a structural beam (see Fig. 9.5) spanning between individual blocks to support the intermediate section of the original foundation and thus the original foundation does not have to span between the blocks of its own accord. A series of deep square concrete bases (piers) are normally excavated and formed at intervals beneath the walls of the damaged property. The beams are then formed or placed under the intervening parts of the walls to span between the bases, so supporting the walls (see Fig. 9.6). Both this and the previous system require considerable excavation and disposal of ground material. This can sometimes adversely influence the use of these types of underpinning procedures. When designing and installing block or beam and pier systems, it is important that the following points are adequately taken into account: the possibility of roots from adjacent trees growing below the underpinning in the future the likelihood that the excavation for the underpinning and the backfilling around it may provide a pathway by which ground water can percolate to the base of the underpinning, so causing softening of the substratum.
A reservoir created by the excavation can also attract root growth to the property during drought periods. In recent years there have been a number of instances where shallow underpinned works of these types have failed and had to be redone because they were found to be too shallow for the circumstances, or the substratum below the underpinning had softened due to water collecting upon it.
88
Fig. 9.2 Mass concrete underpinning cast up to and around existing foundations
9.3.4 Mini-pile underpinned systems

Mini-Piling consists of the installation by driving, boring, augering, drilling, jacking or vibrating into the ground of a steel, concrete or composite shaft into or onto good quality material such that any beam or raft cast on top of the piles is capable of supporting load. Most mini-piling systems are conventionally designed to take only direct compression loads. Occasionally tension forces can be accommodated but in such cases the design needs specifically to cater for tension in the piles. Piles are not generally expected to accommodate bending forces as to do so necessitates differential load application to the substratum and the variability of ground material tends to make this principle very risky. The four main methods of installing mini-piles are:
Fig. 9.3 Isolated block mass concrete underpinning
Fig. 9.4 Continuous mass concrete underpinning
Fig. 9.5 Beam ready to be cast
Vibratory pneumatically operated mini-piling mole (Grundermat) is used to install thin-walled, mild steel casings to the required depth (see Fig. 9.7(i) (vi)). The mole acts on a dry concrete plug at the toe of the minipile to install, by high frequency vibratory driving, the steel casing. This is likely to be in the region of 600mm in length. The mole is withdrawn to allow completion of the mini-pile construction using a high strength, high slump concrete or grout, with the requisite reinforcement, usually a single high tensile bar. Generally used in soft or loose ground, virgin or filled, normally non-cohesive sands and gravels. Mini-pile diameters up to 150mm. Drop hammer an internal drop hammer weight is used to drive steel casings to a predetermined set. The weight is operated by pneumatic or hydraulic drop hammer winches and the weight acts on a dry concrete plug at the toe of the casing, regularly topped up as drilling proceeds (can be 1m or so in length). Generally used in loose to firm ground, virgin or filled, all strata types. Mini-pile diameters 150mm to 300mm. Augered hydraulic rotary mini-piling rigs (see Fig. 9.8) are used to auger using either solid stem flights by themselves in stable ground, solid stem flight with casings in unstable ground or segmented hollow stem augers (continuous flight auger type) also in unstable ground to form cast in situ mini-piles. Generally used where cohesive soils exist particularly clay, even if instable ground exists at higher levels. Mini-pile diameters from 100mm to 300mm. Spoil is generated by this method and will need to be collected and disposed. Concrete is sometimes tremied if water or unstable ground conditions exist. Reinforcement, either single bar or cage is installed into the concrete in grout. Jacked Precisely controlled hydraulic jack sets (see Fig. 9.9) are used to jack mini-piles into the ground. A resistance has to be created against which to jack, which often takes the form of holding down bolts connecting the rig to a concrete raft under the building either new or existing. All jacked mini-piles are proof loaded by virtue of the installation method. The major benefit of this system is that it is totally vibrationless which is a major advantage when dealing with distressed structures. Can be used in all ground conditions. Preformed mini-piles such as 150mm square precast pile sections can be used.
Fig. 9.6 Beam and pier system
Where anti-heave precautions are required the upper limits of the pile are debonded from the surrounding ground. This can be achieved by a variety of techniques. Sometimes mini-piles have a tendency to drift off line during installation. This is less likely to occur with bottom driven piles because the mass of the driver, technically referred to as a mole, is located at the base of the pile. Any pile can be impeded or diverted from line by sufficiently large underground obstructions, e.g. large rock, lump of concrete, etc. (see Fig. 9.10). Top driven or jacked piles do not have this advantage.
89
Fig. 9.7(i) Grundermat mole for driving piles
Fig. 9.7(iii) External piling NOTE: safety helmets should be worn
Fig. 9.7(ii) Internal piling (Van Elle Ltd.)
Fig. 9.7(iv) Mini pile being driven
90
Fig. 9.8 Hydraulic rotary mini-piling rig (Roger Bullivant)
Fig. 9.7(v) Welding of pile sections
Fig. 9.9 Jacked piles
Scissor or root piles (also known as angle or stitch piles)

These are piles, usually small diameter, actually bored or driven through the foundation of the property to support the property direct by forming a connection between the existing structure and the top of the pile (Fig. 9.11). Piles inserted by this procedure are raked at an angle. The procedure has been in practice for many years and works very successfully, not only for low-rise buildings but also for substantial structures. The procedure does rely greatly upon the workmanship associated with the installation of the piles and the condition and size of the existing substructure for its successful implementation. The principal problem with this type of installation is that any assurances or guaranties given as to the long-term effectiveness of the installation can be difficult to justify by theoretical analysis due to the complexity of the engineering principles involved and the unpredictable nature of substratum conditions. Consequently such assurances can only be based on experience and the fact that numerous such installations have proved successful in the past. In all instances, this system should only be installed by a contractor with proven experience of this procedure, and in a building when the substructure is capable of adequately transferring that building load to the raked mini-pile system.
Fig. 9.7(vi) Piles cut ready for filling and forming of beam
91
(a)
Fig. 9.10 Possible problems during installation of piles
(b)
(c)
Fig. 9.11 Scissor or root piles
Pile and beam installations

In this procedure piles are installed vertically on both sides of the wall to be underpinned and a reinforced concrete or concrete encased steel beam is then positioned spanning between two or more piles to support the weight of the existing wall (see Fig. 9.12). The beam may pass through the existing wall or be situated immediately below the existing foundations. The system can consist of a series of individual pairs of piles with a beam between, or a zig-zag pattern consisting of a number of interlinked piles and beams (see Fig. 9.13). This is a very flexible and well-proven procedure. It requires a relatively small amount of excavation, but does require specialist design and installation.
Fig. 9.12 Pile and beam installations showing alternative positions of ground beams: (a) plan view (b) above footing, and (c) below footing
Cantilevered beams
It is possible for a cantilever type of arrangement to be constructed by installing the piles on one side of the wall only and permitting the beam to pick up the weight of the wall on an overhanging cantilever as illustrated in Fig. 9.14. This cantilever arrangement relies upon the pile closest to the wall being particularly heavily loaded and the one furthest from the wall being very lightly loaded or often in tension. Although the piles can take tensile forces, such forces are not desirable unless the characteristic of the ground around the piles can be relied upon with confidence. The tensile force in the furthermost pile can be considerably reduced by increasing the weight on that pile by providing a block of concrete at the end of the beam as a counter-weight or alternatively linking the beam ends together. Any cantilever arrangement requires specialist attention to the design and installation of the works. It should only be
Fig. 9.13 Zig-zag arrangement of pile and beam
undertaken by Experts or Contractors familiar with the techniques of design and construction. Variations in pile positions, for whatever reason, can be critical. The system has the advantage that it can be installed from one side only of the affected wall.
Single piles with cantilever or bracketed heads

This system has been specifically developed to be used in confined or restricted access situations. As with all mini-pile solutions, care must be taken to ensure that design and installation is adequate and the workmanship is well supervised. This system is used where relatively light loaded walls are
92
The system is straightforward with the only real difficulty being to take care that the toothing arrangement is properly constructed, so that the walls are picked up adequately by the reinforced concrete nibs which are cast into the wall. It is sometimes advisable to incorporate a plasticiser additive into the concrete to improve construction quality in the nibs. As with all cantilever systems, particular care is required in the design and construction of the works and it should only be undertaken by those familiar with cantilever design theory.
Fig. 9.14 Cantilevered beam
to be carried and a single pile is theoretically adequate to support the vertical load. The pile is driven on one side of the wall and a bracket of steel or reinforced concrete is affixed to the top of the pile and into the adjacent wall. This system has been used successfully by a number of contractors, but it is difficult to justify from a theoretical analysis, particularly with regard to induced bending in the pile. Where all the piles are located on one side of a wall, the wall requires a horizontal restraining force close to the line of the brackets to stop the piles bending due to the eccentricity of the wall load. Where bracket piles are installed either side of a wall in an alternate sequence the stability is improved, but still it is difficult to justify theoretically. This system has been used where light loading is involved and in instances when it is likely that adjacent floors, which might indirectly be providing the horizontal stabilising forces are unlikely ever to be removed even temporarily.
Rafts supported on piles

The principle of cantilever beams can be extended with greater certainty to a raft type system supported on piles as shown in Figs. 9.15, 9.16 and 9.17. This arrangement uses the counter-balancing effect of two walls to transfer the load of one or both walls onto the piles. This is a more predictable structural arrangement that tends to eliminate any undesirable tensile forces in the piles. The piles are subject to compressive forces, which they can accommodate much more easily. The raft and pile arrangement includes a toothing system of reinforced concrete nibs which are cast into holes cut in the walls to be supported, or in the walls to be used as counterweights.
Fig. 9.16 Conventional arrangement of beams
Fig. 9.15 Zig-zag arrangement of beams spanning between piles
Fig. 9.17 Raft supported on piles
93
Jacked piles
This system is normally used where access is restricted to one side of a wall and where the part of the structure to be underpinned is of considerable dead weight and there are no openings in the lower part of the wall. Jacked piles are less common, but do have their uses where the ground conditions are predictable and consistent and the depth to which the piles will be inserted can be established with reasonable certainty. Unlike most piling systems, the installation of jacked piles does not normally cause vibration or noise and in certain circumstances this can be very beneficial. However this system is only suitable where sufficient weight exists in the part of the structure directly above the hydraulic pressure jack to accommodate the jacking load. If the wall does not have sufficient weight, then it is probable that the wall itself and anything which bears onto it will be pushed up out of the ground rather than the pile being pushed into the ground. Jacking also imposes locally concentrated forces on the building at the jacking positions. It is important that the construction directly above the jack is able to withstand the crushing effects of the jacking load. If there is doubt on this point then bearing plates must be provided. Care must be taken to avoid local damage. Alternatively an adequate temporary load (kentiledge) should be provided against which to jack the piles. Successive lengths of pile are added on top of preceding lengths until it is impossible to jack the piles down any further for a given load on the jacking system. The advantage of this system is that the load on the pile can be positively established at the time that the pile is installed. Piles which are jacked into the ground do not necessarily go down vertically. They may curve or they may be impeded by rocks or other localised obstructions, hence it is necessary to know the characteristic of the ground before a jacked pile system is installed (see Fig 9.9). Considerable skill is required in the installation of piles by this system and it should only be undertaken by Contractors who are reliable and have specialist knowledge of pile fabrication and jacking procedures. If piles go appreciably out of plumb during jacking, they may have to be abandoned and new piles installed or a completely different technique adopted. Monitoring of the installation procedure for jacked piles is very important, particularly to check that the load on the pile is the genuine load and is not influenced by factors which could produce misleading readings, e.g. soil particles jamming the jack mechanisms, faulty dial gauges.
certainty. Voids which remain unfilled in clay substrata may present problems in the future. A major problem which can occur with pressure grouting is that it is sometimes difficult to predict precisely where the grout will disperse within the ground. On occasions adjacent cellars or drains have been grouted inadvertently and even cavity wall voids above ground level have been known to be filled by mistake. Pressure grouting procedures for domestic underpinning have been used successfully where the nature of the substratum makes it appropriate. Estimates of grout quantity are an important safety measure.
9.3.5 Jacking building back into previous position

It is occasionally possible to jack part or all of a building back to its previous level or position (see Fig. 9.18), but this procedure must be done with great care so that the part of the building in question is not further damaged during the operation. It is important that the section of the building to be jacked back must be absolutely free to move and sufficiently rigid within itself to avoid suffering damage from any slight discrepancies which may occur in the jacking procedure. Small sections of a building, such as single storey extensions founded on rafts, can often be treated without much difficulty, but treating large sections of structure by this procedure can be hazardous. This is always a specialist operation. Before the jacking process commences, a new foundation from which the jacking operation can be carried out, must be inserted below the existing foundations. Jacking a building back into position should only be contemplated if its distortion is significant and unacceptable. The Expert should be satisfied that the jacking procedure will be cheaper and safer than taking down and reconstructing the affected part of the building. Services into the building which may not have been damaged by the original subsidence, or which may have been repaired to accommodate the original movement, are likely to require further repair after the jacking operation has been completed.
9.3.6 Post-tensioned and reinforced collar beams

Most buildings which suffer from subsidence also experience differential movement whereby one part of the building moves relative to another and cracking is caused in the superstructure. If the whole building can be bound together by an external collar or girdle type system to increase the strength and rigidity of the building then it is probable that the tendency for differential movement to occur will be significantly reduced or even eliminated. A process was developed in the mid-1980s for tying together a whole building using a grid of post-tensioned concrete beams. The beams are cast around (and through the building if necessary) and are located against the existing masonry below ground level, at or just above the existing foundations, to form the collar or girdle (see Fig. 9.19). When the beams have cured to a minimum of 25kN/m2, they are post-tensioned which induces compression into the masonry thereby greatly strengthening the building.
Pressure grouting
Although strictly speaking pressure grouting is a ground stabilisation procedure, for the purposes of the Guide it is included here as a remedial works system. Pressure grouting is a procedure by which poor quality ground is improved by injecting a cementitious or similar alternative liquid mortar into the ground to improve the bearing capacity of the substratum. Pressure grouting is most suitable for ground which contains voids or which consists largely of granular type material, such as gravel, rock fragments, brick hardcore fill or similar. Little if any excavation is required. The grout is injected into the ground on a pre-determined pattern. Sometimes a grout barrier is first created in the ground around the property and then the ground within the barrier treated, while on other occasions grout is inserted over the area involved on a simple grid pattern. The procedure is determined by: the ground conditions the type of building being treated the accessibility onto the site for the grouting machinery
Old mines, caves and similar ground hazards are frequently treated using pressure grouting procedures. Pressure grouting is not normally suitable for substrata containing clay unless the problem is the formation of voids within the clay. Even then it is of dubious value unless the exact location of the various voids can be established and the filling achieved with
Fig. 9.18 Jacking building back into position
94
Fig. 9.19 Hoopsafe system excavation showing shutter, steel and tendons in place prior to concreting (Van Elle Hoopsafe Ltd.)
Since the mid-1980s, it is understood that a substantial number of properties have been successfully treated with this system. The Building Research Establishment has also published a report9.1 on a case study where the collar system was installed successfully on a severely distorted property, as part of their research into subsidence of low-rise buildings on shrinkable clays. This type of system has merits, but requires installation by skilled and trained operatives, especially during the post-tensioning stage. The stressed collar beams do impose a clamping force on the perimeter of the building and across its main structural walls that must be permanently maintained. This type of system does not normally require a Building Regulation submission as it is deemed to be a repair. However, any future alterations carried out to a building that has a stressed collar should be undertaken with care and with the advice of the specialist Contractor. It is possible that future structural alterations or extensions to such a property may not be possible. It would certainly need to take into account the stressing forces within the original brick walls and foundations. Unfortunately works below ground are frequently forgotten, especially after one or two changes of owner, and the presence of the stressing system and its inherent idiosyncrasies can easily be overlooked. Deterioration of the original subterranean brickwork with the passage of time may also relieve the clamping forces. It is therefore important that the Local Authority be notified in writing and that accurate records of this type of installation are kept safely and passed to subsequent owners along with the deeds of the property. This should prevent the beams being damaged by future works.
its own merits. They do not contain advice on such matters as tree removal, soil stabilisation, etc. but address underpinning per se. It is also assumed that conventional straightforward repairs such as to drains, redecoration, etc. can be undertaken by a competent builder without specific guidance. Having decided that a structure requires underpinning, the Expert will need to assess a number of issues and the Contractor (when appointed) other issues. They will relate to such matters as the practicalities of executing the work, to the specification for those works and to aspects of administration that perhaps do not apply to superstructure or drainage repairs. All piling procedures and techniques are skilled. Even traditional block underpinning requires care and attention so that the work is executed properly. The more sophisticated the underpinning procedure, the more essential it is to have experienced contractors and tradesmen carrying out the work. Some of the issues likely to arise are listed in this section and its subsections. It is not possible to specifically say which party should normally be responsible for which issues; the Conditions of Contract for the particular job may determine some of the responsibilities. It should be remembered that, where possible, risks should be identified earlier rather than later and it should be established who is most able to deal with the risks. In many cases there will clearly be a shared responsibility, but some matters are more appropriately dealt with by one party than another. At the end of each of the following general items a responsibility is suggested. For the subsequent specific underpinning techniques (9.4.1 to 9.4.5), it is assumed that the Expert will be primarily responsible for progressing the issues listed. This is because it is the Expert who will eventually be issuing the Certificate of Structural Adequacy (see section 10.8 and Appendix C) but there are matters for which the Contractor (when appointed) will clearly be responsible, i.e. the conduct of the contract on site and the workmanship.
General items
Specifying the Works Generally it is preferable for the Expert to specify fully the Contractors obligations rather than place reliance on potentially inadequate performance specifications. Superstructure loads The loading arrangement of the building should be closely examined so that the loads on the underpinning works are correctly assessed and catered for in design. Ground conditions Will the underpinning be carried out traditionally? Is there standing water? Does the site investigation carried out initially to diagnose the problem provide the necessary level of information to design a solution adequately? (Primarily a matter for the Expert) Site investigation The site investigation should match the anticipated remedial works scheme. Basic site examination is permissible for block underpinning and similar procedures but it must still be adequate for its purpose. For piling works and the ground should be proved to at least a depth 50% greater than the anticipated length of the pile. (Primarily a matter for the Expert) Health and Safety Do CDM Regulations9.2 apply (see section 10.4)? Who will fulfil the roles? (e.g. Designer, Planning Supervisor, Principal Contractor). Are they competent? Do they have adequate resources? Has the project been notified before start on site? (primarily a matter for the Expert) Mini-piled underpinning Will ground conditions be conducive to mini-piling? Will access be available for mini-piling equipment? (primarily a matter for the Expert). Note: For the purpose of this document minipiles are defined as piles having a diameter of 300mm or less. Design and/or construct Many of the trading underpinning contractors execute their own designs for which they have P.I. or other Insurance do the proposed Contractors have this capability? Are they financially sta-
9.4 Guidance notes for Engineers, Contractors and others responsible for remedial and underpinning works contracts
The guidance notes in this Section are intended as practical considerations when implementing remedial works contracts; they are not exclusive and each contract should be judged on
95
ble? Will the chosen Contractor be able to deal with the complexity of the project? (primarily a matter for the Contractor) Inspection by the Expert The Expert should also be prepared to inspect for themselves as reasonably appropriate during the contract, but it should be remembered that responsibility for achieving the specified quality of workmanship always rests with the Contractor. Building Control Inspections The works fall within the scope of Building Regulations (primarily a matter for the Expert). Have the necessary notices been served? (primarily a matter for the Contractor).
In all cases it is the responsibility of the Expert to specify the minimum period of time before new foundations can accept the imposed load of the existing building: Dry packing the underpinning concrete is left 75mm down from the underside of the existing footing. At least 24 hours after the base has been cast, a semi-dry 1:3 mix of cement and sharp sand is thoroughly rammed into the gap. A minimum of 12 hours should be left between the dry packing being inserted and an adjacent excavation being started. Concrete surcharging the underpinning concrete is brought up to at least 150mm above the underside of the existing foundations. The concrete is worked thoroughly under the old foundation by the vibrating poker to achieve a good percentage contact between the old foundation and the new underpinning. An air pocket vent left at the back of the old foundation assists in achieving good contact on the interface between the foundation and the underpinning. Again, a minimum of 24 hours should be left between casting and load imposition. The risks of not achieving adequate support to the existing foundation, brought about by trapped air must be guarded against. Great care must be exercised when preparing the underside of the existing foundation and in the forming of the voids for air pocket beyond the width of the existing foundation. High strength grout Specialist high strength, free flowing, non-shrink grouts are available to fill the interface between the structure and the underpinning blocks.
9.4.1 Traditional mass concrete underpinning

The following additional issues should be considered when the Expert specifies the extent of the works and the materials to be used for this type of underpinning: Ready-mix vehicles require good access and on occasions must deposit the concrete some distance from where it needs to be placed unless site pumps are available. However, ready-mix does give a consistent quality of concrete delivered, provided one of the standard mixes has been specified. Although Ordinary Portland Cement is normally used for underpinning works, occasionally sulphate resisting cement is required and Ground Granulated Blastfurnace Slag or Pulverised Fuel Ash mixes have been successfully used. Concrete used for the blocks should be a minimum of C25 in accordance with British Standards9.3 with a recommended slump of 50mm. Significant variations either side of this figure can result in major workability problems. It is advisable that the whole of the excavated section be filled with mass concrete for its full plan area. Working spaces filled with stone can provide a route for ground water to soften and undermine the underpinning, particularly in clay strata. Granular fill also provides an easy path for root penetration in the future to the base of the underpinning. Backfilling with excavated material is possible if care is taken to compact the material so as to prevent water penetration, but the procedure is risky. Load transfer from the structure to the underpinning is achieved by one of the following methods (see Fig. 9.20).
As adjacent blocks are excavated, it should be possible to check the effectiveness of the pinning or contact surface between the new work and the original foundation. Where partial underpinning is used, consideration should be given to providing transition blocks to reduce the sudden discontinuity of foundation depth at the end of the underpinning. This is intended to reduce damage from secondary movement. Services below ground should where possible be accurately located prior to any ground works commencing (see Fig. 9.21). The specified length of each block excavated should not normally be greater than 1m. No more than 1/3 to 1/2 of wall length should be unsupported at any one time. Localised concentration of loads should be identified and block locations and sizes adjusted accordingly. The excavation for each block should be taken down to at least 150mm into a suitable bearing stratum. The economic depth for this type of underpinning is normally about 1.5m, but greater depths have been acceptable to some Contractors.
Fig. 9.20 Typical sections through traditional mass concrete underpinning
Fig. 9.21 Foundation built directly above line of drain
96
In stiff shrinkable clays, the use of slip membranes at the sides of the excavation are beneficial in preventing frictional adhesion between the concrete and the clay. Those specified should provide effective slip capability and not be merely a token provision. The adequacy of the stratum should be approved by the Engineer and agreed with the local Building Control Officer or Approved Inspector. Where the loadbearing onto the underpinning is not uniform, e.g. where there are doors/window openings within 600mm or so above the top of the underpinning, individual blocks should be keyed together using rebated notches, or another form of continuity provided in the sides of the adjacent blocks in order to help equalise differential loadings. Individual pier or column bases are points of high load concentration and may require special precautions to be taken during any underpinning work. (Contractor also to bear this in mind during the actual works) All concrete should be well vibrated into place and it is recommended that a vibrator poker with a minimum 50mm diameter be used (primarily a matter for the Contractor). Continuity reinforcement or U-bars should be used where the full depth of a block cannot be cast in one operation (primarily a matter for the Contractor). Where encountered, all services should be examined for damage and replaced or repaired as necessary. Services should be sleeved (see Fig. 9.22) where they pass through the underpinning work (primarily a matter for the Contractor) Any field drains encountered should be reconnected or rerouted as necessary (primarily a matter for the Contractor). The underside of the existing foundation should be cleaned and any deleterious loose material removed (primarily a matter for the Contractor). When ready for concreting, the excavation should be inspected by the Contractors Supervisor in every instance (primarily a matter for the Contractor). Sample excavations should also be inspected by the Expert. The sides of the excavations should be firm, vertical and parallel (see Fig. 9.23). If there is a possibility that loose material will fall into the excavation and contaminate the concrete, polythene sheeting or other more permanent lining may be required. (primarily a matter for the Contractor) For safety reasons, excavations should preferably not be left unconcreted overnight and never over weekends. Newly excavated ground left unsupported for more than a few hours can relax, dry out and collapse. It is also possible that the ground water could leach into the excavations (see Figs. 9.24 and 9.25) and soften unsupported sections of ground which may then be temporarily taking additional load. If, in exceptional circumstances, it is
Fig. 9.23 Good quality excavation for block underpinning. Note stop ends in place, dry base and small sump for water removal
necessary to leave excavations unfilled overnight, they should be properly provided with planking and strutting to prevent collapse (see Figs. 9.26 and 9.23). Foundations should be temporarily propped. It is essential that excavations are protected such as to prevent accidents occurring (primarily a matter for the Contractor). Where the old foundation is temporarily propped overnight then the adequacy of the ground upon which the propping is bearing must be carefully assessed, particularly as to whether it will prove adequate if the ground dries out or if water gets into the excavation (primarily a matter for the Contractor). Contractors may use both on-site mixed concretes and grouts, and ready-mixed concretes and grouts, depending on volumes, access, working space and economics. Irrespective of whether site-mixed or ready-mixed products are used, the standard checks to ensure compliance with specification must be carried out. These relate to mix designs, material specifications, risk assessments as well as quality control slump and strength testing.
Fig 9.22 Sleeving of services
Fig 9.24 Water pooling in excavation for block underpinning
97
Fig. 9.25 Trial pit left open and subsequently flooded
ground level. Much depends upon the Contractor and the excavation system employed as to the economic depth for this system. Piers are normally at 2.5m3.0m centres depending upon the engineering design and structural arrangement of the building. Excavation to be taken down at least 150mm into all adequate stratum approved by the Local Authority and the Expert. Concrete mixes should be to BS 53289.3 and where used in the piers should be a minimum of GEN3, again with a recommended standard slump of 50mm. The concrete specification for the beams will depend upon the design but should generally not be less than RC35 and preferably of better quality. It is often better to have all the concrete of the better quality, i.e. C35, to avoid confusion between different mixes on site. Durability and workability of the mix are as important as strength. Depending upon the precise details of the system used, the beam spanning between the piers will either sit on top of the piers or be accommodated in socket rebates formed in the piers at the time of casting. Temporary propping may be necessary where the beam is being installed in, or below, a particularly heavily loaded wall. This is often in the form of stools or similar items placed at not greater than 1m centres along the line of the beam. These stools are normally sacrificial and are cast into the beam. Beams can contain structural steel sections or be of a conventional reinforced concrete bar and stirrup arrangement. Adequate room must be left along the length of the beam so that the concrete can be properly placed and worked around the existing foundation or wall. (Contractor also to bear this in mind during the actual works) Inspection holes should be provided at the back of the existing wall to check that the concrete has adequately worked its way through to the back of the existing construction. (Contractor also to bear this in mind during the actual works) If concreting cannot be carried out immediately after excavation then the base of the excavation should be screeded over, or otherwise protected, so that the quality of the bearing stratum is not affected by the delay. (Primarily a matter for the Contractor)
9.4.3 Piles with beams or rafts

The following additional issues should be considered when the Expert specifies the extent of the works and the materials to be used for this type of underpinning. Notes from the previous sections apply as appropriate. Particular points to note are listed below:
Fig. 9.26 Collapse of excavation due to inadequate planking and strutting
9.4.2 Beam and pier underpinning

The following additional issues should be considered when the Expert specifies the extent of the works and the materials to be used for this type of underpinning. Notes from the previous sections apply as appropriate. Particular points to note are listed below: For this system, the structural design should be carried out by a suitably experienced Engineer, who may be the Expert or directly responsible to him. If the design is done by the Contractor, then it should be reviewed by the Expert. A check by the Local Authority under the Building Regulations is a worthwhile exercise but should not be relied upon as a procedure for spreading risk. It is a legal obligation (see section 10.6), but as the law stands at present, it may not give any enforceable claim against the Authority. Beam and pier underpinning is normally used where a firm stratum is to be found between 2m2.5m below
All mini-pile and beam/raft arrangements should be designed by Specialists in this field to the satisfaction of the Expert. If designed by the Contractor then the design and detailing should also be to the satisfaction of the Expert. The Local Authority will require details to be submitted in either case. Mini-piles used for underpinning are normally designed for an ultimate load of between 10 and 50 tonnes depending on the pile diameter and the factor of safety specified. For a 100mm diameter pile with a factor of safety of 2.0 a working load of 5.0 tonnes is normally easily achievable in reasonable quality ground. A safety factor of at least 2.0 is advisable. Mini-pile diameters range upwards from 50mm to 300mm (as referred to in BRE 3139.4). Those at the lower end of the size range are designed for specific purposes and the Expert should consider the sizes most appropriate for compliance with the design criteria. The type of pile selected should be appropriate to the ground conditions and to the underpinning system selected. Driven piles have different installation constraints from augured or jacked piles.
98
Driven piles are installed to a pre-determined set. It is important that some piles are redriven in the presence of the Expert to confirm their adequacy before filling with concrete. This is particularly so if the piles have been left for some time unfilled after driving (see Fig. 9.27). Sometimes this redriving is not possible if the pile casing contains water. Systems now exist for dynamic testing without redriving and these can be considered as alternatives, but sample testing of some form is strongly recommended. Augured piles are best used where vibration of the ground is likely to be unacceptable. Unlike driven piles, they are not load-tested as they are installed and consequently their installation procedures should be more rigorously controlled. Unless there is a high safety factor, an appropriate number of augured piles should be subject to load testing as determined by the Expert. This testing can be time consuming and disruptive. Electronic testing of piles is available using computer based methods. The technique is a non-destructive procedure based upon a simplified drop hammer principle. Where an end bearing pile is to take support from the rock head the pile should be socketed into the rock. (Contractor also to bear this in mind during the actual works) The verticality, line and position of mini-piles need to be constantly monitored. Checks should be carried out on randomly selected mini-piles generally in accordance with the requirements of BS 80049.5. Mini-piles, which are found to be out of tolerance, vertically or bowed beyond permissible code limits should be carefully assessed as to their likely loadcarrying capability and resistance to buckling in the ground conditions which exist. They should be tested and proved or in cases of doubt, replaced. Further guidance is provided by BRE Digest 3139.4. (Contractor also to bear this in mind during the actual works) Needle beams through walls spanning between piles should not normally be spaced at greater than 2m centres. The loading arrangement must be carefully analysed to consider all major loads. (Contractor also to bear this in mind during the actual works) Where rafts are toothed into existing walls, provision must be made for proper forming of the rebates, placing of the reinforcement or steel beams, and adequate compaction of the concrete to fill the rebate. Dry packing can be used above the rebates to achieve proper load transfer between the existing structure and the underpinning. (Contractor also to bear this in mind during the actual works) If, after or during driving, a bottom driven pile is found to contain water, this should be viewed with concern as this might indicate a weld or plug failure which could affect pile set, and thus the piles adequacy may be questionable. (Primarily a matter for the Contractor) If a bottom driven mini-pile has water in it, this water should removed or concrete should be placed using tremie methods. (Primarily a matter for the Contractor) If dry packing is not used to achieve load transfer between the existing and new construction, then surcharging with fresh concrete can be just as effective, provided the operation is carefully supervised and executed. (Primarily a matter for the Contractor)
Fig. 9.27 Piles left to stand for long periods before completion of work should be checked by redriving, especially if water is present
the piles will be jacked so that any anomalies encountered during the installation of the piles can be recognised as such. There are two principal types of pile used in jacking: Pre-cast concrete segments dowelled together. Sections can be up to 1m in length. Hollow metal spigot and socket tubes tack welded together. Again, up to 1m long sections are normally used. Tube wall thickness is normally between 3mm and 13mm. Depending upon the jack load to be applied and the predicted ground resistance. Care must be taken not to crush or concertina the tubes.
9.4.4 Jacked piles

The following additional issues should be considered when the Expert specifies the extent of the works and the materials to be used for this type of underpinning. Notes from the previous sections apply as appropriate. Particular points to note are listed below: It is essential that accurate and thorough site investigation is carried out before any underpinning operation commences. It is important to predict the depth to which
The spacing of jacked piles depends upon the load to be carried but they are normally set at about 1m centres. Consideration should be given to the piles having adequate lateral stability both as regards preventing the pile itself buckling and so that there is no possibility of the pile head moving sideways. On a 24 four-hour load test, only a minimum load fade should be permitted, ideally not exceeding 10% and certainly not exceeding 20%. Load fade can be caused by defective jacks and/or soil particles contaminating the jack seals. In some instances fade appears to occur to the load on the jack when in fact no loss of load has taken place. It is important that the Expert and the Supervisor for the Contractor should be satisfied with all piles. It is also important that jacked piles do not drift out of line. Where significant drift has occurred piles should be tested by the 24 hour method. (Matter for both the Expert and the Contractor) When the Expert and Contractor are satisfied that a pile is approaching its design load, a stillage frame is placed between the pile head and the underside of the foundation to lock the load onto the pile. The jack can then be removed and the hole concreted, the stillage frame
99
remains embedded in the final works (primarily a matter for the Contractor). Pile jacking procedures leave themselves open to many forms of abuse; it is important that supervision and inspection of pile jacking is done frequently and thoroughly by the Contractor (primarily a matter for the Contractor). Access pits should be excavated at the pile positions. It is important that the pile head is carefully held in place so that an even load is applied to the top of the pile. It is essential that the pile is jacked into the ground vertically (primarily a matter for the Contractor). The base of the wall or slab against which the jacking takes place must be level to achieve an even application of load to the head of the pile and sufficiently firm so that no local crushing or breaking of the original foundation material occurs. If necessary, a metal or concrete padstone should be fixed or cast immediately above the jack position to prevent this problem (primarily a matter for the Contractor). As jacking progresses, new pile segments are placed on top of preceding ones until the pre-determined maximum jacking load is achieved without any movement of the final segment. The maximum load should be held on every fifth pile for a minimum of 10 hours and for 24 hours on every tenth pile. All jacks used should have a current calibration certificate (primarily a matter for the Contractor).
Fig. 9.28 Temporary protection to driveway
9.4.5 Contractor proposals, workmanship and quality control on site

It should be remembered that responsibility for achieving the specified quality of workmanship ultimately rests with the Contractor unless the Conditions of Contract say otherwise. But, as reasonably appropriate and on a sample basis, the Expert should also be prepared to inspect the general standard of the work for themselves during the course of the contract. Notes from the previous sections apply as appropriate. Particular points to note are listed below: As previously said, the more sophisticated the underpinning procedure, the more essential it is to have experienced Contractors and tradesmen carrying out the work. All piling procedures and techniques are skilled. Even traditional conventional block underpinning requires care and attention so that the work is executed properly. All Contractors should price on the basis of the scheme as specified. If the Contractor wishes to submit an alternative scheme, it should be presented separately and be accompanied by a full engineering specification and sufficient other details to enable the Expert to decide upon the most appropriate scheme. Where any alternative scheme is selected full calculations, drawings, etc. should be provided for approval by the Expert prior to commencing construction. Agree the extent of the working area prior to the contract commencing and clearly define any out-of-bounds areas. Where premises are vacated by the occupants, all areas out-of-bounds to the Contractor should be locked and preferably sealed against dust with masking tape. Carpets and underlay in areas to be trafficked should be taken up and stored away from the premises. Protect drives, walls, decoration, fixtures and fittings, lawns, etc. if liable to damage (see Figs. 9.28 and 9.29). Domestic facilities made available to the Contractor such as toilets, kitchen, etc. must not be abused by the Contractor, they should be kept in a clean state during the works and left thoroughly clean on completion of the works. Always hand dig in areas where services are anticipated. The use of tracking devices is essential. Over-digging of holes for mass concrete underpinning can result in appreciable additional cost in terms of extra
Fig. 9.29 Temporary protection to internal walls
concrete. It is important to keep any extra over-digging to a minimum where possible. Filling of over-dig with granular material may not be permitted. Dry packing between underpinning and the existing structure should be carried out thoroughly and by experienced tradesmen. A number of instances have occurred where underpinning work has failed because of the inadequate quality of the dry packing. Welding of pile sections must be carried out by a proficient tradesman experienced and qualified in welding (see Fig. 9.7(v)). Continuity reinforcement should be provided between piles and any beams or raft construction cast upon the piles. Ideally piles should have at least one reinforcing bar for their full length, particularly where piles may be required to take tension. Where full length reinforcement does not exist and tension in the pile is not anticipated, continuity reinforcement, usually a T12 bar, should overlap the steel casing by at least 1m and should bond into the beam/raft for the minimum bond length. The material used in any void formers to separate underpinning work from surrounding ground or adjacent structure should be inert. Very low density polystyrene is probably the best material, but whatever material is used, it should not give off obnoxious or dangerous fumes during any subsequent decomposition. It must be capable of achieving the required amount of compression without the necessity for exceptional force. Any compressible layer should be properly jointed between adjacent sheets so there is no bridging of the void layer by solid material filling any gaps. The void former system should be carefully installed so that the anticipated movement has been comprehensively catered for. It must also be strong enough to support construction loads placed upon it. Mini-piles will normally be 300mm diameter or less and fall into two categories displacement or replacement.
100
Displacement mini-piles may be either driven, vibrated, jacked, or displacement augered and do not bring arisings or spoil to the surface. Replacement mini-piles are gradually installed by boring, augering, or drilling methods, and will produce spoil at the surface which will probably require disposal off-site at a licensed tip. Displacement mini-piles generally comprise permanent steel casings filled with in situ concrete with the required reinforcement. They may also comprise precast concrete, or steel, either tubular or I-section. Bored mini-piles can be installed using tripod rigs, whilst augered and drilled piles will be installed using minirotary hydraulically powered rigs. In ground which is heaving or suspected to heave, minipiles are constructed using either teflon-coated, cardboard or plastic tubes on the outer surface of their upper levels to mitigate heave forces caused by swelling clays. Mini-pile products and installation methods are constantly being updated and developed and care should be taken when dealing with new techniques and systems. The Expert should require that a record of the locations and depths of any underpinning and piling installed be maintained, including any variations between the works actually carried out on site and those originally proposed. This record should be provided to the Expert by the Contractor upon completion of the works. In principle concrete test cubes should be taken at regular intervals during any concrete work and should number at least one set of cubes per 10 piles with a similar number for beams or their equivalent for slabs. Test cubes for concrete to blocks are not so crucial provided the Expert is satisfied that the concrete is of reasonable quality. On site slump testing of concrete is an excellent immediate aid to site quality control off the premises.
ing properties whether they be attached or not. The Party Wall, etc. Act 19969.6 (see 10.3.5) provides for an adjoining owner to agree to works proposed that are to a party wall or structure, or foundation works within a specified distance. In so doing, any proposal that seems to have such implications can be challenged before the works commence. The scope of this legislation thus takes into account most of the eventualities that could occur with linked properties. Further details of this legislation are to be found in the Appendix G. There is nothing unsound with the principle of partial underpinning of a building provided that future significant settlement of untreated parts of the structure will not occur, or if some settlement is predicted, damage will be slight, insignificant or controlled. In the case where partial underpinning is carried out to one or more of a joined group of properties, the same considerations apply. Care must be taken to ensure that the stability and serviceability of untreated properties adjacent to treated ones is not compromised. In this respect, the mortgageability of the building, or of the different properties comprising the whole structure, may also have to be taken into account It may be better to leave a group of properties to continue to subside in a uniform manner and so avoid major unserviceability of one or more of the group of properties occurring, the alternative being to stabilise one or more of the properties and accept the anticipated damage which may result from subsequent differential movement. In instances where a building has been partially underpinned and some time later subsidence occurs to another part which was not underpinned, insurers are normally prepared to deal with any resulting damage as a separate claim or, on occasions, as part of the original claim (see 4.3.4) if there is continuing subsidence cover. It is rare for existing Insurers to refuse to continue subsidence cover on buildings which have experienced subsidence (see 4.6.3).
9.5 Partial underpinning (refer also 9.4.1)

Partial underpinning is the provision of additional support to only part of the foundations of an existing property or interconnected group of properties effectively comprising one building such as a terrace of houses or a pair of semi-detached houses. There is nothing unsound with the principle of partial underpinning indeed most underpinning is partial and is successful. In the majority of cases, damage from subsidence, such as encroaching tree roots or leaking drains, may only affect part of a property. There is rarely any reason to extend remedial works beyond the affected area. Some Engineers and Local Authority Building Control Officers have suggested that partial underpinning of a property may provide an uneven or unbalanced foundation. They argue that there may be a possibility that some differential settlement might occur in the future between the untreated and treated areas and cause damage. In most cases foundations would not be expected to move in the future if they have not moved in the past, provided that: any local problems have been rectified the structural arrangement of the property has not been altered the loading arrangement within the property is not altered the general ground conditions in the area do not change adjacent trees are properly managed.
9.6 Repairs to superstructure

9.6.1 General
Superstructure repairs may be all that is required to a property because the Expert, after careful examination of the circumstances relating to the damage, decides that the cause of the problem is a once and for all occurrence. In such a case, the property will not have suffered any structural damage of consequence nor appear distorted to an extent which requires any rebuilding of the structure. In fact, there is no real benefit to be derived from doing anything other than simple cosmetic repairs. This might occur, for example, where some work has been carried out on the superstructure which has caused the loads coming onto part of the foundation of the property to be increased or affected to such an extent as to encourage slight initial settlement. Typical instances where minor cracking might occur but where no further continuation of major settlement results include: building an upper floor extension above existing construction, e.g. a new bedroom above a garage or loft conversion. removal of a wall between adjoining rooms enlargement of a doorway through a perimeter wall
The owner of a property has a reasonable entitlement to rectify their property so as to make it stable. However, in exercising this right, an owner might have to consider whether there are any obligations to neighbours. Clearly no actual physical damage should be caused to an joining property in the execution of any remedial works which may be undertaken, e.g. cracks in walls, broken window, etc. nor must the work accelerate or initiate any subsidence that may be a threat to adjoin-
Monitoring over a period of one or two years will confirm whether movement is continuing and whether further action needs to be taken. Monitoring should confirm that the original decision not to do any ground stabilisation or underpinning works was correct. When it has been shown that the property is unlikely to move any further, the question of the necessity or otherwise of repairing the superstructure of the building arises. Structural movement does not always involve superstructure damage. If a building moves as a complete unit then it may not suffer any
101
superstructure damage. It might move downwards uniformly and so end up level, but at a lower level than it was originally constructed, or alternatively it may tilt. Such uniform movement will normally only require repairs to drains and other incoming services unless the amount of tilt in the property is unacceptable. What is acceptable and what is unacceptable is very much a matter for debate. Many old properties have quite exceptionally distorted or uneven floors, walls, etc., and such distortion is often considered to add character and sometimes value to those buildings (see Fig. 9.30). Most buildings over a hundred years old have some degree of distortion and it is rare that sloping floors or distorted walls cause concern to occupiers or owners of these properties providing the properties are stable. The picturesque timberframed buildings of Suffolk and Cheshire are typical examples of this. From a practical point of view, a slope in a floor of up to 50mm in a distance of 4m is probably quite acceptable, even if not in conformity with modern building standards. Corresponding distortions in doors, walls, etc., are rarely complained of by those who own older buildings. When a room is furnished, only the most pronounced slopes tend to be noticeable or prove troublesome. Nevertheless some repairs to the superstructure may be essential to maintain the structural integrity of the building and other repairs may also be necessary to rectify serious distortion that is unacceptable from a practical and aesthetic point of view.
Fig. 9.30 Distorted timber frame buildings (non-subsidence)
Cracks in brickwork
These normally occur along or through the mortar joints. They should at least be pointed up properly as a minimum. If considered necessary from a structural point of view, the brickwork may need to be bonded across the cracks by the cutting out and relaying of a few individual bricks. In some cases, merely pointing up the line of an individual crack can provide an unacceptable appearance. It may be reasonable for an area of a wall to be repointed in its entirety in order to eliminate unpleasant zigzag lines of pointing (see Fig. 6.11). Resin bonding of cracks by the injection of a resin adhesive into the cracks can sometimes be necessary, but simple raking out and repointing is normally sufficient. Bed joint reinforcement provided by stainless steel deformed bars set in suitable mortars with pointing to match existing mortar, is an alternative method. Occasionally cracks actually pass through individual bricks and in these instances there are a number of options available, e.g.: the bricks can be cut out and replaced, possibly by borrowing matching bricks from other parts of the premises such as garden walls filling the crack in the brick(s) with mortar matching the colour of the bricks, but this requires care to achieve a satisfactory result. simple repointing with suitable mortar may achieve a quite satisfactory result.
or other remedial works. Some Engineers argue that minor cracks in walls cause an inherent weakness and consequently such cracks should be cut out to their depth and the brickwork bonded properly either side of the crack. This is something of an academic point. Low-rise brick structures rarely rely on tensile forces in brickwork and consequently even reasonably large cracks are rarely of any importance from a structural point of view. If, in special cases, proper bonding across cracks is required, then the Expert should consider those cases individually and advise how the bonding is to be achieved. This can normally be done by cutting out and rebonding bricks, or injecting a resin compound into the crack, with or without a stitch bar. Cracks identified, as due to wall tie failure should only be repaired once the defective wall ties have been replaced.
9.6.2 Floors
The relevelling of floors can cause more problems than it solves. It is advised that floors should not be relevelled unless the degree of slope in them is genuinely unacceptable or there is some other major reason for relevelling them. Steps at doorways, conspicuous out-of-level between window sills and skirting-boards or similar irregularities can often be aesthetically unpleasant. A floor may be levelled either laying additional material on top of existing floor, by placing firrings on the existing joists and reboarding, or alternatively by reducing the floor to its lowest level. To carry out the former operation can produce steps at doorways and staircases unless those positions are fortuitously the highest points in the room. Lowering a floor can cause major problems such as the taking down of the ceiling in the room beneath, or at ground level, the possibility of taking the floor below the DPC level, with all the attendant problems which that might cause. Rectification or replacement of staircases can be particularly troublesome and should be avoided if at all possible. A good rule to consider before undertaking the work is whether the final state will be worse than the original. Often a compromise is the best solution where all or some of the slope remains, but for all practical purposes is acceptable.
Where walls lean out of the vertical, their stability is rarely in question provided they are adequately tied back into the structure at roof and floor levels. Restraint-straps, tie-bars and similar fixing methods are commonly used for this purpose. Walls which are unacceptably out-of-plumb, e.g. 75mm in 3m, may need to be taken down and rebuilt, but again tying in may be all that is required. Reconstruction should only be undertaken if it is absolutely necessary because a vertical wall forming part of a building which is otherwise obviously slightly sloping can have an aesthetically unpleasant appearance. This may be more unacceptable to an owner or prospective purchaser than if the whole building or part of a building is slightly out-of-plumb. Masonry walls, particularly those constructed using lime mortar, can accommodate appreciable distortions provided they are adequately tied into the structure. The criterion is not usually how much the wall is out-of-plumb or bowed, but whether it is likely to deteriorate further after adequate tying
9.6.3 Repair of plasterwork to walls, ceilings, etc.

These tend to be repairs of a more cosmetic nature, but if they are not done properly then seasonal cracking can re-occur, and indeed it may be sometimes unavoidable. Providing scrim across cracks in ceilings and metal lathing beneath new plasterwork over cracks in walls can substantially reduce the possibility of the recurrence of hairline seasonal cracking. No matter how skilled the tradesman, it is impossible to achieve a perfect repair as shrinkage cracking is likely to occur. Embossed or heavy patterned wall and ceiling papers are often better than flat papers for covering minor flaws in repaired plasterwork. Common sense should always prevail in such circumstances.
102
9.6.4 Doors/window realignment

Window realignment is rarely a sensible option as reinstated windows are often conspicuously out of alignment with the brick coursing of the walls in which they are located. This should not be attempted unless absolutely necessary. Unless doors hang vertically on their hinges, they will not remain stationary when partially open (they will tend to swing open or closed). Sometimes doors and their frames distort as a unit but remain square. In other instances a door frame will distort out of square and the door does not fit in its opening. Small distortions of either sort are normally tolerable, but on occasions it is necessary to take off not only the door but also the door casing and realign it correctly if a door is to function efficiently. Again, this type of repair can cause more problems than it solves and should be viewed in this light.
9.6.5 Cosmetic repairs

These would normally be the sort of repairs, usually done as part of conventional property maintenance, including: internal redecoration filling to minor cracks to cornices, around doors and windows the reinstatement of paths and landscaping
It is not intended to give any detail of these types of repair, other than to again emphasise that expectations should not be unreasonably high. The standards to be achieved should be agreed beforehand with the owner, the Expert administering the contract and the Contractor. It is sometimes useful to agree a sample of workmanship before the full job is undertaken.
References
9.1 9.2 9.3 9.4 9.5 9.6 Burford, D., Crilly, M, S., Handley, V.: Monitoring and repair of a building damaged by ground movements using the hoopsafe system. Watford, BRE Construction (Design & Management) Regulations 1994 BS 5328 Concrete, BSI. Mini-piling for low-rise buildings. Watford, BRE, 1986. BRE Digest 313 BS 8004: 1986. Code of practice for foundations. London, BSI, 1986. Party Wall, etc. Act 1996
Bibliography
IStructE/ICE. Manual for the design of reinforced concrete building structures. London, Institution of Structural Engineers, 1985
103
104
Chapter 10 Remedial works to properties damaged by subsidence

10.1 Introduction 106 10.2 The role of the Expert in remedial works 106 10.3 Contract administration and procedures for major remedial works 106 10.3.1 General 106 10.3.2 Pre-contract stage 106 10.3.3 Design administration stage 107 10.3.4 Contract and other insurance 107 10.3.5 The pre-contract meeting 107 10.3.6 Contract stage 108 10.3.7 Project management of the contract on site 109 10.3.8 Work in the ground 109 10.3.9 Work above the ground 109 10.3.10 Decoration 109 10.3.11 Final completion 110 10.4 Health and safety matters relating to remedial works contracts 110 10.5 The Housing Grants Construction and Regeneration Act 1996 111 10.6 Building Regulations matters 111 10.6.1 Scope of the regulations 111 10.6.2 How to ensure compliance with the regulations 111 10.6.3 Building regulations as they apply to foundations and underpinning 111 10.6.4 Scottish regulations 111 10.6.5 The scope of the regulation (Northern Ireland) 112 10.7 Guarantees 112 10.8 Certificate of structural adequacy 112
105
10 Remedial works to properties damaged by subsidence

10.1 Introduction
In previous Chapters the background to the problems of subsidence damage have been considered in detail, along with the procedures by which a property should be examined. Following these sections the various remedial works options have been identified, and the methods described, again, in some considerable detail. These range from arboricultural work, through to cause rectification, ground stabilisation measures, and superstructure repairs. Clearly, all of these activities involve some organisational issues, probably project management, the placing of a construction contract and its administration and the preparation of reports. This Chapter considers these aspects in detail. which is usually legally enforceable. Subsidence remedial works contracts are in principle no different to any other building contract. The Employer, i.e. the property owner, requires building works to be carried out by the Contractor and enters into a contract with him. The Insurer may provide a substantial amount of the money for the works but is not a party to the contract. The majority of subsidence claims involve work to domestic properties and this can present special difficulties. Subsidence remedial work is invariably an imposition on the householder; it has rarely been anticipated and subsidence is frequently discovered only when a house is being sold. It can involve the owner in unexpected major financial outlay and in considerable unanticipated delay of the sale. The work is invariably very disruptive. It is often a reason for the loss of the sale of a property. Most houseowners rarely have anything approaching the scale of works of a subsidence repair contract carried out on their property. As a result, few know what to expect. Frequently misunderstandings occur between the various parties, i.e. Insurer, Loss Adjuster, householder, Engineer and Contractor, due to lack of a procedure for dealing with the implementation of the contract. The situation can be further complicated by those not normally directly involved such as Solicitors, Local Authority Building Control Dept, Valuation Surveyors, etc. Chapters 2 and 3 detail the roles and concerns of the majority of these parties. Where the proposed remedial works are extensive and very disruptive, it may be necessary for the occupiers of the property to move out into temporary accommodation. This is frequently advisable for occupants who are elderly, infirm or disabled. However, there is much to be gained on the point of security and general control of the contract if the householder can remain in the property. Most underpinning and remedial works contracts are carried out with the householder and their families still in residence. The following sections suggest items which should be covered at the stages indicated.
10.2 The role of the Expert in remedial works

It is important that an Expert with experience of the particular type of work is appointed. Their duties (see 2.2.3) should include: a thorough investigation of the problem design or approval of remedial works administration of the contract.
The Expert who designs the remedial works should consider the practicality and safety of the design during construction. The Expert who administers the contract should have a sound knowledge of general building construction, expertise in structural repair works and experience in this type of activity. This knowledge and expertise should extend to the types of contract used as well as the practical aspects of the repairs being undertaken. It must be appreciated that the Contractor cannot perform the impossible and if asked to carry out unreasonably difficult tasks, costs may increase disproportionately to the end result, and additional inspection or supervision may be necessary. Whilst it is not the Experts role to supervise the Contractor directly, the Expert should exercise overall project management to ensure that the Contractor is working safely, efficiently and is generally adhering to the design and specification, together with agreed timescales. The Contractor is responsible directly to the owner for the standard of the work and should be competent and experienced in the field of work which is being undertaken. Since 1980 it has not been uncommon to find that inadequately underpinned properties have had to undergo further remedial works because of the inexperience and lack of knowledge of those parties responsible for designing, specifying, administrating and executing the contract. As with all professional appointments, Experts should be engaged for their services on the basis of a written agreement set out in clear terms, together with the details of the responsibilities and roles of the Expert and the Client, including arrangements for payment of fees. It is best if such an agreement is based on one of the standard forms published by such bodies as the Association of Consulting Engineers or the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors. Ad hoc agreements not based on an accepted standard form can frequently lead to misunderstandings and problems.
10.3.2 Pre-contract stage

This is the initial stage. The Insurer has agreed with the Insured that remedial works are to be undertaken. However with the exception of the initial inspection and the site investigation, it is probable that nothing else has been done. The remedial works should normally be project managed by a suitably experienced and qualified Expert. Although it was common until a few years ago for the Expert to be appointed by the Insured, it is usual nowadays for the Insurer to appoint the Expert and pay them directly. Insurers may appoint a Loss Adjuster to represent their interests. The name of the Insurers representative should be confirmed at the earliest stage and certainly before any design or building work commences. The pre-contract site investigation, exploratory work and design of the remedial works is invariably undertaken by the Expert. The extent of the work is agreed with the Insured and the Insurer or their respective representatives. It should be noted that Insurers do not pay for preventative repairs except at their discretion. The Expert will also prepare the tender enquiry documents for issue to Contractors for pricing. These documents should particularly cover the points in 9.6.3. and 9.1.3. It has become common for institutional Lenders such as Banks, Building Societies and also Insurers to expect that a guarantee or warranty for the underpinning work will be issued upon completion of the works. This subject is discussed later in section 10.7. If such assurances are required of the Contractor or the Expert then their nature and scope should be agreed as early as possible, and any such requirements of the Contractor contained within the tender docu-
10.3 Contract administration and procedures for major remedial works

10.3.1 General
A contract is an agreement between two or more parties
106
ments. Prior to appointment, the Contractor will be required to give full details of any guarantees which may be issued so these can be checked by the other parties. This also applies to the Expert and the Certificate of Structural Adequacy (see section 10.8 and Appendix C).
Extensions of existing household policies, notification to contents Insurers. Non negligent damage cover resulting from the works.
10.3.3 Design administration stage

All relevant information as to the extent of the work to be carried out should be clearly defined and described. It is preferable for the detailed scheme of work to be agreed between the parties, e.g. Expert, Insured and Insurer, before documents are issued to Contractors for pricing. Any private works to be paid for directly by the Insured should be specified separately at time of tender, and certainly no later than at the pre-contract meeting (see 10.3.5). The insured should have the policy excess confirmed and the method of collecting the excess agreed. A reasonably accurate drawing of the general site and the relevant parts of the property to be repaired should be prepared and issued. It should contain all the known and assumed site information, including trial pit or borehole details, plus services runs. Use of CAT and Genny services location equipment can prove advantageous. Any assumed, and hence provisional, information should be clearly noted as such and, where possible, this should be kept to a minimum in order to achieve accurate and realistic tender figures. The Contractor should clarify in the tender the extent to which they have relied on any provisional information in order that any subsequent claims under the contract can be determined. It should be confirmed whether the tender is to be let as either: Detailed scheme with specification Expert design generally adopted as an industry standard, or less likely Performance specification Contractor design.
The former is the more usual for a contract funded by Insurers. The tender period should be realistic and generally not less than 3 weeks. Lesser periods are not fair to the Contractor and can lead to inflated tenders. When the tenders are received, the Expert will assess them and report to the Insurer and owner with a recommendation as to which Contractor should be appointed. Where underpinning works are designed by the Contractor, and a Certificate of Structural Adequacy is desired, the Expert must review the technical design produced by the Contractor in order that they can subsequently issue the Certificate which must also be signed by the Contractor (see section 10.8). It should be clarified whether the Expert or the Contractor is to obtain the Building Regulation approvals. Payment of Local Authority fees should be borne by the Insured or the Insurer and which of these two parties is to pay the fees should be agreed as early as possible. The Expert will generally be expected to design the engineering aspects of the works in accordance with the relevant British Standards and Codes of Practice. The Expert is not, except in unusual circumstances, responsible for the detailed supervision and organisation of the works. Those aspects are the responsibility of the Contractor. The Expert should, however, see that the Contractor is carrying out the contract in a workmanlike manner to programme and carry out all necessary inspection in reference to section 10.8. The remedial works scheme designed by the Expert should avoid impractical and complicated details and requirements.
Specialist advice from an Insurance Broker may in some cases be necessary if the inter-relationship between the various parties is thought to be complex. If JCT 21.2.1 type cover is required then it is usually taken out by the Contractor on behalf of the employer, i.e. the Insured, to safeguard against damage which might be caused to the employers (Insureds) property which is not part of the contract works and to Third Party adjacent properties as a result of non-negligent action by the Contractor during the works. The Contractor should have been made aware of this requirement in the Tender Documents so that an appropriate financial allowance can be made. Alternatively, it may be agreed that in the event of damage or further damage being caused through no fault of the Contractor, the resulting costs should be borne by the employer, i.e. by the Insured, possibly under the umbrella of the overall claim. In practice this means that the Insurer undertakes to indemnify the Insured against liability for such damage. It is normally necessary for the householder separately to advise their Contents Insurers that work is being carried out to the property. They should also advise whether or not they will vacate the property whilst the work is undertaken and what arrangements have been made for security, etc. Under the terms of the JCT Minor Works Form of Contract 10.1 , insurance cover under clauses of 6.3A or B should be put in place as appropriate. These relate to works and unfixed materials delivered to site in case they are lost or damaged. This is a standard form of cover with which most Insurers are familiar and can be effected by an extension of the household buildings policy for the period of the contract. Any extra cost will normally be borne by the building Insurer.
10.3.5 The pre-contract meeting

Although termed pre-contract, this is normally the first meeting between all parties after a Contractor has been appointed, but it is usually held before work physically commences on site. Ideally this should be held at the property, with the Insured, Expert, Contractor and, if possible and appropriate, the Loss Adjuster all present. At this meeting the Expert should explain in detail to the Insured, in the presence of the Contractor, the extent and scope of the work to be carried out by the Contractor and also which aspects of the contract are to be dealt with by sub-contractors. It is not unusual for a householder to decide that, as work is being undertaken, they may as well have other things attended to at direct cost to themselves, e.g. improved standard of decorations, the installation of double glazed windows, or even the building of an extension. Such additional work must be clearly identified and programmed into, or parallel with the remedial works contract not later than this stage and ideally should have been included at pre-tender stage. Even though the householder may well have had copies of drawings, and specifications at an earlier stage, it is often only by this hands on approach involving the householder that they begin to understand the extent of the work to be carried out. Delays and interruptions to the insurance related works can involve cost to the Contractor. The Insurer may not have any obligations to meet such additional costs, so they will invariably fall as a direct extra charge to be met by the property owner. A programme should be agreed. This is particularly important if alternative accommodation arrangements need to be made. At this stage the Experts should explain their role in the contract to the owner. Their role in this respect should be acknowledged by all parties from this juncture if the contract is to run successfully. It is also important to decide what temporary protection is to be provided to paths, doorjambs, etc. in order to reduce the
10.3.4 Contract and other insurance

Any requirements as to insurances to be expected of the Contractor, Expert or Insured should be clarified at this stage, such as: JCT Minor Works Clauses 6.1, 6.2, 6.3B10.1, etc. Professional Indemnity insurance requirements and public liability insurances. JCT 21.2.1 type cover for damage caused to adjacent/ attached properties not forming part of the contract works.
107
necessity for reasonably avoidable remedial work. Facilities for the use of the Contractor are to be agreed, such as power supply, water supply, toilets, messing, etc. Where the Insured are to remain in residence for the duration of the works they should be made fully aware of the inevitable and unavoidable disruption, dirt and discomfort. Care should be exercised by all parties to avoid extending the limits of disruption beyond the area of the works. The Expert should also explain that after underpinning has been completed, minor initial settlement might occur but that this is no cause for concern (see 2.2.1). The Expert should explain the contractual relationship between the parties and clarify that the owner is employing the Contractor. Following this meeting a set of minutes should be produced and circulated, for agreement of all parties, by the Expert. The Experts duty is to administer the contract impartially.
matters in dispute are resolved. It is not fair or acceptable to the Contractor that the whole amount of the final certified account be withheld and this would usually be a breach of contract. It must also be agreed exactly when the Insureds contribution becomes due, e.g. the policy excess payment, etc. Alternative methods of collecting the policy excess are as follows: At the pre-contract meeting the Insured issues a cheque to the Insurer to the value of the excess and thereafter all payments to the Contractor are made by the Insurer via a mandate signed by the Insured. At the pre-contract meeting the Insured issues a cheque to the Expert covering the excess which will only be released to the Contractor when an appropriate certificate is issued. The Contractor makes an interim request for payment to the value of the excess at an appropriate stage which when certified by the Expert is paid to the Contractor within a period stated in the contract.
Party Wall Act (see also Appendix G)
The Party Wall, etc. Act 199610.2 requires a building owner to inform their neighbour when it is intended to undertake buildings works to either a party wall or to excavate close to an adjacent property. The intention of the Act is to protect both parties, the owner and the neighbour, from spurious claims for damage made by one upon the other. The Expert should be fully aware of the details of the Act and apply the Act fully as appropriate. The duty of the party wall surveyor is to the structure and not to either of the adjoining owners, although the surveyor will be appointed by one of them. Where the Party Wall Act10.2 is not applicable, a condition survey with photographs should be carried out to assist in reinstatement. It is essential that sufficient photographs are taken of the whole site along with relevant descriptions. The condition survey must then be issued and agreed by all parties.
Any provisional sums included in the contract to cover possible unforeseen or undetermined works must be clarified and properly established at this stage so that all parties are aware of the implications to both the contract price and programme. Delays in clarifying provisional items can be disruptive to the contract and costly to all involved.
10.3.6 Contract stage

The signing of the contract should occur prior to commencement of any work on site. The contract for the remedial work is a binding and enforceable agreement between the property owner (the Employer) and the Contractor. The Insurer is not a party to the contract but usually provides the funding for part or all of the agreed cost of the work being undertaken. It is always preferable to sign a formal contract document. If not, a letter of acceptance must be sent to the Contractor, preferably by the Insured. Alternatively, this can be written by the Expert on behalf of the Insured with their express authority, to appoint the Contractor to carry out the work. Any omissions or additions should be made clear at this stage if the acceptance is not in accordance with the tender. If a formal contract document is not signed, then the letter of acceptance and its terms must be formally accepted by the Contractor, including reference to any standard form of contact as the basis of this specific contract. Letters of intent should invariably be avoided. In the past it has often been the case that a Contractor submits a quotation based on a schedule of work, a letter of instruction is issued by the Expert on behalf of the Insured, and the Contractor starts work. In such instances no other formal documentation existed. This practice is not recommended. A formal contract should be used. The majority of contracts are carried out under the umbrella of the J.C.T. 1998 Minor Building Works Form10.3 or alternatively the ICE Minor Works Form10.4. Occasionally a Form of Minor Works Contract is formally drawn up and signed by both parties. It is certainly advisable that one of the conventional forms of building contract should be formally signed. This ensures that all necessary issues are properly addressed. This should be recorded as being a condition in any formal exchange of letters of appointment. The Insured should be able to rely upon the advice of the Expert as to the appropriate contract to be used and the terms to be included within it. The Insured may, of course, obtain alternative advice if they are prepared to meet the additional cost of such advice.
Condition survey/photographic records
Terms of payment
In the past, Insurers have normally paid monies to the Insured who in turn should pay the Contractor. This procedure has caused a lot of problems and the use of a direct payment mandate is now universally accepted by Insurers. The Contractors direct payment mandate should be presented for signature by the Insured at this meeting. By signing this form the Insured permits the Insurers to make those interim and final payments certified by the Expert directly to the Contractor. This gives the Contractor confidence that fair payment for properly completed work will be forthcoming and that there will be no abnormal delays in payment. Payments should be made to the Contractor within the period stated in the contract. This arrangement invariably improves the smooth running of the contract for all parties. As well as the Contractor, the Expert is entitled to fair payment for their professional services. The Experts Fee may also be subject to a mandated arrangement with the Insurers. Payment procedures should also be agreed before the work commences, or, if possible, even before the design work is started. Interim certificates and payments should be processed at intervals stipulated in the contract (usually monthly) to enable the Contractor to maintain a reasonable cash flow. Payment periods should be stated but these should not exceed four weeks. The Expert should clarify this point with the Contractor and obtain their agreement. In practice, these certificates are normally sent directly to the Insurer or Loss Adjuster by the Expert and the existence of a mandate facilitates this procedure. The property owner/Insured should be provided with a copy of all certificates. Upon completion of the contract, the final account should be processed promptly and the Contractor should expect to be paid promptly following certification by the Expert. Should there be any dispute then, and only then, should the appropriate agreed amount of disputed money be withheld whilst the
108
The Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999

The Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 applies, in England and Wales, to contracts entered into after 11 May 2000. It enables third parties to enforce a term of a contract if either the contract expressly provides for this or if the contract purports to confer a benefit upon them. However, conIStructE Subsidence of low rise buildings 2nd edition
tracts may be written in such a way as to explicitly exclude the conferment of third party rights. At the time of publication it is not clear how this Act will affect contracts relating to work associated with subsidence and it is recommended that specialist legal advice is sought.
10.3.7 Project management of the contract on site

The Contractor is responsible for issuing the appropriate Building Regulation Notices to the Local Authority at the required stages. The Local Authority must be kept advised as to all aspects of the works which fall under their control. A schedule of dates for inspection of the works should be agreed with the Contractor at the commencement of the work so that due notice is given to all parties. Full liaison with the Insured should be maintained at all times, whether they remain in the property or vacate it. If they vacate, then an exchange of addresses, telephone numbers and contact times is essential. Cleanliness and protection of the property, including the external landscaping, paths, driveways, etc. is essential. Failure by the Contractor to protect such areas will require reinstatement of any items which have been damaged or contaminated as a result of the works. All parties in the process must be aware that subsidence remedial work is essentially repair rather than new works, therefore different expectations will apply. As with any repair, blending, matching and marrying-in of repaired and reinstated elements with original untouched elements has to be carried out carefully but will never be perfect. It should not be expected that the repairs and reinstatements will be camouflaged to the extent that they will be undetectable and that perfection in terms of line, level and finish will be achieved. The work involved in the repair of the property usually divides itself into two separate sections. Work in the ground frequently the owner is not concerned personally about this work and the Expert normally liaises the Contractor on the owners behalf. Work above ground and cosmetic repairs invariably it is at this stage that the owner, i.e. the Insured, understandably takes greatest interest. It may be at this stage that some friction can arise as to the expectations of what is required if this has not been adequately explained and agreed at the pre-contract stage and/or the pre-contract meeting. The Expert should project administer the contract fairly and firmly between the parties.
made promptly and certainly within seven days. A site instruction duplicate book is very useful in this respect. It is sometimes the case that the ground conditions encountered are not the same everywhere as those identified in the site investigation report. Even when a competent report has been prepared, it is, of its very nature, a record of examinations of the ground at a number of individual sample locations. Ground conditions may be worse elsewhere. The ground water conditions may alter if the works are being undertaken at a different time of the year from the date of the site investigation. This may cause variation to the contract works for which additional payments might reasonably be requested by the Contractor. When delays occur due to problems in the ground, notification in writing should be sent promptly to the Expert by the Contractor advising of any difficulties, why they have occurred and any possible implications for the contract. Where large cost implications arise due to unforeseen or unspecified work being required, an early resolution of such matters is essential and the Insurers, or Expert, should be informed promptly. From a practical point of view delays will invariably occur unless the Expert has been delegated authority to agree such matters. Equally the Insurer must react promptly to problems of this nature properly notified to them by the Expert. It is essential to establish the extent and cost of any extra work as soon as possible and who is to pay for it.
10.3.9 Work above the ground

This is the stage of the contract where problems and frustrations can arise for all parties under the heading of interpretation of what is required or to be expected of the Contractor. Firm administration of the contract by the Expert is required this is essential to the Contractor. The Expert should, when requested, promptly provide the Contractor with clear directions as to what is required under the contract. If not previously explained to the Insured, a meeting should be held to agree the extent and standard of the cosmetic works through to completion. Insurers or their representative should be in attendance at this meeting, as to all intents and purposes it is they who approve the expenditure on such cosmetic works. On completion of the structural works and the attendant cosmetic repairs/reinstatement, and prior to decoration, the Contractor is expected to sweep out the property, clean off the paths and generally tidy up ready for redecoration. This sweep out is expected to be a builders clean and the Contractor should not be expected to carry out a domestic standard spring clean. On completion of the total works, contract cleaners are sometimes employed to finish the cleaning, but this is usually done by the householder.
If, during the course of the contact, the Expert is not satisfied with any aspect of the work being carried out by the Contractor, the Contractor should immediately be informed in writing and asked for a prompt reply as to the action proposed to rectify the matter. The Contractor is entitled to receive prompt payment of certified invoices (see 10.3.5). In turn Experts, Loss Adjusters and Insurers have an obligation to process them promptly. Contractors frequently complain that interim payments are unreasonably delayed because of the casual attitude of one, or more, of these parties. The Contractor also relies on prompt instructions from the Expert. The owner should be encouraged to read and understand the contract they sign. The Expert should explain to him all the salient points. It is outside the scope of this Guide to discuss the terms of the contract in detail. Reference should be made to the appropriate forms of contract
10.3.10 Decoration
It is often necessary to carry out decorative repairs to a building that has suffered from subsidence and/or heave, whether or not it has been underpinned. Sometimes it is necessary to carry out a whole-house redecoration contract, but this is rare. Insurers may look upon excessive redecoration as betterment and not provide funds to cover this, but expect it to be paid for by the Insured. That said, the likely extent of decorative repairs is often difficult to assess at pre-tender stage. Therefore in the majority of instances a provisional sum is included in the estimate for the works to cover the decorative repairs deemed necessary following stabilisation or underpinning works. This sum should be realistic and fairly represent the full extent of the work likely to be required. The Contractor that is executing either the underpinning or superstructure repairs, or both, has an obligation to see that existing decor, fittings and the fixtures are adequately protected. A small degree of further deterioration of existing decorations during the course of the works is tolerable, but negligent damage caused by the Contractor is not. If this occurs, the Contractor should be expected to contribute appropriately to reasonable redecoration costs. At an appropriate point during the contract, (usually upon
10.3.8 Work in the ground

The Expert usually deals with the queries as they arise during the day to day running of the project. During this stage of the work the Expert must be prepared to visit the site at relatively short notice and, if necessary, to make decisions promptly whilst on site. Delays can cost money. Exchanges of confirmatory letters between the Expert and Contractor recording variations to the contract should be
109
completion of the underpinning stage but before full-scale superstructure repairs commence) an assessment of the decorative repairs required should be made and agreed, particularly with the Insured. The extent and standard of decorative repairs are often particularly emotive issues and an important part of the project management of any subsidence claim is to make all parties aware, before the work commences, just how the finished article will look. If, at this stage, the Insured decides to have improvement works carried out to the decor during the contract works, e.g. upgraded papers, paints and other finishes, then Insurers will normally require a financial contribution to be made by the householder or owner, equal to the difference in cost between normal reasonable rectification to the presubsidence damage standards, and the Insureds required improved standards. In other words, the Insured pays the difference between the two. Another issue that must be highlighted in this section is related to the execution of the decorative repairs by the owner, or the owners choice of decorator. It is sometimes the case that the decoration is taken out of the main contract and the Insured is allowed to deal personally with this aspect of the remedial works. In exceptional circumstances it may be considered as an item allocated to offset part or all of the excess contribution required to be paid by the Insured. Alternatively, the Contractor could be asked to carry out the decoration work in addition to the main contract, at which stage a firm price should be submitted once the extent of the work required is known. It is usual for a separate decorating Sub-Contractor to undertake this work, whether employed by the householder or the Contractor. If employed by the Contractor, a percentage will be added by the Contractor to the decorator's account to cover normal profit and attendance by the Main Contractor. As with all other Contractors, the decorator expects and is entitled to be paid promptly. It is also worth noting that smaller decorating firms often expect to be paid immediately on completion of the job. This is another good reason for allowing the householder to look after this part of the works which, if necessary, can be carried out at a later and more convenient date.
Adequacy are to be issued, then these become due immediately upon full payment, with each party being separately responsible for issuing their own appropriate documents in the agreed terms once they have been paid.
10.4 Health & safety matters relating to remedial works contract

There are a number of Regulations governing health and safety matters as they apply to building contracts. All parties have some degree of responsibility for compliance with the appropriate Regulations. For activities associated with subsidence rectification it may be necessary to comply with various regulations including: Health and Safety at Work, etc. Act 197410.5. Construction (Health and Safety Welfare) Regulations 199610.6. Provision of Use of Work Equipment Regulations 199810.7. Lifting Operations and Lifting Equipment Regulations 199810.8. Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 199210.9. Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations 199510.10. Control of Substances Hazardous to Health 199910.11.
10.3.11 Final completion

One or more meetings should be convened during the latter days of the contract so that the Insured can confirm that the work has been carried out to their satisfaction and if not, why not. This should not however, interfere with the impartial administration of the contract by the Expert if he disagrees with the Insured. In order to speed up the final payment aspect of the contract, a final inspection should be arranged by the Expert with the Contractor and the Insured as soon as possible. The Insured, Insurer, or Loss Adjuster as well as the Expert should be present. The owner should expect to sign an acceptance form following the final inspection. By signing this form the owner confirms their acceptance of the works to the Insurers, but the wording of the form should not reduce or remove the legal rights of the owner to pursue any reasonable additional aspect of the claim which may subsequently come to light, nor should it affect their rights in law as regards any of the other parties involved. It should only be an acceptance in principle that the works appear complete to the Insured. The Insured and the Expert should check the wording carefully. Any minor items of unfinished work still required should be recorded by the Expert at the final meeting. But the acceptance form should not be signed by the owners if any works remain outstanding which cannot be done within the retention money stipulated in the contract, should the Contractor fail to complete these final minor items. The acceptance form and final payment will probably take about two to four weeks to be cleared by the Insurer. If during the defects liability period of the contract, any works come to light which have not been properly completed by the Contractor, then they must be attended to during this period. If any guarantees, warranties or Certificates of Structural
110
Of these and of particular note is the Construction (Design and Management) Regulation 199410.12 commonly known as CDM. Where subsidence works are being carried out on behalf of a company or corporate body, e.g. an Insurer, or it involves more than 30 days work or will involve more than 500 man hours, or involves any demolition work then CDM Regulations apply. Furthermore all design done for the purposes of construction, regardless of location of work, days worked, or man hours, fall within the scope of the CDM Regulations. With the exception of duties always applicable to designers, because of the limited number of people involved and short duration of the works, it is unlikely that the CDM Regulations will apply to the majority of subsidence remedial works, unless the work also involves the demolition of a substantial part of the building. Where the CDM Regulations apply, they require that the works be notified in advance to the HSE (this includes projects carried out for domestic householders even though only the designers duties under CDM are applicable in these cases). The CDM Regulations require that certain key appointments are made and details of the responsibilities of these appointees should be understood. Companies may, depending on their position in relation to the work, have one or more of the statutorily defined roles in the following list: Client Planning Supervisor Designers Principal Contractor Contractor
The posts of Planning Supervisor and Principle Contractor are required to be by appointment of the Client. The designated duties of each of the five roles are clearly defined and this information along with guidance10.13 is available from the Health and Safety Executive. Information on all other Health and Safety-related Regulations including information on occupational health is available from the Health and Safety Executive. These legal requirements should be understood by all parties to the process and should be incorporated within the contract. Clearly Regulations are constantly reviewed, updated and changed, therefore any further information should be obtained from the Health and Safety Executive.
10.5 The Housing Grants Construction and Regeneration Act 1996

Consideration may need to be given to the requirements of The Construction Act 199610.14. The Construction Act does not apply to contracts between a Contractor and a residential owner/occupier. Thus, the Contractor on an underpinning project for a domestic residential owner/occupier is not bound by the Act. However, all other construction-related contracts are bound by the Act. Therefore, although the Main Contractor may be exempt in the above-mentioned situation, any contract they may have with a sub-contractor will be bound by the provisions of the Act. All other construction operations including underpinning and superstructure repairs for non-residential domestic occupiers are caught by the Act. The main provisions of the Act relate to prompt payment and the right to refer a dispute arising under the contract for adjudication.
the Building Regulations, but there is no limitation to the application of the Regulations as to whether any enhancement or improvement of the foundations is notifiable or simply traditional underpinning. Furthermore Regulation 4(2)(a-c) requires that building work shall be carried out so that after it has been completed, it complies with the relevant requirements of Schedule 1 or, where it did not comply with any such requirement, is no more unsatisfactory in relation to that requirement than before the work was carried out. This is more commonly known as the adverse effects requirement. Further requirements (C3) relate to the resistance of the passage of ground moisture to the interior of the building and damage to the fabric of the building, which could be prevented by subsoil drainage, and resistance to the passage of moisture to the inside of the building (C4). The original compliance with these requirements could be adversely affected by underpinning or remedial works to the foundations and thus be a contravention of Regulation 4.
10.6 Building Regulations matters

10.6.1 Scope of the regulations
The scope and basis of the Building Regulations are dealt with in Appendix F which should be referred to for greater detail. The following details relate to England and Wales unless otherwise stated.
10.6.4 Scottish regulations

The scope and the basis of the Building Regulations as applicable to Scotland are dealt with in Appendix F.2.
How to ensure compliance with the regulations

By compliance with the relevant standards set out in the supporting Technical Standards By conforming with provisions which are stated in the Technical Standards to be deemed to satisfy the relevant standards, or By any other means which can be shown to satisfy the relevant standards
10.6.2 How to ensure compliance with the Regulations

Since January 1997 Building Control services can, in addition to Local Authorities, be undertaken by Corporate or Individual Approved Inspectors, as well as the NHBC, but whereas the Local Authority and NHBC can undertake all types of building control, the Approved Inspectors can only undertake work on commercial buildings. Details of Approved Inspectors are available from the Construction Industry Council. If an Approved Inspector, or the NHBC are used, the parties need to enter into a contract with them in respect of their services. In the case of using a Local Authority, the submission may be by Building Notice or Full Plan approval. The former permits a start within 48 hours of service, but details will be required, and the work checked on site, by regular inspection to ensure compliance. The latter allows for a full check of the submitted details which when approved and built to constitute compliance, this work will also be inspected on site. A certificate of compliance is usually issued upon satisfactory completion.
To satisfy the Regulations the design, materials and methods of construction must therefore be at least to the standards set out in the Technical Standards. Part A of the Technical Standards gives information on the general application of the Regulations and provides: a full list of defined terms used in both the Statutory Instruments and Technical Standards instructions of the interpretation of references to other published standards a complete extract of Regulations are applied generally covering: exempted buildings fixtures not requiring a Building Warrant limited life buildings classification of buildings by purpose occupancy capacity rules of measurement, and means of compliance and a set of the Schedules of the Statutory Instrument essential to interpret and apply the Regulations.
10.6.3 Building regulations as they apply to foundations and underpinning

The requirements for foundations, and other structural elements of a building are contained in the following extracts from Part A of schedule 1 of The Building Regulations 199110.15. LOADING: The building shall be constructed so that the combined dead, imposed and wind loads are sustained and transmitted by it to the ground safely and without causing such deflection or deformation of any part of the building, or such movement of the ground as will impair the stability of another building. GROUND MOVEMENT: The building shall be constructed so that the ground movement caused by swelling, shrinkage or freezing of sub soil, or landslip or subsidence (other than subsidence arising from shrinkage), in as far as the risk can be reasonably foreseen, will not impair the stability of any part of the building. There is specific reference in Regulation 3(1)(f) to underpinning of a building being notifiable work for the purposes of
Building Regulations as they apply to foundations and underpinning

This is explained in Part C of the Technical Standards, which is to ensure that the structure of a building is safe, and listing the criteria that are relevant in all cases: loading properties of materials structural analysis details of construction safety factors workmanship, and the nature of ground.
This notes that loads used in calculations must allow for possible dynamic, concentrated and peak load effects that may occur. There is no specific requirement relating to underpinning,
111
10.6.5 The scope of the regulations (Northern Ireland)

The scope and basis of the Building Regulations as applicable to Northern Ireland are dealt with in Appendix F.3.
How to ensure compliance with the regulations

The Building Regulations are the mandatory requirements to be complied with regarding the design and construction of relevant buildings, and the method chosen to demonstrate compliance is open for choice to the applicant or their agent. District councils will most probably for assessment purposes benchmark alternative or innovative proposals against the deemed to satisfy documents named within the regulations. It is to be noted that these documents are not regulations in themselves and therefore do not set mandatory requirements. They do however indicate methods and standards of construction which, if followed, demonstrate compliance with regulation requirements and consequently cannot be challenged by district councils.
Scheme is for a period of 10 years from completion of the works. Clearly this only comes into effect if a member company ceases to trade. Member companies, whilst continuing to trade, deal with their own defects. However, in addition to the issue of the financial substance behind the guarantee, the terms of it need to be looked at carefully. They will rarely reflect the Contractors legal and contractual obligations but usually qualify and limit their liability. In consumer contracts, certain legal rights can not validly be limited or excluded, but in other cases the terms of these guarantees must be looked at to ensure they are expressly without prejudice to other rights. If they are not, and they emanate from the Contractor, they should probably be rejected. In the few known cases when such contractors have had to reinstate allegedly defective work, it appears to have been adequately attended to by the specific Contractor involved.
The Regulations as they apply to foundations and underpinning

Building work means the erection of a building, the structural alteration or extension of a building (including work in connection with the making of a material change of use) or the provision of a service or fitting. There is no specific definition for work relating to the underpinning of a building within the Northern Ireland regulations such work will tend to be considered under Regulation A7 Applications to alterations and extensions. Building work shall be carried out so that it complies with the relevant requirements of the regulations. The requirements for foundations and other structural elements of a building are contained in the principal regulations, as amended by the Building (Amendment) Regulations (NI) 199910.16.
10.8 Certificate of Structural Adequacy

The following procedure is proposed and should result in a more meaningful assurance being given in the form of a Certificate of Structural Adequacy from the Expert, particularly when no insurance-backed guarantee is available: The Expert chosen to carry out the Investigation should decide what remedial works, if any, are required. If no major works are necessary, a Certificate of Structural Adequacy can be issued by the Expert at this stage. If major remedial works are required, the Expert and Contractor selected to undertake the work should be experienced and competent in the services and type of work involved. The Expert should design the remedial works within the extent of the information available from the investigations. The Contractors invited to tender, including the one eventually selected to undertake the work, should be chosen because of their known competence or experience of the type of work required. The Expert should carry out site inspections at sufficiently representative intervals throughout the contract in order to monitor that the Contractor is generally complying with the specification. The Expert should require the Contractor to rectify any unsatisfactory work which he detects, prior to issue of the Certificate.
10.7 Guarantees
The majority of specifiers of underpinning ask for guarantees to be provided by the Contractor. During the 1980s and early 1990s this was largely driven by the Lenders via their Valuation Surveyors. Latterly this appears to have become the requirement of conveyancing Solicitors on behalf of prospective purchasers. Guarantees provide perceived comfort and a feeling of security. However, unless insurance-backed, these guarantees are only as good as the quality and stature of the company issuing them. They will rely solely on the company continuing to trade profitably during the term of the guarantee. Guarantees have been provided for periods of up to 30 years. However, latterly, guarantees of 10 years have become the norm, largely mirroring the guarantee period provided by major housing structural warranties such as the NHBC Buildmark Warranty. In practical terms 10 years has now generally been acknowledged as a suitable period, as it is likely that if a problem occurs it will manifest itself within the 10 year period and usually within 35 years. In recent years the building industry has earned an unenviable reputation for having a greater number of company failures than the national average, thus even the well intentioned firm which issues a guarantee, may not be in business in 10 years time, let alone 30. The sizes of companies carrying out underpinning work range from the larger national companies to small locallybased companies. However, size is not a measure of quality or stature. It is noted that the Association of Specialist Underpinning Contractors has an Insurance Backed Guarantee Scheme in place which essentially takes over the guarantee cover if a member company ceases to trade. There may be a modest one-off premium charge for this cover. A typical guarantee is shown in Appendix D. The Insurance Backed Guarantee
Upon completion of the works, it should be possible for the Expert to issue the property owner with a Certificate of Structural Adequacy for the area of the property which has been subject to remedial works. Such a certificate would not be a warranty or guarantee, but it would be a considered professional opinion by an Expert. It would not apply to the cosmetic work of re-pointing, re-plastering, decoration, etc., but only to the major structural work which contributed directly to the stability of the building, such as the underpinning itself, any tying into the structure of main walls, etc. The Certificate and any accompanying drawings, etc. will state (see suggested Certificate in Appendix C): The name of the owner and address of the property. The damage which the property sustained in general terms. The cause of the damage as established by investigation. The property stabilisation measures (if required). The remedial works undertaken to the property.
The Certificate will confirm: that the Contractor who undertook the underpinning works was, to the best of the knowledge of the Expert, competent to do the type of work undertaken.
112
that the Expert has used professional skill and care to design the works and also that Building Regulation approvals were obtained for the work (copy documents to be given with the certificate). that where the Contractor designed the underpinning works, that the Expert had reviewed the adequacy of the design. that the Expert monitored the works during the course of the contract and was satisfied with observations at the times of the visits.
The owner should be provided with a final set of as built drawings and a copy of the specification along with the Certificate of Structural Adequacy as these should record and confirm the extent and nature of the remedial works undertaken to the foundations of the property. This does not diminish the legal rights of the owner to pursue any party for defective work. The issue of the Certificate of Structural Adequacy should be the last step in the contract after all works have been completed and all amounts agreed, certified and paid. This procedure is recommended to those interested in having some confirmation as to the extent and standard of the work undertaken.
References
10.1 10.2 10.3 10.4 10.5 10.6 10.7 10.8 10.9 10.10 10.11 10.12 10.13 10.14 10.15 10.16 JCT Agreement for Minor Building Works 1998 (with amendment 1: 1999) Party Wall, etc. Act 1996 JCT 80 Minor Works Form ICE Conditions of contract Minor Works: 2nd edition Health and Safety at Work, etc. Act 1974 Construction (Health and Safety Welfare) Regulations 1996 Provision of Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998 Lifting Operations and Lifting Equipment Regulations 1998 Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1992 Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations 1995 Control of Substances Hazardous to Health 1999 Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 1994 Construction (Design and Management) ACOP Housing Grants Construction and Regeneration Act 1996 Part II The Building Regulations 1991 Building (Amendment) Regulations (NI) 1999
113
114
Chapter 11 Research & future activities

11.1 General 11.1.1 Activities identified in 1994 as requiring attention 11.1.2 Research 11.2 Particular research topics 11.2.1 Root barriers 11.2.2 BRE research into desiccation of clay soils 11.2.3 HORTlink project Controlling water use of trees to alleviate subsidence risk 11.2.4 Soil rehydration 11.2.5 Mining subsidence 11.2.6 Tolerance of structural movement 116 116 116 116 116 116 116 117 117 117
115
11 Research & future activities

11.1 General
When preparing the first edition of the Guide, it became clear that a number of related aspects required further research or consideration. It was thought useful to give some suggestions of the topics which were thought to require further research and consideration. Many of those previous suggestions have received some attention during the last 6 years, but subsidence is a topic which is continually developing and hence the relevance of the previously mentioned topics are in many respects the same today as they were in 1994. Arboricultural research into water use by trees considering species, genotype and geographical region.
11.2 Particular research topics

11.2.1 Root barriers
This is still a subject which deserves further research and it is not known whether it is receiving any attention. This new edition of the Guide gives guidance on the topic but the subject still merits attention. Where trees grow in close proximity to buildings on clay soils, root barriers have occasionally been used in an effort to prevent foundation movement. The material used for the barrier can include interlocking steel sheet piling, in situ concrete, geotextiles and coated polythene. The physical penetration of most materials by the growth of roots should not normally be a problem. However, it is the installation of root barriers that can lead to problems. Further advice on the whole subject of root barriers would be useful.
11.1.1 Activities identified in 1994 as requiring attention

Development of a code of practice for the handling of subsidence insurance and an arbitration process for the resolution of disputes Although the Guide has become the nearest thing to a code of practice, no independent arbitrational service has been set up. It has been found that existing procedures for complaint resolution (see 2.2.2) including the insurance ombudsman, have generally proved satisfactory. Agreement in the insurance market regarding the handling of insurance claims spanning a number of policies This has substantially been achieved. Education of Lenders and Insurers so that they understand that properties do not become valueless because of minor cracking, i.e. an appreciation of the genuine implication of possible structural defects on the value This has probably proved to be the most difficult objective, but the Guide has substantially assisted in achieving this outcome. Unfortunately it is not easy to change entrenched views. They cannot be changed by compulsion, only by persuasion. Substantial success has occurred but this is an ongoing process. Development of a method to permit prompt dissemination of technical information which might be gained from building problems, anonymously if it is subjudice A joint Working Party of the Institution of Structural Engineers and the Institution of Civil Engineers is currently considering the possibility of establishing a confidential reporting system for the construction industry.
11.2.2 BRE research into desiccation of clay soils

In the first edition of the Guide we recommended that this subject be comprehensively investigated. Our previous comment was as part of a comprehensive study of foundation performance, the Building Research Establishment is monitoring the behaviour of various types of foundation at a London Clay site in Kent. Measurements are being made in open ground and in an area containing some large Lombardy Poplars. Observations at the site have confirmed that away from the trees, ground movements are largely restricted to the soil within 1m of the surface. Monitoring of soil moisture contents near trees through the winters of 1988 and 1989 resulted in cumulative moisture reductions and associated long-term settlements. BRE are continuing their observations at their research site, including the study of the effects of soil rehydration following tree removal.
11.2.3 HORTlink project Controlling water use of trees to alleviate subsidence risk
We are pleased to say that a major new research project is being undertaken in a five year study to better understand the water uptake of trees and its control by pruning in relation to building subsidence claims. The project is being jointly funded 50% by the Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions and 50% by the Project Consortium to the tune of 550,000 over the five years. The collaborating organisations who make up the consortium for the project come from a variety of backgrounds. They are: Horticulture Research International The University of Newcastle upon Tyne The Loss Prevention Council The Association of British Insurers The Arboricultural Association Dr P. G. Biddle Delta-T Devices Ltd. East Mailing Trust for Horticulture Research
11.1.2 Research
The following 8 items were given in the original guide as possible research proposals. They continue to be worthy of attention. A number are receiving such research attention: Problems associated with pre-used or contaminated land. Continuing examination of building problems and dissemination of information, particularly for new materials and procedures. The continuing relevance of different building defects and their significance. Investigation into the natural elasticity of buildings including the tolerance of different materials to movement. Soil injection with chemicals to stabilise very shrinkable clay. Investigation of the relationship between existing domestic ground floor slabs and mini-piles installed to provide support, particularly with regard to pile spacing, floor slab thickness, slab reinforcement, etc. Techniques of improvement of the bearing capacity of fills.
Horticulture Research International will be undertaking the field work. This will initially be done on young trees at East Malling, identifying measuring procedures for establishing leaf surface areas of different species. New techniques will be applied for determining water use of different leaf types under various conditions, and then a comparative study will be made of how different crown manipulations or prunings affect the water uptake of particular species and for how long.
116
These investigations would establish first principles in an area of work where it is internationally acknowledged there are no comparable studies or data available.
11.2.4 Soil rehydration

At the time of the publication of the original guide in March 1994 proposals were currently being looked into for the rehydration of desiccated clay soils involving the introduction of a system of probes terminating in artificial rootlets set within the ground and linked by a system of small-bore pipes. The system was to be connected to a mains water supply and allows rehydration of the ground. The system sought to rehydrate the whole desiccated zone back to the natural prevailing soil moisture profile within a period of, say, six months. This hoped to compress into a few months a time scale of 15 or more years over which heave can take place following tree removal. It was appreciated at the time that the rehydration systems required refining so that it could address more exactly the equilibrium moisture profiles of natural unaffected soils. This ingenious suggestion appears to have proved too difficult to achieve in practice and little has been heard of it since the original suggestions were made. Further research may well be justified.
11.2.5 Mining subsidence

In the first edition of the Guide Appendix A dealt with mining subsidence and that Appendix is again contained in this edition. It was prepared by Professor G. S. Littlejohn of Bradford University. It was also observed that all buildings which suffer damage in areas of mining subsidence, and to a lesser extent those which do not, are potential sources of information on which improved design techniques could be based. Further observations of building performance and better access to existing records, including related damage, should lead to a closer correlation between predicted and real behaviour in the future. International co-operation in such work would be valuable. Since current damage criteria may seriously underestimate or overestimate the degree of damage, improved guides to acceptable damage levels related to building type and use are required. A better classification of building types would facilitate correlation of case records. The above comments are still relevant. It is not known that anything is being done to progress the suggestions, but they are of undoubted relevance to both national and international interests and we recommend that efforts be made to progress the suggestions.
11.2.6 Tolerance of structural movement

Reference has been made in 1.2.2 to the tendency of modern structures to be built with more brittle materials than has historically been the case. Research may be justified into determining the factors that affect the user tolerance to structural movement/deformation. Superstructure repair techniques are a continuingly developing field, see 9.6.1.
117
118
Appendix A Mining subsidence

A.1 Introduction A.2 Coal mining subsidence A.2.1 Introduction A.2.2 Factors affecting mining subsidence A.2.3 Estimation of subsidence A.2.4 Surface damage A.2.5 Ground movement due to old coal workings A.2.6 Geometry of mine shafts A.3 Metalliferous mining subsidence A.3.1 General A.3.2 Typical surface mining related features A.3.3 Investigation of metalliferous mining subsidence 120 120 120 121 122 124 125 126 126 126 126 128
119
Appendix A Mining subsidence

A.1 Introduction
Many areas in Great Britain have been affected by past mining and mineral extraction. Construction projects are undertaken throughout the country in such areas and, in the past when less control was exercised by Local Planning Authorities on development in mining areas, buildings were erected without precaution against the possibility of subsidence from old mining features. The hazards to the performance of structures from past mining activity and mineral working are generally hidden, and their effect on the performance of structures can be dramatic. There are many sources of information on historical and contemporary mining in the British Isles. Many references relate to specific areas of the country, for example the work by DinesA.1 that describes in much detail the history of the metalliferous mining in the South-West. A more general study, however was undertaken in 1990 by Arup GeotechnicsA.2 that reviewed and reported on mining instability in Great Britain. The study was extensive and identified five mineral types with which mining features could be related: Metalliferous (non-ferrous) ores. Rocks such as sandstone and limestone. Coal and its associated minerals (e.g. fireclay). Iron ore outside coal fields. Evaporites.
Each type represents a grouping of minerals in which similarities of geological occurrence and mining methods are found. This study is an invaluable reference for those wishing to initially identify the nature and extent of mining activity in different regions of the country. The map of the British Isles shown in Fig. A.1 was prepared for the study and highlights the principal areas in which the various types of mining are found. As can be seen from the figure, and as noted previously large parts of the British mainland have been influenced by the different types of mining set out above. Given the extensive and buried nature of the hazards presented to new and existing buildings, it is essential that a thorough desk study is undertaken in order to identify the probability of structures being affected by mining features. Such a study should incorporate, at an early stage, a Mining Archive Search to identify known and recorded features associated with the mineral extraction. A desk study and search of available information will include reference to some of the more general publications (such as DinesA.1), but should also incorporate a review of specific information. This is usually found in local archives and record offices. Local specialists in mining history and methods may have built up a detailed database of mining activity related to a specific mine or source of extraction. These specialists are often an invaluable source of data and knowledge about the features which are likely to be encountered on a construction project. Mining archives can provide much detailed knowledge about the historical development of an area and there can, therefore, be a lot of data related to known mining features. Due to the nature of the mineral extraction and the way in which the various mining industries developed, the locations of many older mining features were not recorded. It is these unrecorded workings which pose the greatest hazard to the safe development of a site. It is necessary, therefore, when construction is undertaken in a known mining area to carry out not only an extensive desk study and archive search, but also a site-specific investigation using appropriate techniques. This is required to identify the exact location of unrecorded features and to provide
120
Fig. A1 Mining areas of Great Britain (From DETR Review of mining instability in Great Britain. Crown Copyright is reproduced with the permission of the Controller of Her Majestys Stationery Office)
information which is necessary for the safe design of foundations for the proposed structures. The following sections of this Appendix give a general overview of two of the principle types of mineral extraction. Coal mining subsidence is discussed first. Secondly a summary of metalliferous mining subsidence is presented. These sections are not intended to present a treatise on the two subjects, but rather an appreciation of the nature of the problems which can be encountered at sites which have been affected by past mining. There is no substitute for detailed desk study and archive search, backed up by site-specific investigation. Armed with some knowledge about the nature of the mining, however, it is easier to specify the correct scope of investigation to undertake such studies and investigations.
A.2 Coal mining subsidence

A.2.1 Introduction
Mining subsidence is the result of the action of gravity on strata rendered unstable by the withdrawal of their natural support over a sufficiently large area. The following is intendIStructE Subsidence of low rise buildings 2nd edition
ed as a very basic exposition of the technical aspects of subsidence resulting from mineral extraction, particularly coal mining. Considerable information is available in published literature and from mining authorities such as British Coal. Subsidence, starting at seam level, extends vertically and horizontally with varying time lags to the surface where disturbed ground sinks slowly at different rates until, in the course of time, stability of the whole mass is restored at a lower level. This part of the Appendix deals with subsidence due to: modern longwall mining, which is amenable to prediction and analysis pillar and stall (room) mining, which is a more traditional process used prior to the middle of the 19th century, can affect surface stability in areas of old coal workings. This method is unpredictable in terms of timing and magnitude of ground movement.
Fig. A2 Plan layout of longwall working
In the early 1900s, it was known that mining subsidence varied with the size and shape of the underground workings but no generally acceptable theory had been proposed. Since then, considerable progress towards a better understanding has been made by the recognition of basic geometrical relationships between some of the principal factors in mining subsidence, although unsolved problems remain to confuse the prediction of events in specific physical conditions. Mining procedures can be adopted to minimise surface damage as the development of surface curvatures and slopes with their associated lateral movements can be predicted with reasonable accuracy. This technique can be used to reduce subsidence damage. Structural precautions, on the other hand, have not been wholly successful and many problems remain to be tackled, especially in the field of soil-structure interaction, before structures can be adequately designed to accommodate or resist ground movements. With the accumulation of large numbers of observations in mining areas during the past 40 years, empirical rules have been established which relate surface movements to such factors as: seam thickness type of extraction, i.e. mining method, and degree of packing, if any depth of overburden width of working rate of advance.
Fig. A3 Plan layout of pillar and stall workings
However, surface movements are governed also by less determinate factors which include: character of strata between seam and surface level presence of goaf (voids) in old workings above the new seam, and presence of geological faults.
Fig. A4 Basic form of subsidence profile created by longwall mining
Nevertheless, as a result of many observations, the basic principles governing mining subsidence have become widely accepted and the current concepts are now discussed. For further more detailed information reference may be made to the NCB Subsidence Engineers HandbookA.3 and LittlejohnA.4.
tion. The walls may be extracted later or left as pillars to support the roof.
A.2.2 Factors affecting mining subsidence Mining methods

There are two distinct methods of working, i.e. longwall, and pillar and stall. The longwall method shown in Fig. A.2 is now employed in the considerable majority of coal mines in Britain and consequently has been more widely investigated than the latter. In longwall mining, large areas of coal are completely extracted by a number of more-or-less broad working fronts as the mine face advances. In pillar and stall mining (see Fig. A.3), coal is extracted in rooms and only 30 to 50% may be removed in the first opera-
The subsidence diagram

In planning and recording their work, mining engineers construct graphs relating surface subsidence to extraction. The basic form of the subsidence profile created by longwall mining is shown in Fig. A.4.
Angle of draw
The extent of surface subsidence is defined by the angle of draw, measured between the vertical and the line joining the edge of the movement zone on the surface with the edge of the working (see Fig. A.5). WardellA.5 states that this angle is not constant, although a value of 35 repeats itself with a high measure of consistency in British coalfields.
121
ment has taken place and may be done by hand or, more effectively, by pneumatic, hydraulic or mechanical means. It is obvious that any material imported into the goaf must, to some extent, reduce the amount of convergence of the roof and floor and thus reduce subsidence at the surface. However, stowing cannot eliminate surface subsidence completely, since in almost all cases the roof subsides 5 to 10% of the thickness worked before any packing material can be introduced. The stowing is invariably more compressible than the coal removed, so it is impossible to prevent some degree of surface subsidence over longwall workings using present day techniques.
Width/depth ratio
For a given W/D ratio and seam thickness t, field observations have shown that the maximum subsidence is practically the same irrespective of depth but ground strains, to be discussed later, are affected by amplitude of subsidence and depth.
Geology of the overburden

In order to predict the effect of geological characteristics, an intimate knowledge of the strata comprising the overburden is essential. McTrustyA.7 has observed in the field that strong massive beds of sandstone or limestone may subside erratically in large blocks between joints, thereby leading to irregular subsidence at the surface, whereas shales and clays tend to yield more uniformly. A thick bed of sand or sandy clay may, by internal adjustment of its particles, absorb erratic displacements in underlying beds and thus reduce irregularities at the surface.
Fig. A5 Relationship of subsidence to different widths of extraction in a seam of given depth
Old coal workings

The effect on subsidence caused by the presence of goaf above the seam being worked is difficult to assess, especially where pillars, ribs and barriers have been left in old workings. Movement of the old workings is superimposed upon the normal subsidence and WhettonA.8 considers that the major problems concern prediction of the magnitude of the strain on the surface, both in position and direction. The subjects of surface stability and remedial treatment in areas of old coal workings are described in Appendix B.
The maximum angle is not developed under all mining conditions in level strata. As confirmed in practice, the smaller the width of face, the smaller the amount of subsidence produced at the surface. By considering faces of progressively reduced width, a stage is eventually reached when a longwall face is too narrow, for example a single roadway, to produce subsidence at the surface. At this point there is no subsidence and hence no angle of draw. From field observations, MarrA.6 prepared a graph of angle of draw against the ratio of width of working W to depth of working D. The graph shows that the maximum angle of 35 is produced only in undisturbed strata when W/D is 0.7 or more.
Presence of faults
The most erratic surface changes occur in the presence of a geological fault. PeateA.9 has shown that this natural plane of shear modifies the normal effects of draw and may cause abrupt changes of surface level with spectacular effect. All such problems, however, are unique in time, place and circumstance, and the appropriate answers vary with the facts.
Critical area of extraction (area of influence)

If from a surface point P (see Fig. A.5) angle of draw lines are plotted downwards on all sides, the area subtended in the seam is called the critical area of extraction. As the dimension of the critical area in any particular case depends upon the depth of the working and the value of the angle of draw, it will be appreciated that, all other things being equal, the area of influence increases with depth. The area of extraction affects the subsidence profile considerably as shown in Fig. A.5. Since point P suffers its maximum possible subsidence when the whole of the critical area is extracted, it is convenient to call this full subsidence. With supercritical areas, where the goaf (extraction) is wider than the critical value, not only does point P suffer full subsidence but other points nearby subside equally, thus forming a flat-bottomed basin. On the other hand, when a panel is worked with a width less than the critical value, this subcritical area causes a degree of subsidence less than the maximum possible and is referred to as partial subsidence.
A.2.3 Estimation of subsidence Subsidence factor

When all the effects discussed above have been taken into account, it is usual to express the estimated maximum subsidence as a fraction of the seam thickness extracted. This fraction is known as the subsidence factor. An estimate of subsidence factor can be made from Fig. A.6 for longwall workings with strip packing, provided the seam is level, the width of panel is constant and the face has advanced through the critical area for the point consideredA.10. Whilst the greatest subsidence factor is 0.84, the value may be higher for full caving but is certainly lower for solid stowing. Thus, the method is strictly limited in its scope and, even when applied to strip packing, there is no doubt that the factor is subject to variations according to local conditions.
Seam thickness
The greater the thickness of seam extracted, the greater the subsidence, and it is common practice to express subsidence as a percentage of the seam thickness. Care is required, however, to ascertain the true average seam section extracted.
Strains and displacements

When a trough of subsidence is formed as shown in Fig. A.4, the centre part subsides vertically only and the remainder moves inwards in addition to moving downwards. Observations show that the horizontal components of the movement at individual surface points in the subsiding area are not equal in amount and the differential displacements cause tensile and compressive strains according to whether
Stowage
Subsidence may be reduced by replacing the extracted coal with waste material. This operation is called stowage. The material is packed tightly in place before appreciable settle-
122
Fig. A7 Longitudinal section on line of advance of working face
Slope
An estimate of surface slope or tilt is required to determine the size of structural units and the need for expansion gaps to minimise the risk of damage. Mining engineers calculate slope between adjacent subsidence stations, 1530m apart, by dividing the differential subsidence by the horizontal distance between stations. Graphs relating slope and strain to maximum subsidence and depth and showing the effect of depth and thickness of seam on maximum slope at the surface have been produced by British Coal and, although the results are obviously limited in their application, they give the Structural Engineer a guide when determining the limiting dimensions of construction.
Fig. A6 Estimation of subsidence factor
the inner or outer point is displaced the more. The tensile strains occur mainly around the edges of a subsiding basin and the compressive strains more or less directly over the worked-out area. The horizontal displacements reach a maximum at points approximately vertically over the edge of the worked-out area and are zero at the extremities and at the centre of the subsiding basin. One phenomenon, which is a direct outcome of tensile strain, is the occurrence of breaks or fissures in the ground surface, usually at points of maximum tensile strain. These fissures tend to appear where a stratum of hard rock is present, at or near the surface, but may occur also in softer strata if the tensile strain is great. To obtain full subsidence, the width of working must be equal to the diameter of the critical area but it has been observed that the maximum strains are reached when the width is approximately equal to the radius of the critical area. As the width of working increases, the tensile strain remains constant at its maximum intensity whilst the compressive strain reduces in value and gradually spreads out into two zones when the full critical area has been worked. Under these conditions, it is commonly observed that the compressive strain tends to reduce to the value of the tensile strain, in accordance with the long-established principle that the amount of tensile strain in two zones must more or less balance the compressive strain over the goaf, whether in one or two zones. For a critical area of extraction there exists a point which is strain free and when a supercritical width is worked this strain free point becomes a zone (see Fig. A.5).
The time factor

From the point of view of surface damage, the duration of ground movement is a factor of concern to mining Engineers and Surveyors who have to deal with damage claims and repairs. It is important to know when a particular structure is likely to be initially affected, when the danger will be most acute, and when the movement will be virtually complete. Workings must be properly phased to avoid cumulative strains. A knowledge of the relationship between time and subsidence is thus essential. WardellA.12 clarified the situation by introducing the subsidence development curve. This curve (see Fig. A.8) indicates the subsidence of a given point on the surface for successive positions of a face passing through the critical area of the point. Wardell represented the time factor by the rate of advance expressed in terms of the radius of the critical area and, from eleven case histories, concluded that the development of subsidence depended primarily on the position and rate of advance of the face within the critical area.
Travelling or dynamic movements

The foregoing diagrams illustrate the final position which is reached only when the movement is complete. Development of subsidence is a three-dimensional process and as the face advances it initiates a wave of subsidence at the surface where tensile and compressive strains are experienced alternately as shown in Fig. A.7. Beevers and WardellA.11 found that the intensity of the travelling strain bears a direct relationship to the amount of subsidence and thus, for a face equal in width to the diameter of the critical area, the maximum travelling strain develops over the centre of the face, where the greatest subsidence is also developed. To right and left of the centre, both the subsidence and intensity of the travelling strains decrease. Travelling strains are greatest when the width of the advancing face equals or exceeds the diameter of the critical area. Therefore, a surface structure placed in the central zone of a supercritical area of extraction would be subjected to maximum travelling strains, although eventually it would return to a strain-free condition at a lower level than originally located.
Fig. A8 Subsidence-time relationship (modified after Wardell, 1953)
123
Conclusions
The purpose of this section has been to describe the principles of subsidence due to longwall mining, since it is essential that the Engineer who sets out to design a structure in a mining area should be familiar with the basic concepts of the problem. The subsidence prediction procedures of British Coal are based primarily upon surface and seam level survey data and, in spite of the fact that these prediction procedures are purely geometric, an accuracy of within approximately 10% is claimed in the majority of cases. In the Subsidence Engineers HandbookA.3, the empirical rules and curves quoted earlier have been employed to produce contour maps of subsidence and strain plotted in relation to position of the mine panel for different width/depth ratios. These charts have proved valuable to practising Engineers but, since the rules do not take account of geology, topography and material properties of the subsiding rock and soil masses, all of which influence subsidence development, and there is risk in applying empirically based procedures or charts too generally. Nevertheless, the accumulation of data by British Coal represents the largest systematic study of subsidence to date and all Engineers concerned with mining subsidence should be familiar with that work.
strains, is often tolerable or even unnoticeable but certain industrial processes can be upset by slight departures from the horizontal and provision for jacking is sometimes made where the possibility of levelling by underground extraction is impracticable. In general, although damage due to mining can be very severe, it appears that aesthetic damage is a prime concern. Although structurally sound, a house which leans or contains plaster cracks can cause serious distress to its occupants. For this reason a knowledge of ground strains and settlements present at the first appearance of cracks is of particular importance. Although surface subsidence due to mining is three-dimensional in character, in order to study the threshold or limiting movements in relation to degree of damage, it is convenient to consider the vertical and horizontal components separately, in spite of the fact that they occur simultaneously.
Vertical settlements
Curvature of the ground surface usually gives rise to differential settlement between parts of a structure and, unless the structure is statically determinate or perfectly flexible, the distribution of the supporting forces will be changed. This will, in turn, produce stress changes within the structure and these may ultimately produce structural damage. In ground settlement problems, the Engineer has to answer two questions: firstly, to evaluate the allowable differential settlement the structure can withstand without experiencing damage, and secondly, to predict what total and differential settlements can be expected at a given site.
A.2.4 Surface damage General aspects

The effect of subsidence on structures and services are dealt with elsewhere in this Guide. Minor effects include cracking of plasterwork and slight jamming of doors and windows. More serious effects are fractures in brickwork and distortion of steel or concrete frameworks which may lead to structural failure. Roads, railways, rivers and canals have subsided as much as 6m where a number of seams overlying each other have been worked. This has necessitated the building up of banks of rivers and canals, followed by the raising of bridges to maintain headroom. Areas of low-lying land become inundated with water to form flashes and meres, thereby detracting from land values and rendering existing buildings untenable. Backfalls may be created in pipelines due to variations in vertical subsidence. In zones of compression, the ground has been observed to form ridges some 1m wide and 200mm high, whilst in tension zones cracks of width exceeding 150mm have been measured. As a result of these horizontal ground displacements, sewers and other pipelines may be buckled and fractured and basements and manholes distorted and crushed. With regard to surface structures, it is well established that the tensile and compressive ground strains are the main cause of damage. This is confirmed by the fact that the greatest damage does not necessarily take place where maximum subsidence occurs but rather where the curvature of the subsidence basin is greatest. The degree of damage suffered by the structure, however, is not simply dependent on the intensity of compressive or tensile ground strain, but also on the dimensions and orientation of the affected structure with respect to the advancing face, the subgrade forces at the foundation interface and the flexibility of the superstructure. If the ground is being compressed at a uniform strain of, say, 1mm/m, the damage resulting from this compressive strain may be slight in the case of a small building but, if the whole of the shortening takes place at one weak place in the structure, a long building, such as a terrace of houses, may suffer severe damage. In addition to horizontal strains, tilt can also adversely affect buildings, especially tall structures such as chimneys. Here the structure may lean to such an extent that it becomes unstable. This occurrence, however, is rare and nearly always due to several seams being worked on one side only of the structure. The remedy is to work coal on the other side, although this is not always convenient. Slight or moderate tilting, unaccompanied by appreciable
124
Field observations show that the magnitude of differential settlement which will cause damage to a building cannot be predicted from a theoretical computation, since the behaviour of the building is influenced by a number of factors which are difficult or impossible to take into account in theoretical calculations such as interaction between frame and cladding, the varying rates of subsidence and the redistribution of the loads. Allowable settlements have, therefore, to be decided on the basis of experience derived from observations on similar types of structures. The second problem which the Engineer faces concerns the prediction of differential settlement at a given site. Settlements occurring as a result of mining operations are, of course, additional to settlements existing before mining operations commence. The factors affecting the estimation of magnitude and rate of subsidence have been discussed in this Appendix as well as normal settlement. It should be noted that, in addition to vertical settlements, horizontal displacements must be taken into account in connection with mining subsidence and the latter are treated in the following section.
Horizontal displacements
Ground strains at the surface arising from differential horizontal displacements are not transferred directly to the structure. The ground movements impose a force on the structure which, in turn, causes structural strain. The fact that ground strains do not reproduce identical strains on the structure sited on or in the ground was not generally appreciated by planning and mining Engineers until the late 1950s. At present, the only guide to estimating damage is based on many years of observing countless buildings and, in spite of the fact that several factors such as soil type, subgrade force and structural flexibility have not been included in the observations or in the empirical analyses, simple relationships between ground strain and damage have proved to be of value. When new extractions are planned, a fair idea can be obtained of the damage likely to be caused to overlying surface properties. Any particular precautions indicated can then be taken, whether this be in the form of modifications to the structure or to the proposed mine workings. Most buildings can withstand a certain degree of tensile or
compressive ground strain without apparent signs of damage and observations indicate that cracking of internal plaster and jamming of doors and windows tend to occur when tensile and compressive ground strains exceed between 0.40.8mm/m, respectively. These figures lead to the commonly held view that most buildings appear to be about twice as strong in compression as in tension. Compressive ground strains up to 6 mm/m have been recorded and these would, without doubt, cause severe surface damage. Ogden and OrchardA.13 compared several cases where the ground strains have been measured precisely and the structural damage has been photographed and classified according to an accepted scale of damage.
A.2.5 Ground movement due to old coal workings General

Although ground movements due to active mining may be predicted with reasonable accuracy from the empirical relationship derived by British Coal, those due to old coal workings can be assessed only on the basis of simple models of behaviourA.14, records of collapse and from experience of building performance within districts underlain by former workings. The following text has been incorporated in this Appendix to provide background information for the Engineer confronted with the problems of building development within such districts, but it must be emphasised that specialist geotechnical advice should be sought at the preliminary stage of the site study. Thousands of old mine workings have been charted in Britain, but unrecorded workings exist as legislation making it compulsory to keep plans of old workings and shafts was not introduced until 1872. These workings are largely the product of coal mining operations in the 17th, l8th and 19th centuries when coal pillars were left to support the overlying strata. It is important to recognise that old workings due to the mining of silver, lead, shale and salt also exist, and that iron minerals and refractory clays were extensively mined at the outset of the Industrial Revolution. The following text however concentrates on the major problems related to coal mining. At shallow depths, coal pillars may continue to support the overlying strata for a considerable time, perhaps several hundred years, before gradual deterioration leads to collapse of roof strata between pillars leading to the upward migration of cavities. Pillar collapse may also occur in certain circumstances. Where cavities reach the surface, local subsidence occurs, often quite suddenly. Access and air shafts associated with former mineral workings have often been partially and loosely infilled and covered such that their exact location is extremely difficult to establish. In some cases the mine shafts were completely infilled and/or sealed at the surface of the bedrock by means of a reinforced concrete slab. In many cases, however, a timber platform was erected at the surface of the bedrock and heterogeneous fill materials deposited between the platform and ground surface. With the passage of time the timbers decay, and sudden failure can be experienced in the form of local and rapid drawdown of surface materials. The disturbance experienced at ground surface by a structure due to collapse of shallow workings or old mine shafts is often related to the nature and condition of the superficial deposits. Loose water-bearing essentially non-cohesive deposits such as sands and silts maybe expected to accentuate the ground disturbance caused by shallow mineral workings in direct contrast to the relatively better ground support conditions provided by a stiff cohesive deposit such as glacial till. Serious structural failures are possible if buildings are founded above hidden unstable shafts or collapsing pillar and stall workingsA.15, A.16. However, little information has been published on the subjectA.14, A.17 and yet the coal seams in question are extensive, often underlying major urban areas created as a result of the Industrial Revolution (see Fig. A.9)A.18. These areas continue to expand and simultaneously
Fig. A9 Correlation between the development of the major conurbations and coalfield areas mined during and after the Industrial Revolution (after Price Reference A.18)
undergo central redevelopment, which may involve the construction of buildings founded over strata partially removed by mining. As workings age, they become more susceptible to collapse due, for example, to the slow but steady erosion of material in the workings by ground water. Operations on the ground surface such as piling can also affect the stability of the workings. Construction over mined areas therefore demands that caution should be observed, and more than usual care taken in site appraisal and ground investigationA.19. Reference should be made to the Institute of Geological Sciences for information concerning the geology of the district within which it is proposed to erect any structure. Reference should also be made to British Coal whose Regional Offices often possess considerable and detailed information about former coal workings, e.g. abandonment plans. Difficulties can be experienced in obtaining detailed information on the extraction of other types of minerals, particularly in the case of limestones, ironstone and metallic-type ores, and information should be sought from the Department of Energy.
Surface stability of old workings

Old coal workings are prone to collapse, and such collapse may occur sporadically on a site over a period of time and at any time after mining is abandoned. The collapse of old workings is not necessarily dependent on surface load being applied by foundation construction (see Fig A.10), although such engineering activity may have a marked detrimental effect on the conditions leading to instability. Uncollapsed or partially collapsed workings, if dated before 1872, are not likely to be recorded. Even where records exist there is no guarantee of accuracy in the description of pillar and stall geometry on which the stability of the workings depends in part and neither can assumptions be made of the deterioration of the workings. At present it is impossible to predict the timing of any collapse, but a careful site investigation to assess the degree of collapse or roof convergence to date, combined with a knowl-
125
breakdown of the shaft lining, or where a thick deposit of unconsolidated material overlies the shaft, a large crater may be formed as the deposits flow into the shaft. Clearly the possibility exists that disused shafts were not efficiently filled on being abandoned. Even if their position and construction technique were faithfully recorded, the process of deterioration of the shaft fill, lining and staging can seldom be quantified. At present, no predictivity capacity exists in relation to the time, magnitude or extent of surface subsidence arising from shaft collapse.
A.3 Metalliferous mining subsidence

A.3.1 General
Fig. A10 Mine shaft collapse
edge of the mining method and general geometry of the workings, do permit an assessment of the maximum subsidence likely if total collapse occurs. The magnitude and distribution of ground strains, however, cannot be forecast with any accuracy and these can have the greatest influence on the subsequent performance of a surface structure.
A.2.6 Geometry of mine shafts Introduction

Knowledge of the shape, plan dimensions and depth of shafts is important in gauging the consequences if collapse occurs or in establishing the precautionary measures, e.g. backfilling, capping or grouting, etc. that may be required to prevent subsidence. Shapes ranged from circular and oval, square and rectangular, and while circular was the most popular in Britain, certain regions preferred square and rectangular sections. It is also useful to be familiar with the types of mine shafts since knowing the function of the shaft may make it possible to infer its proximity to other shafts or the workings.
Mine shaft fill

Old shafts will be encountered in three conditions of abandonment, i.e. completely filled, partially filled, or open. Many shafts have been only partly filled in, the fill having been placed on a staging, usually timber, within the shaft. The level for the staging varies in practice, but it is often found just below ground level or in the vicinity of a rock head. On occasions the upper shaft lining was removed so that the staging could rest upon a secure rim. Late 19th Century shafts had the timber replaced by an open grid of iron joists. Experience indicates that large objects such as mine cars or trees were thrown into many shafts to form an obstruction on which to start filling and sometimes large objects have accidentally bridged the shaft creating an obstruction for the fill. It is also noteworthy that until recently there has been no standard practice of closing off galleries and drifts, thus fill could migrate from the shaft bottom. Also no evidence exists that shows that fill was deliberately compacted when being placed. Any tendency to consolidate would be due to selfweight, leading to surface depressions.
This section presents a brief overview of metalliferous mining and its effect on building structures. It is based wholly on experience in the South West of England, although the principles may be applied to this type of mining elsewhere in Britain. The information presented in this section was obtained from practitionersA.20 in mining investigations in the region and experience gained from many years investigating subsidence related problems due to old metalliferous mining features. In addition some data has been obtained from published references on the historical mining of the area. It has been noted previously that many older buildings in mining areas have experienced problems due to subsidence. This can be related to both recorded and unrecorded workings. It is not uncommon to find old structures, which have been constructed directly over backfilled shafts, or other surface and near-surface features which are actually recorded and noted on old plans of the mines at the time they were abandoned. Some features are also noted on Ordnance Survey maps of mining areas. More often, however, mining subsidence is due to unrecorded near surface or surface workings which have been previously backfilled. With the passage of time the buildings begin to show signs of damage due to subsidence. Depending on the extent of the mining feature, subsidence damage can be superficial or progressive. Either way remedial works will often be needed, requiring knowledge of the ground conditions, and information about the geometry of the mining feature(s), and this will require some appreciation of the types of feature which are associated with the particular type of mining. The following section presents a discussion of typical surface mining related features, together with a simple schematic drawing of the various form of mining structure which can be encountered.
A.3.2 Typical surface mining related features Introduction

This section of the Appendix describes the typical early workings related to surface extraction of minerals, which lie above the deep and shallow adit elevations of metalliferous mines. Such surface features are rarely recorded and are responsible for many of the subsidence problems that are encountered in the South West of England and other parts of the country. The simple schematic view shown in Fig. A.11, (prepared by Cornwall Mining Services Ltd.), shows the typical features of early workings related to the surface, and lying above the deep and shallow adit elevations. It is these workings which are very rarely recorded. The following paragraphs describe the various features which may be encountered. The terms described below relate to mining in the South West of England. It should be noted that terminology will probably vary depending on the location of the metalliferous mining within Great Britain, with local terminology having developed with the mining itself.
Capping
Shafts that were not filled have traditionally been made secure by fencing or capping. In practice many methods of capping have been noted, including the use of abandoned haystack boilers from Newcomen engines, and brick cupolas. Until the nationalisation of the coal industry, there were few legal requirements concerning the protection of shafts.
Surface stability of old shafts

Experience indicates that loss of support from a large area of the surface may occur suddenly when abandoned shafts collapse. Where rock head is near the surface and the collapse arises from disintegration of the staging supporting the fill, the subsidence will be severe but localised. In the case of a
Early exploratory pits, trenches and tunnels

A very common feature in any mineralised area, there are often up to hundreds of early exploratory pits, also known as
126
Fig. A11 Schematic view of mine workings (Cornwall Mining Services Ltd)
costeening pits, within 1 acre of ground. They are mostly irregular in shape and variable in size, but typically roughly oval in section, and 1.5m by 0.7m to 2.5m by 1.5m, tapering with depth to a base generally within the structured rock head, and typically being between 2.0m and 4.0m deep. Stubs or very short tunnels can be present. Backfill may typically be of earth and clay, with mixed near-surface rock. The tunnels usually remain open. These pits are often found in clusters, or in rough bands following lode veins or outcrops. Occasionally, surface trenches have been cut across the trend of the lode (vein of metal ore), or more often along an outcrop to try it. The latter may be very variable in width and length, and are of similar depth to the exploratory pits, and are effectively the first phase of excavating the lodes. However, they are typically of an ovoid section, and spaced along the lode. Exploratory near-surface tunnels, driven from deep pits or very shallow shafts can be present, which often follow along or adjacent to a cross-course fault or to a lode vein, and with their base entering the structured but broken rock head horizon, resulting in their roof often lying between 1.5m and 2.5m below the surface. These mostly still partly open tunnels are typically 0.6m wide by 1.6m high.
ings took for the form of a surface quarry type lode working, or Goffan. These workings were mostly backfilled when moorland reclamation was carried out, using the adjacent waste tips of earth, clay and mine waste, together with imported materials.
Shafts
There are various types of shaft, related not so much to their function, but to the historical or technical period or phase of working, and are here discussed in a chronological sequence.
Early exploratory or trial shafts

These features generally lie in areas where either a lode had been discovered that was being followed, or traced after being lost, or where exploratory pitting or costeening had indicated lode veins. They may in their simplest form be an extension of any early pit, and may be very irregular in their shape, often tapering from a collar between 1.5m and 3.0m in diameter, down to a roughly square or rectangular section, typically 1.3m by 0.7m. Circular shafts are rare in the South West. Backfill material within these shafts is predominantly of earth material, with near-surface clay and rock. Stubs or short small section tunnels may be present very near to surface.
Early lode shafts Early lode outcrop workings

If a discovered lode was proved by the previous exploratory methods to be worth following in depth, before the use of shafts, the pits or trenches were simply deepened into often very irregular warren like workings, resulting in very deep pits and slots running into underground workings, often interconnecting between the surface workings. If a lode was very rich at surface, a near-continuous deep slot or trench would result, with no intermittent pillars remaining. Where the lode was wide, or a close group of veins was present, these workMostly following the earliest lode outcrop workings, but sometimes concurrent with them, are small- to medium-sized, roughly square or rectangular shafts, typically 1.5m by 1.5m, and 1.2m by 2.0m in cross-section, with nominal surface coning. These lie immediately along or adjacent to the lode outcrop, unless the lode is of moderate to shallow dip, in which case they lie close to the hanging wall side of the outcrop. Backfill material within these shafts is often of clean or earthy cobbles, originating from depth, but may also be of earthy, near-surface rock and clay.
127
Early adit shafts

In the construction of shallow drainage tunnels between the lode workings and an adjacent valley side or bottom, vertical shafts were sunk along the course of the tunnel to facilitate both rock extraction, and ventilation. They may typically be of rectangular section, 0.8m by 1.5m, with no significant coning, and may still be partly open, being often originally sollared by timber mostly near to surface. The early shallow adit shafts may typically be spaced at around 40m apart, the spacing increasing (often doubling or more) with increased depth. Backfill may be very variable, as these shafts have often been filled following later collapse of the timber sollar or platforms.
Later lode shafts

With the advent of steam power, mining rapidly progressed to far deeper levels than had hitherto been possible, with the need for new deep shafts. For vertical and near-vertical lodes, these may be continuations of earlier shafts on-lode, but for less steep to shallow dipping lodes, new shafts were sunk well into the hanging wall side of the lode outcrop, being vertical to the lode intersection, and then down the lode on-dip. These mostly rectangular shafts vary in size, depending on their period and type, and may typically be between 2.4m by 1.3m, and 3.5m by 1.8m. Backfill can be very variable, and may be of household or industrial rubbish, as well as mine waste. These shafts can still be open, and may occasionally be sollared near to the surface, either with a timber platform, or occasionally with arched stonework. More recently, many have been secured by mass concrete plugging, or by reinforced concrete capping, or protected by steel grids or copes.
Shaft and engine house-related features

Various pits, slots and sumps can be present within engine houses, or adjacent or near to engine houses and shafts, and are not easily described as typical features. They may occasionally be deep, and cut into the rock, and may often be stone walled against the cut sides.
Non-mining related quarries and pits

In addition to recorded pits and quarries, unrecorded pits and quarries can be present, and which may be up to several metres in depth. These can sometimes be backfilled and reclaimed.
of the known workings in an area. The desk study and Mining Archive Search are the first step in assembling sufficient information to enable a more detailed site investigation to be undertaken. The desk study should seek to identify as far as possible the nature and extent of any known and recorded features which might affect the building in question. From geological information and data, and available mining records, sections through the site can be drawn to identify the likely locations of lode outcrops. This provides a first step towards locating the possible worked or backfilled areas which might have influenced the structural behaviour of buildings in mining areas. A detailed structural inspection carried out in accordance with the methods described in the main body of the report will also provide detailed evidence about the nature of structural movement and the likely mechanisms which have affected the construction. The combination of structural inspection and desk study may provide sufficient data to be able to interpret the subsidence. Additional site-specific investigation will be needed, however, to provide conclusive proof of the nature of the features which caused the subsidence. Once information is available from the desk study, the Mining Archive Search and the structural inspection, then a more detailed site investigation may be planned. This may include trial holes, trial trenches, probe drilling or borehole drilling. Hand probing tools have been used in the past for investigative purposes, but caution should be exercised when using such methods as they can lead to erroneous results, particularly in ground containing cobbles and boulders. The use of hand probes is not recommended. A very useful development in current drilling techniques is that known as Measurement With Drilling (MWD). If this is used with borehole or air flush probe drilling, a continuous read-out is produced of all the drilling parameters. These include rate of bit rotation, penetration rate, bit pressure, torque, etc. The advantage of such techniques, particularly when using open flush holes is that they can provide excellent quality of data relating to areas in which backfilled voids are present.
References
A.1 Dines, H. G.: Metalliferous mining region of South West England Vols 1& 2, British Geological Survey HMSO 1956, 1994 reprint A.2 Arup Associates: Review of Mining Instability in Great Britain, Newcastle on Tyne, Arup Geotechnics, 1992 A.3 National Coal Board, Mining Department. Subsidence Engineers Handbook. Second edition. London: NCB, 1975 A.4 Littlejohn, G. S.: Structures liable to the effects of mining subsidence In Henry F. D. C. ed. The design and construction of engineering foundations. 2nd edition. London: Chapman & Hall, 1987. pp 739-820 A.5 Wardell, K.: Mining subsidence. I. Roy. Inst. Chart. Surv., vol. 33, 1954, p53 A.6 Marr, J. E. (1958): A new approach to the estimation of mining subsidence. Trans. Inst. Min. Eng., vol. 118, 1958, p692A.7 McTrusty, J.W. (1959): Control of mining subsidence. Colliery Engg. vol. 36, 1959, p 122 A.8 Whetton, J. T.: A general survey of the ground movement problem. The Engineer, vol. 203, 1957, p 562 A.9 Peate, I. S.: Mining subsidence, J. Inst. Mun. Eng., vol. 83, p 341 A.10 Orchard, R. J.: Recent developments in predicting the amplitude of mining subsidence, IRoy. Inst. Chart. Surv., vol. 33, 1953, p 864A.11 Beevers, C., Wardell, K.: Recent research in mining subsidence. Trans Inst Min Eng. vi 14, 1954, pp 223253
Early tin stream works

Any part of a valley alluvium or other tin-bearing superficial deposit may have been worked over in the past, and the general effects are usually of a widespread disturbance of the natural sequence of the deposit. Deeper, subsurface gravel workings are not indicated in the study area, although shallow exploratory tunnels can be present.
Surface waste tips

These may appear to be obvious, but can be present with no noticeable remaining surface signs. The materials can vary from coarse rock to fine processed sands, and often contain significant metallic ore contents. They have often been partly or wholly removed in more recent times.
Shallow adits (drainage) or exploratory tunnels

In addition to the near-surface tunnels as previously described, these mostly still partly open, near-horizontal tunnels run from the valley side or bottom, and for the first section may be very close to surface, depending of course on the valley side slope, or if the tunnel passes along the valley bottom before running into the slope. The tunnel may typically be 0.7m wide by 1.7m high. In the lowest section, an adit may well be in the form of a timbered or stone-lined and roofed cut trench, or open trench or ditch.
A.3.3 Investigation of metalliferous mining subsidence

In the general introduction to this Appendix, reference was made to the requirement for a desk study to identify the extent
128
A.12 Wardell, K. (1953): Some observations on the relationship between time and mining subsidence. Trans. Inst. Mm. Eng., vol. 113, 1953, p471 A.13 Ogden, H., Orchard, R. J.: Ground movements in North Staffordshire. Trans Inst Min. Eng. Vol. 119, 1959, p259A.14 Thorburn, S., Reid, W. G.: Incipient failure and demolition of two-storey dwellings due to large ground movements In Geddes, James D., ed, Large ground movements and structures. London: Pentech Press, 1978 A.15 Cameron, D. W. C.: Menace of present day subsidence due to ancient mineral operations, Journal of the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors, Scottish supplement, v19, n3, 1956, pp159-171 A.16 Dean, J. W.: Old mine shafts and their hazards , Mining Engineer, v26. n78, 1967, pp368-377 A.17 Littlejohn, G. S. (1979a):, Surface stability in areas underlain by old coal workings. Ground Engg. v12 n2, 1979, pp22-30 A.18 Price, D. G.: Engineering geology in the urban environment, Quart J. Eng Geol., v4, n3, 1971, p191A.19 Price, D. G., Malkin, A. B., Knill, J. L.: Foundations of multi-storey blocks on coal measures with special reference to old mine workings, Quart J. Eng Geol., v1 n4, 1967, pp271-322 A.20 Private correspondence July 1999, Cornwall Mining Services Ltd., Highburrow Lane, Wilson Way, Pool Industrial Estate, Redruth, Cornwall TR15 3RN
Bibliography
Department of the Environment. Reclamation of derelict land: procedure for locating abandoned mine shaft. London: Planning, Regional and Minerals Directorate, 1976
129
130
Appendix B Measures to minimise the effects of foundation movement

B.1 Introduction B.2 New build B.2.1 Detailed site investigation B.2.2 Desk study B.2.3 Walkover survey B.2.4 Physical investigation B.2.5 Identification of sites where special precautions are required B.2.6 Factors relevant to selection of appropriate ground improvement and foundation types B.2.7 Ground improvement methods B.2.8 Selection of foundation type B.3 Existing structures B.3.1 Factors within the property owners control B.3.2 Possible effects of excavation for adjacent construction activity on existing buildings B.4 Mining subsidence precautions B.4.1 Precautions taken during mining B.4.2 Structural considerations to minimise the effects of mining subsidence B.4.3 Consolidation of mine workings B.4.4 Shafts B.5 Treatment of site with natural cavities 132 132 132 132 132 133 133 134 134 135 138 138 140 140 141 141 142 143 144
131
Appendix B Measures to minimise the effects of foundation movement

B.1 Introduction
Potential problems should be considered at the commencement of design for any building project. Identification of site hazards prior to the construction process will help to avoid future damage and expense. The use of appropriate solutions once the risks have been assessed will minimise future problems. In the case of recently constructed properties experiencing foundation failures due to inadequate site investigation, design or construction, Insurers may seek to decline liability and the owner should be aware of this possibility. This Appendix deals with new construction and looks at ways of preventing damage caused by foundation movement. Topics covered include site investigation, the choice of appropriate foundations and some applications for the design and detailing of new structures. This Appendix also looks at the prevention of damage caused by foundation movement to existing structures. Certain measures can be taken as a form of preventive maintenance, addressing matters such as trees, landscaping and drainage.
Fig. B1 Aerial photograph used to identify the position of existing trees relative to proposed development of a clay site
mation that can be used for the study purpose include those listed below: Geological maps and memoires Soil survey of Great Britain maps and memoires, e.g. British Geological Survey Land utilisation survey of Great Britain Agricultural land classification maps Authorities Archives Ordnance Survey maps, including historical coverage British Coal, formerly The National Coal Board Hydrological maps Aerial photographs Local history publications Previous site investigation reports Statutory bodies Previous owners or users Mining archive search.
B.2 New build

B.2.1 Detailed site investigation
As indication of the site investigation process, this section has been divided into four parts: Desk study Walkover survey Physical investigation Identification of sites where special precautions are required.
The first two often run together and lead to the physical investigation when this is considered appropriate. The fourth part reviews the need for more detailed site investigation. The scope of the investigation is dependent upon several factors. These include: The size and location of the proposed buildings The variability of the ground The nature of the site Whether the information being sought is to confirm previous findings or to seek more information about suspected hazards.
A detailed site investigation should be commissioned where the walkover survey, desk study or ground assessment indicates that the characteristics of a site are not clearly defined, and are highly variable and hazardous. Examples of this type of site should include unstable sloping ground and variable fill material. The type and extent of the investigation may need to be reconsidered if unusual ground conditions are identified during the physical investigation. The expenditure of a relatively small percentage of the contract sum on the site investigation should usually save unnecessary delay and expenditure during the contract period. Any site investigation should be undertaken by a competent person with appropriate experience.
Detailed information concerning the topography, geology, previous use of land and services can be established from these sources. Reference to past Ordnance Survey maps and aerial photographs (see Fig. B1) can give an indication of changes in topography. Information that can be established includes old water courses, filled areas, the position of trees and areas from which trees have been removed. It has become fashionable that desk studies be handled from the end of a telephone to minimise time and in consequence costs. It is therefore essential that the competency of any correspondent be assessed before relying on the information imparted.
B.2.3 Walkover survey

The purpose of the walkover survey is to identify all the visible site characteristics. BRE Digest 348B.1 gives useful guidance for undertaking such a survey. The survey should seek indications as to the ground conditions of the site and surrounding area. Factors to be taken into consideration when making a site assessment include the following: Local names and signboards Locations of workings and ditches (see Fig. B2) Local knowledge Sloping ground Land instability Vegetation on and near to the site, e.g. mature bushes and trees
B.2.2 Desk study

The purpose of the desk study is to collect information on the site characteristics and its former use. The sources of infor-
132
used to measure the shear strength of the soil, thus allowing the bearing pressures to be established reasonably accurately. Other laboratory tests, e.g. as outlined in BS 1377B.3, may be required to assess the organic content, the sulphate content, the swelling pressure or suction of desiccated clay and presence of aggressive gases or chemicals. Samples should be taken as indicated in BS 5930B.4.
B.2.5 Identification of sites where special precautions are required

The ground investigation will identify such sites. Some of these may be sites susceptible to the causes of damage that are identified in Chapter 5. Others may be sites that require special precautions during excavation and construction, for example, water-logged soils and previously developed sites.
Alluvial soils
Alluvial soils and peat are likely to vary in extent and depth. There is an obvious need for a localised and fairly detailed ground investigation to avoid differential settlement. The choice of foundation type must allow for the variable nature and compressibility of these soil types.
Shrinkable clay soils

The potential for clay soil movement on a firm shrinkable clay site should be assessed and allowed for in the foundation design. Allowance needs to be made for the presence and future growth of vegetation on the site. NHBC Standards Chapter 4.2B.5 gives guidance on foundation design when building near trees on shrinkable clay soils.
Sandy and silty soils

Fig. B2 Fenland drainage ditch showing high water table
Type of ground indicated by appearance Ground water Structure below ground level Damage to surrounding structures Former and existing underground workings Contaminated ground.
With sandy and silty soils, care needs to be taken to avoid the possibility of soil erosion. Areas of concern include the disposal of surface water and the positioning of drains. Excavation below the water table can lead to severe loss of fine material. The reduction of lateral stresses acting on clay soils, e.g. by excavation, can lead to the clay absorbing water and softening.
Sloping ground
When the stability of a sloping site is in doubt, a ground stability investigation should establish the most appropriate foundation type, taking into account all possible influences. Global as well as local stability needs to be considered.
The information established can be used in conjunction with the desk study and will be of assistance when establishing the type of physical investigations required.
Fill sites B.2.4 Physical investigation

The desk study and walkover survey should provide basic information about the characteristics of the site and the nature of the ground. A decision can then be made as to whether further investigation is required. The physical investigation is used to obtain and confirm the soil types and properties. BRE Digest 322B.2 discusses the value of site investigation and the steps that should be involved as well as giving guidance on contractual matters. Before the assessment is undertaken, the preparation of an outline map is recommended as a reference for all the investigations regarding the development. Position of trial pits and boreholes should be located on a site layout plan. Ordnance Survey map references of the site are useful when relating onsite features to desk study and walkover survey information. The identification of the type of subsoil should be undertaken by an Expert suitably qualified to do this work. Methods of physical soil examination include: Trial pits Borings and hand augering Probing penetration testing Soil tests. With the filled site, a ground investigation must establish the depth, type and variability of the fill. Other factors to be considered include the: time, method and age of the filling chemical composition gas potential and possible migration from adjacent sites area of the filled ground likely effect and depth of ground water throughout the seasons potential for further consolidation.
Mines and natural cavities

Specialist investigation techniques can be used on sites where mining or natural cavities are likely to be a problem. The precautions that can be taken to avoid damage due to current mining are reviewed later in this Appendix. Treatment of old workings and natural cavities are also considered.
Granular soils
Granular soils, silts and sands may be compacted by vibrations. This effect needs to be considered when developing sites with loose granular soils. Construction techniques may require modification to prevent vibration induced subsidence.
These tests are discussed in detail in Chapter 7. The simplest laboratory tests on selected samples are index or classification tests. The results of tests assist in the categorisation of the soils. Undisturbed samples taken from cohesive soils can be
Frost heave
Frost expansion, although rare in Britain, may be a problem at shallow depths in susceptible soils such as silts and chalk.
133
This needs to be considered, especially in relation to unheated buildings and refrigeration plants.
Presence of sulphates
Sulphates occur naturally in some clay soils and may additionally be found in backfill materials. Sulphate tests will establish whether the specification for substructure concrete needs to be modified to prevent sulphate attack. Other chemicals can also have a deleterious affect on construction materials and reference to specialist advice may be required.
Presence of trees
Trees may present development problems on clay sites, and also care is required when building near trees on any soils in order to avoid damage to the tree, and further to ensure that allowance is made for the physical pressure exerted by tree roots as a result of their growth. BS 5837B.6, NHBC Standards Chapter 4.2B.5 and NJUG 10B.7 provide guidance on some of these aspects.
damage and distress, occasioned by the construction operations and also noise and pollution if occupied. An example of this is excavation which must take into account the reduced stability of existing foundations and include allowance for the effects of vibration, dewatering, lack of lateral support, etc. It is obviously important to try to anticipate any nuisance which may affect adjacent owners and occupiers. New buildings where existing trees either on the site or on an adjacent site are being retained, necessitating foundations designed to accommodate any effects from these retained trees. Existing damaged buildings whose foundations require ground works, such as underpinning, to be carried out in order to maintain building stability and/or prevent any further unacceptable foundation movements.
Previously developed sites

Sites with existing or demolished buildings can be subject to differential settlement due to filled basements and hard sports caused by old foundations. Prior to construction, existing foundations and basements should be surveyed to establish their condition and position. Measures such as grubbing out can be taken to limit differential settlement. The foundation design should take this into account in cases where it becomes impracticable to remove existing structures, e.g. bridging old foundations.
The constraints of any contract type, and especially timescales may compel a Contractor to forgo the consideration of options and place a piling contract with a sub-contractor as seeming the most expedient way to fulfill the contract obligations.
B.2.7 Ground improvement methods

Before discussing foundation types, it is worthwhile mentioning geotechnical processes for ground improvement to enhance the loadcarrying capacity and/or stability of sloping sites, fill materials, loose or disturbed granular soils, silty soils and compressible clays. These methods are generally expensive. However, other factors such as the presence of existing structures or foundations, the risk of settlement from piling vibration, or noise nuisance can make their consideration worthwhile. There may be a reduction in cost if soil conditions are such that conventional foundations can be used following the ground improvement. Several processes for carrying out ground improvements follow. In all cases, it is suggested that specialist advice should be sought before adoption. It is often prudent to check the ground after use of the improvement method to verify its adequacy.
Water
Ground water problems are not usually isolated but occur with other hazardous ground conditions, e.g. water causing collapse settlement of fill material. Founding at a level above the water table can be a solution or using a form of piled foundation through a subsoil such as saturated sand, frequently referred to as running sand. Ground water should be checked for sulphate and acidity so that precautions against concrete damage can be taken where necessary.
B.2.6 Factors relevant to selection of appropriate ground improvement and foundation types
The appropriate foundation type to suit a particular site is governed by the ability of the soils to safely carry building loads within acceptable levels of movement over the design life of the building. Other factors, not least of which is the question of cost, play a significant role in the selection process. Physical constraints, such as existing buildings or foundations on or around the site, trees and ground water, all have to be considered when selecting an appropriate foundation. Furthermore the risk of ground movements need to be assessed and only schemes that can sustain these movements should be proposed. Frequently planning consents stipulate tree planting as a condition of granting permission for a development. This is particularly true of development in urban situations where the local authority is keen to improve and regenerate an area. The planning consent will usually provide that in the event of a young tree not developing in its first two years, it will be required to be replaced. Consideration should be given at the earliest stages of a design to accommodate future tree planting so that adequate foundations are factored into the economics of construction. This will avoid expensive and time-consuming problems at a later date. In assessing the foundation type, new and existing buildings, both on and adjacent to the site (with due regard for the condition of the existing buildings) should be considered thus: New buildings on green field sites where selection will normally be made on economic grounds should only need to consider the ground related conditions. New buildings adjacent to existing buildings will need to have regard for the protection of the latter from possible
Slope stabilisation
Ground improvement techniques for the stabilisation of slopes include regrading of the slope, soil and rock anchors and land drainage techniques.
Preloading of ground
Preloading can be used to improve loose granular soils, fill materials and compressible clays. Preloading is carried out by temporarily or permanently depositing a predetermined weight of soil, rubble or building material on the site until such time as settlement has decreased to an acceptable rate. It is therefore time dependant, and frequently unacceptable due to the delays caused to construction processes. However, BRE research on preloading certain types of uncompacted fills has shown that the effect can be rapid and thus need not necessarily result in delays. Settlement in clays can be accelerated by drilling vertical drainage holes and filling them with sand, i.e. sand-wicks. This helps relieve positive pore water pressure in the clay.
Shallow compaction of granular soils

Loose or disturbed granular soils can be compacted by vibratory rolling or ramming. The effective depth of compaction by this method is normally in the order of 300mm which makes it unsuitable for most foundation purposes, although compaction to greater depth can be achieved with appropriate equipment.
Deep compaction of granular soils (vibro)

Loose granular soils can be improved by inserting and withdrawing heavy vibrators while feeding granular materials in the depressions formed. The spacings of these stone columns can be varied to suit the site and amount of compaction
134
required. The granular material is compacted during repeated insertions of the vibrator, thus reducing the risk of appreciable differential settlements. The two principal methods used for deep compaction are: Vibroflotation (Wet process) with this method, the vibratory unit is jetted down to the desired level when the vibrating machine is set in motion and the direction of the jets reversed to carry soil particles downwards. Granular material is fed into the surface depression which is compacted along with the surrounding soil during withdrawal and vibration of the unit in increments of 250mm. The ground surface is made up as required. Vibro-replacement (Dry process) in this process (see Fig. B3), the vibratory unit consists of a large vibrating tube which relies upon dead weight and high frequency vibration to obtain penetration. The procedure is similar to vibroflotation except that the water is not used.
Fig. B3 Vibro-replacement on landfill sites
Dynamic consolidation of granular and silty soils

Dynamic consolidation is sometimes used to improve loose granular and silty soils by dropping heavy weights from a fixed height. Initially the weights are dropped at wide centres in order to improve the ground at lower levels. This is followed by a closing-up of the spacings to enhance the ground at higher levels. Soft clayey soils can be consolidated with the falling weight causing rupture and cracking. It is claimed that water is expelled during subsequent passes of the falling weight. Since clays are sensitive to disturbance, there is a danger that the falling weight may heave the ground surface. This will reduce the shear strength and stiffness of previously undisturbed soil.
Binding of soils by ground injection

Ground injection using cement-based or chemical materials is a job for a specialist. The depth and frequency of injections depend entirely upon their interaction with the existing soils. Soils which consolidate slowly and which usually contain a high proportion of fines cannot normally be injected.
Grouting of cavities and voids

The subterranean voids formed by mines and natural cavities can be successfully grouted (see Fig. B4) following a detailed investigation of the extent of the cavities and a thorough understanding of the geological conditions on site.
B.2.8 Selection of foundation type

B.2.8.1 Foundation depth considerations Foundations for most low-rise buildings will normally consist of one or a combination of types referred to in the following sections. Table B1 indicates general foundation types which are suitable for various soil types. General comments relevant to the selection of foundation types are noted. In all cases, foundations should be located at a depth to: safely resist the applied loads without undue settlement resist the effects of settlement or heave due to climatic conditions and trees. When trees are present on shrinkable soils, foundations should be at a depth below which changes in desiccation will not cause excessive or unacceptable movement.
Fig. B4 Grouting underground cavities
In the absence of trees, the seasonal movement of clay in the UK due to the winter/summer cycle affects soils to a depth of approximately 1m. Consequently a foundation depth of 1m is normally adequate for conventional pad and strip foundations, providing the ground bearing pressure at that depth is sufficient to support the applied load. Soil movements are relatively small at this depth, as long as they are not affected by external influences such as tree roots.
It should be noted that the depth to which replenishment of clay can occur is governed by its permeability, so with most clay soils, full replenishment will occur each winter. Only in the most exceptional circumstances, with very deep-seated desiccation and a clay of very low permeability would the expiry of up to ten years be necessary for soil moisture equilibrium to be reached after felling trees. In order to establish foundation depth when building near trees on shrinkable clay sites, consideration has to be given to the shrinkage potential of the soil and the tree type, size and
135
136
Table B1 Choice of foundation types for various ground conditions

Type of ground
Foundation types1 Waterlogged soils Slopes Fill4 Areas known to contain mines or natural caves
Soft soils (e.g. alluvium, peat, Shrinkable clay2 loose sands or gravels)
Demolished buildings/old wells
Strip or trench-fill
Suitable where there is a harder crust, although increased width may be required to limit settlement to acceptable levels; added difficulties in running sands Only suitable with dewatering or other special precautions. Note - This may cause problems for adjacent foundations Ground treatment or other structural meaGround treatment sures may be normally required needed to improve stability of slope
Not economical where trees and ground conditions necessitate deep foundations3
Treatment normally No reduced risk of required; excavation, damage, but may still be removal, introduction economic option. of imported fill and Grouting may be required recompaction
Piles
Bored piles are Generally the preferred common choice near Ground conditions option, providing competent trees; the effect of uplift may dictate a driven strata is reached economically forces can be reduced displacement pile type by sleeving Can be used to found building in soil below slip surface but careful appraisal of conditions required
Piles can provide support Preferred choice where Economic where old at a founding level, fill exists to unknown foundations have been below shallow workings. depths or uneven depths removed Grouting often required
Pads and ground beams
More economical than May prove more economic trench-fill where deep than piles where soft soils are foundations are needed relatively shallow near trees3 Generally more economical than trench-fill
No advantage over the trench-fill unless potential slip surface is very close to the surface
Only suitable where fill Usually no advantage over trench-fill is very shallow
Can be used to bridge isolated features
Raft
Risk of over-stressing deeper strata, and differential movement
Risk of differential movement near large trees
Reduced depth of foundations may offer advantages
Preferred choice where only limited movements are anticipated
Not preferred choice as differential movement likely
Preferred choice where only limited movements are anticipated
Possible applications
Replacement, surcharge for Ground cohesive soils, vibro for improvement granular soils
Chemical treatments exist, but are of limited benefit
Dewatering, diversion of Regrading, anchoring, streams, drainage. retaining walls, Note - May cause problem drainage to adjacent foundations
Replacement, vibro, dynamic compaction, grouting, surcharge
Filling, grouting. Grouting, capping, filling Grubbing and replacement vibro
2. 3. 4.
Notes 1. Foundations are listed in ascending order of cost for use in good ground conditions, i.e strip or trench fill is normally the most economic option unless the ground conditions require deeper foundations or special precautions during excavations. in certain circumstances, it may be desirable or necessary to modify the ground conditions prior to construction and the bottom row of the table therefore lists appropriate ground improvement techniques.
Appropriate design is needed to ensure floor slabs and foundations elements are isolated from swelling soil (See NHBC Standards and other Construction Standards). Recommended foundation depths for building near trees are given in NHBC Standards and other new Construction Standards. Special precautions may be needed to allow for presence and removal of methane gas.
position. Appropriate guidance regarding foundation depths near trees is given in the NHBC Standards Chapter 4.2B.5.
Strip foundations
Historically shallow mass and reinforced continuous strip footings (see Fig. B5) have been used successfully and economically for many buildings. This type of foundation is particularly common for low- to medium-rise structures with loadbearing walls and where the imposed load is in the light to medium range, i.e. up to 100kN/m. Recent climatic extremes, by UK standards, and greater awareness of the effects of desiccation of shrinkable soils in relation to trees has resulted in the adoption of greater foundation depths in some parts of the UK. This has increased costs due to the construction of below-ground brickwork within deep narrow trenches as health and safety regulations require trench support systems at depths greater than 1.2m.
load on the pad tends to compensate for any nominal horizontal loads imposed by the superstructure and ground beams. In the case of new buildings on heave-susceptible sites, it is normal practice to suspend internal ground slabs above an appropriate void and place compressible material beneath and to the side of ground beams.
Piled foundations
Over the last fifteen years, piles less than 300mm diameter
Trench fill
Trench fill (see Fig. B6) has in many instances replaced shallow strip footings principally for economic reasons. The increased foundation depths required to avoid movement often result in higher allowable bearing pressures and a reduction in foundation width. The trench is filled with mass concrete to within a short distance of the finished ground levels, thus reducing the amount of below-ground brickwork. Temporary supports are often avoided because access to the trench is not required. One of the main disadvantages of trench fill foundations, particularly deep trench, is that they have little resistance to lateral loading. Stability can be at risk when differing ground moisture contents occur between the inner and outer faces. This is frequently the case when trenches are located within the zone of influence of trees which are growing or have been felled. This problem can be alleviated by the use of compressible fill or void formers (see Fig. B7) against the vertical foundation sides. Due to the uncertainty of predicting the extent and time of future ground movements, the use of these products is the subject of much debate. Current guidance is given in the NHBC Standards Chapter 4.2B.5. Simple reinforcement of trench fill by the use of mesh placed vertically can help to reduce the tendency for ground heave to fracture the footing, especially if the sides of the trench-fill are not vertical. Trench filling can cause difficulties for the installation of services in the future.
Fig. B6 Typical trench fill foundations to 280mm cavity brick wall
Pads and beams

Mass concrete pads and reinforced concrete ground beams (see Fig. B8) may be a practical and economic solution if good allowable bearing pressures can be realised at a moderate depth, typically within 5m of the surface. The increased
Fig. B7 Heave precautions for trench fill foundations
Fig. B5 Typical strip foundation to 280mm cavity brick wall
Fig. B8 Pad and beam foundations (including heave precautions)
137
known as mini piles have been increasingly used. Small bored and driven mini piles are suitable for most low-rise buildings and become increasingly more economic when poor ground occurs above competent strata. As in the case of pad and beam construction on shrinkable clay, piles have the advantage of allowing tree root growth beneath the structure. Obviously if clay strata are present the heave protection is required to prevent disruption to ground beams and suspended ground slabs. Pile designs should take account of the possible uplift forces associated with heave (see Fig. B9). These can be reduced by using pile sleeves but the piles may then need to be longer.
Raft foundations
A raft foundation (see Fig. B10) is a continuous reinforced slab of concrete laid over the ground as a foundation for a structure. It is as large or slightly larger than the area of the building which it supports. Purposely designed stiffened rafts can be used in mining subsidence areas and on filled and sloping sites. Rafts can be used to limit loadings on soft ground. It should not be assumed that a raft will eliminate settlement potential, but it will normally reduce it. If settlement was likely to occur, it probably still would but to a lesser extent. The use of a raft may eliminate the likelihood of differential settlement. An example could be a riverside or fenland site where the raft is constructed on the firm crust above soft alluvial soils. Care needs to be taken to avoid excessive consolidation in the deeper, weaker soils with the attendant risk of settlement. To avoid differential settlement, the ground should be of a similar consistency over the total area of the raft without any hard spots. Because a rafts depth is relatively shallow and it is usually founded at or slightly below natural ground level, consideration should be given to the effects of frost and erosion. The effects of trees may cause differential movement on shrinkable clay sites. B.2.8.2 Additional considerations on the selection of foundation types and ground-bearing structures Ground-bearing concrete slabs can, however, be disrupted by heave movement even where minor seasonal movement of the ground has occurred. If the slab is laid during a period of dry weather, then soils near the surface could be desiccated. As the soils recover, swelling will occur, causing heave and damage to the slab. Where heave is probable, consideration should be given to the use of suspended ground floor slabs with appropriate void beneath to allow for soil heave movement. In addition to the cyclical nature of seasonal desiccation and heave, soil moisture content can also be affected by the presence of trees and other vegetation. Most trees root systems are within the top 0.6m of soil and can extend down to a depth of 2.0m. In exceptional circumstances some roots may be at depths greater than this and may be contributing to desiccation. Foundations placed within the zone of desiccated clay can be disrupted by both horizontal and vertical heave movement. Appropriate measures need to be taken to avoid damage to foundations. With desiccation due to vegetation, there is also a need to avoid heave damage to ground-bearing slabs. Precautions need to be taken as mentioned previously. Heaveabsorbing materials can be used to avoid the transmission of heave forces to the slab structure of buildings. There are two distinct types of material that are manufactured to protect substructures from the effects of heave. The first is a compressible material made from low-density polystyrene, which should be highly compressible and must be designed specifically to deal with heave. Other polystyrenes may be too dense or too soft and may not perform correctly, therefore it is important that the grade and thickness is taken into account. Polystyrene material should not be used beneath ground floor slabs to overcome potential heave. It can be used effectively to protect the sides and soffits of ground beams and the sides of trench fill foundations.
Fig. B9 Pile and ground beam foundations (including heave precautions)
Fig. B10 Typical details of slab and beam raft
The second type of material used for heave protection is the void former. The void former is an alternative to the compressible material. It is usually a cellular material, manufactured in sheets of different thicknesses. The material may be inert or may decompose. If the material can decompose, consideration should be given to possible gas emission and any formers likely to give off dangerous or noxious fumes should not be used. A void former thus provides a void into which the clay can expand or heave.
B.3 Existing structures

B.3.1 Factors within the property owners control
Heave and subsidence damage affect only a relatively small proportion of houses in this country and it would be wrong to suggest that the average property owner needs to expend considerable care and effort in protecting property from these perils. At the same time, many houses that suffer damage are older properties whose foundations have performed satisfactory for many decades or even centuries. Occasionally the damage is the recurrence of a problem that has dogged the property periodically since it was first built, but more often it is attributable to a change in circumstance which is usually the result of either a lack of the necessary maintenance or an injudicious improvement. It is important therefore that the property owner appreciates the factors that can be cause subsidence of heave damage and takes care that: nothing is done to reduce the stability of the propertys foundations where appropriate, steps are taken to improve the stability of the foundations.
The following sections describe some of the factors that com-
138
monly alter a propertys susceptibility to heave or subsidence damage and which, to a degree, are within the control of the owner.
Trees
Because of their effect on the moisture content, the planting of trees and other vegetation close to existing buildings founded on clay soils should be guided by Table 8.1 in Chapter 8. Further advice on planting can be found in BS 5837B.6 and NJUG 10B.7. Planting within the advisory distances may be considered for some species where the tree owner undertakes regular planned maintenance to trees in close proximity to buildings on clay soils. Tree maintenance is important whatever the soil type and particularly where there is a high clay content. It is normally necessary to ensure that large trees are not allowed to grow unmaintained in close proximity to building foundations and where the public has access. It is recommended that specialist advice be obtained from an arboriculturist, and that in the case of protected trees, consent from the Local Authority must be obtained before carrying out any work.
tion, while ground that slopes towards foundations would be expected to increase the supply of moisture. However, in the long term, existing vegetation may grow new roots to exploit the moisture and this may negate any short-term benefits that are generated by increasing the supply of moisture to the soil under the foundations. Slopes also present a larger surface area to the atmosphere and hence evaporation and transpiration can be more pronounced and to a greater depth than for level ground.
Structural alterations
Modifications to existing structures can cause damage due to differential settlement, reduced overall and elemental stability, and changed load paths causing local failures. The resulting damage can mistakenly be identified as being ground movement related. Differential settlement affecting buildings can occur when additional loads or new load paths cause the foundation bearing pressure to change over a short distance. This can result in local settlement and rotation of the superstructure causing damage and cracking. Increased loading is often the result of change in use, construction of additional storeys over part of the building footprint, attic conversion, etc. Changed load paths can impose high concentrated loads on footings adjacent to those from which load has been released, a typical example being the formation of large openings where the beam over the opening carries loads from higher levels and thus imposes greater concentrated loads at the support points. In the majority of cases, the movements are small, occur in the short term and are likely to cause only minor damage. However, larger movements are possible where the property is underlain by soft clay, peat or made ground. Damage is particularly likely where the soil conditions vary across the site in such a way that the magnitude of the differential movements is increased.
Drainage
Water leaking into the ground, from drains and water mains is generally undesirable and can cause erosion of sandy soils and promote soil softening. It is therefore important that such services are well maintained and any defects repaired promptly. Improving surface or underground drainage tends to lower the natural water table. This technique can be used to improve the stability of slopes, but may increase desiccation in shrinkable clays and may cause consolidation of soft soils and fill. Conversely, the neglect of existing drainage will allow water levels to rise, reducing the stability of slopes, causing collapse compression in fill and reducing desiccation in shrinkable clays. Sometimes natural water courses exist below ground and there is little that can economically be done even if their presence is known. Interfering without specialist advice can result in widespread problems. The occurrence of desiccation in shrinkable clay soils may also be altered by the application of large areas of impermeable covering such as concrete and asphalt. While reducing evaporation, this could also restrict the rate of rainfall infiltration into the soil, especially where there is no run-off to landscaped areas. Such coverings prevent competition for the water by grass and other vegetation, thus providing any trees with adequate soil water reserves and reducing the need for roots to extend further. This will only be effective if water can enter and move laterally below impermeable surfaces. Porous pressed concrete slabs, with open joints, and feature gratings can offer effective solutions.
Extensions to existing structures

The foundations for extensions to existing structures must take into account the site conditions as previously detailed. Due to the development of new standards and changes in building techniques, the depths and construction of future foundations will often differ from those supporting the existing structure. The result can lead to differential movement and subsequent damage. Care must therefore be taken to keep this movement within acceptable limits through sympathetic design and construction. New extensions to old structures may be placed in areas affected by trees and adjacent buildings and the foundation design will need to take account of this, especially on shrinkable clay soils where the removal of trees or the severance of tree roots could give rise to future heave. In these circumstances, consideration has to be given to the effects of heave on both the existing and new structures. Perhaps a form of foundation that does minimal damage to existing tree roots can be adopted, such as pile and ground beam. This will allow root growth to continue but heave precautions should be considered where there is a likelihood of future tree removal. The interface between the new and existing structure needs to be designed to allow for the differential movement that can often occur. If a movement joint is provided, it should extend from the bottom of the foundation to the top of the structure. Lack of lateral support at the joint to the superstructure may have to be considered in the design. The connection between the two structures must not reduce the stability and integrity of either or any part, and the placing of additional loads on the existing structure can cause unequal settlement. Where new and old foundations meet, there may be a need to provide transitions to greater depths by, for instance, stepped footings. Some designs may specify locally underpinning the existing structure at the joint but this can lead to differential movement and future damage. The effects of excavations on the existing structure must be considered.
Landscaping
Care is needed wherever cut and fill techniques are used to landscape a sloping site as they tend to increase the gradient of the slope locally and thereby reduce its stability. Retaining walls may be used to improve stability, but may themselves be susceptible to failure, especially in clay slopes, as a result of creep and consolidation of the soil. Retaining walls can also fail as a result of excessive ground water and often have drainage layers placed directly behind them to reduce the build up of pressure. Failure of a retaining wall can have serious consequences for any foundation upslope of the wall, particularly as damage of this nature may not covered by household insurance policies unless there is damage to the main dwelling by the same cause and at the same time. It is therefore important that retaining walls and their drains are maintained in good order and any perceived movements addressed at an early stage. Landscaping of shrinkable clay sites can reduce the effective depth of the foundations and hence increase the propertys susceptibility to damage as a result of clay shrinkage. Altering the slope away from foundations is likely to encourage run-off, thereby increasing the average degree of desicca-
139
B.3.2 Possible effects of excavation for adjacent construction activity on existing buildings
It must be re-emphasised that all building works within the scope of The Party Wall, etc. Act 1996B.8 are to be the subject of Formal Notification to all the relevant adjoining owners, and all agreements or Awards under the Act are to be in place before any work commences. Care is needed wherever a large pit or trench is dug close to existing buildings as this can induce subsidence or landslip. Unfortunately the resulting damage is not always apparent at the time the excavation takes place. In shrinkable clay soils, exposure can result in a decrease in moisture content causing desiccation and subsidence. Shallow footings can be damaged when excavation are carried out in close proximity. This is a particular problem in older buildings, where brick walls, with or without corbels, are founded upon a layer of hard-core or gravel. A large proportion of the cost of damage to buildings caused by adjacent excavation is as a result of: lack of lateral support in the excavation destabilisation of existing slopes erosion excavations left open to weather inadequate methods of backfilling lowering and raising of the water table.
Trench excavations for underpinning

When trench excavations are taken down to the formation level for underpinning purposes, particular care must be taken to ensure that vertical loads and lateral foundation loads do not render the side and bottom of the excavation unstable. The use of such excavations is not recommended unless considerable care and attention is given to the procedure.
Destabilisation of existing slopes

On sloping sites, trench excavations can render marginally stable slopes unstable by cutting through the potential slip surface (see Chapter 5). If the ground surface shows signs of previous movement, the advice of a specialist should be sought before carrying out any work.
Erosion
The effects of erosion have been described in some detail in Chapter 5. Damage from erosion due to water seepage or surface water run-off can be greatly exacerbated when trench excavations are parallel with and run close to existing footings. The result can be a loss of soil from beneath the foundations with consequent loss of bearing.
Excavations left open

Where excavations are not promptly or properly filled with concrete, backfill, etc., they should always be provided with appropriate temporary support. There have been numerous cases of collapse of buildings where adjacent unprotected and unsupported excavations, left open for a short time, have been affected by weather, ground or simply drying out of the soil.
All excavation support works should be designed to safely resist the effects of load and the above-mentioned processes. If there is sufficient space between the excavation and any adjacent building, stability may simply be achieved by cutting back the sides of the excavation to a stable slope. This assumes that there are no problems with ground water. When insufficient space is available around the excavation to slope the sides, they should be supported with braced systems or sheets piles to suit ground conditions and applied loads. Foundations of existing buildings can be protected by underpinning them to a depth which will not be affected by the proposed adjacent excavation.
Inadequate backfilling methods

Failure to adequately compact backfill can, over a period of time, result in migration of soils. In some circumstances, this movement can cause damage to adjacent foundations. Granular materials are more easily compacted than clays. Sometimes it is possible to minimise movement by casting concrete against the unprotected face of the backfilling. Inadequate or unsuitable backfilling to a trench can cause a french drain effect, allowing the free passage of water, which may be undesirable.
Lack of lateral support

Foundations under load impose lateral forces as well as vertical forces onto the ground beneath the foundations. Resistance to lateral forces, when the excavation is within the zone of influence of the foundation, should be provided by a temporary support system within the excavation. If this is not done, it can result in the unsupported excavation yielding and local bearing capacity failure of the soil beneath the existing foundations. Normal methods of supporting excavations, no matter how carefully done, cannot prevent at least some inward yielding of the face of the excavation. The inward movement may be in the order of 0.25% of the excavation depth in soft clays to 0.05% in dense granular soils or stiffening clays, accompanied by corresponding settlement of the ground surface. One method of safeguarding existing structures is to underpin them prior to or whilst supporting the excavations. For shallow to moderate depths of excavation, say not exceeding 5m, it is sometimes assumed that settlement of the ground surface will not occur to any appreciable extent beyond a line drawn at a slope of 1 (horizontal) to 2 (vertical) from the base of excavation. Underpinning of structures is carried out within this line, but this is only a rough guide and no substitute for proper professional advice. In shallow or only moderately deep excavations, it may be justifiable to accept a small amount of subsidence and repair any consequent cracking or other minor damage to existing structures. However, the risks must be fully assessed when making that judgment. Special consideration should be given to deep excavations and excavation for basements where other important engineering and geotechnical factors are involved.
140
Lowering and raising of water table

Lowering of the water table is liable to cause ground settlement. This effect can be severe in soft clays and peats, and appreciable settlement can occur in loose sands. Dense sands and gravels are not likely to settle unless the ground water lowering is accompanied by the loss of fines from the soil. Lowering of the water table can increase skin friction causing dragdown on piles, resulting in subsidence. In some instances raising of the water table can reduce pile skin friction and both can cause failure and subsidence. Construction of new buildings, particularly those with basements, can alter the existing ground water regime locally, resulting in some circumstances in higher water levels which it is claimed cause an increase in the forces acting on foundations and basements. Increased water pressure due to a higher water level can increase lateral forces on walls, induce buoyancy or uplift in basements and result in water penetration through adjacent walls and floor slabs. The potential effects of a rising water table on both new and adjacent existing buildings should always be considered during the design stage.
B.4 Mining subsidence precautions

Modern mining normally occurs at considerable depths below ground level and consequently it is not normally possible to completely protect a building from the effects of mining subsidence if it falls within the zone of influence of the mining activities. In simple terms, either the mining must avoid the building or the building must be designed to accommodate the resulting ground movement. It is possible to take precautions to reduce damage to buildings if the nature and direction
of any mining in the future is known. General precautions can be adopted where the extent of future mining is not known.
B.4.1 Precautions taken during mining Sterilisation

If a valuable structure, such as a public building or power station, requires protection, part of the coal seam underneath may be left unworked in order to form a pillar of support. The size of this pillar (see Fig. B11) depends on the seam depth, the inclination of the strata, the angle of draw and the margin of safety required. With increasing depth, the amount of sterilised coal increases appreciably and obvious limitations apply where the area to be protected is extensive. Hence, the adoption of protective pillars is more or less regarded as an extreme measure.
Fig. B11 Relationship between area of sterilised coal, seam depth, angle of draw and safety margin
Harmonious mining
Some success has been achieved in Europe in protecting particular buildings from major damage by careful planning of workings. Broadly, this involves arranging a particular working so that the building to be protected lies in a area of minimum strain or, by working two seams concurrently so surface strains are counteractive.
More recently, expanded polystyrene blocks have been employed around basement walls to limit the mobilisation of passive thrusts during the period of compressive ground strain.
Sewers and pipelines

Sewers and other pipelines and services should be provided with relatively flexible or telescopic jointsB.11 and allowances should be made for the effect of tensile and compressive ground strain. Both compressive and tensile forces are generated at different stages in the subsidence development. Sliding joints permit reduction of the relative movement between the soil and pipe to zero and the maximum load on a pipeline is, therefore, limited to the maximum load on an individual pipe length. Alternatively, welding of a pipeline is often sufficient to prevent disruption with the pipe being surrounded by low friction backfill. While a line may be heaved out of the ground or stressed beyond its elastic limit, failures are rare. Sewers should be laid to maximum gradients to reduce the impact of differential vertical movement otherwise causing a back fall.
Stowing
Stowing (infilling) the area of extracted coal with waste material may be applied to restrict subsidence and thus reduce surface damage. Whilst there appears to be no justification for wholesale stowing OrchardB.9 has shown that by increasing the packing in the centre of a panel, the resultant ground curvature and possibility of damage can be reduced
Partial extraction
Partial extraction, where areas of coal are left in situ between panels, is the most common form of mine design adopted to control ground movements. It has been demonstrated that the adoption of a carefully balanced design of panel and pillars can allow extensive volumes of coal to be mined from under sensitive areas of surface development. In certain circumstances, therefore, mining controls can be employed to avoid damage. However, in general, the Mining Engineer must devise methods of working a roof control which will be efficient and economical from the point of view of coal production, and these considerations may dictate that limited damage and disruption at the surface cannot be avoided. In addition, it should be appreciated that situations exist where, in spite of correct roof support, damage is inevitable.
Buildings
Wall footings for ordinary domestic dwellings should be reinforced and tied together to cater for horizontal tension. An advantage of a raft for domestic houses is that it reduces the contact-bearing stress to a value much less than that under strip footings and therefore reduces the likelihood of stress transferring into the building. Rafts should be designed with sufficient reinforcement to cater for horizontal strainsB.12. Additional resistance to flexure and direct tension can be provided in domestic dwellings by 1m deep horizontal bands of reinforced brickwork at ground-floor, first floor and roof levels, together with similar vertical bands at corners. Reinforced brickwork, instead of cement mortar brickwork, is able to adjust itself more readily to subsidence without the formation or wide cracks. Floors and flat roofs should be tied to all walls and a basement should be designed as a box to cater for vertical movements, resistance to torsion being afforded by floors constructed monolithically with the walls. Outbuildings should be structurally independent of a house. Corner windows, bay windows, arches and porches should be avoided, and door and window openings should not be close together. Window frames should be of wood with oversize rebates or, if steel frames are used, they should be mounted in wood. In general, ceiling and wall linings should be of plasterboard in preference to plaster directly applied to masonry. Existing structures can be modified in order to minimise the possibility of damage, as described in the Subsidence Engineers HandbookB.13. Such modifications comprise permanent strengthening, temporary supports, or removal of structural elements. Since extension of the ground is commonly followed by compression as the face advances, fractures which have been opened should not be filled immediately and debris within cracks should be removed before the onset of compression. Cutting slots and removing brickwork and window glass may
B.4.2 Structural considerations to minimise the effects of mining subsidence General aspects
With regard to construction in general, the size of the building is the first important consideration, not only its length and breadth but also its height. Long continuous buildings should be divided into units, so that each can settle independently, and cater for compression and differential tilting. In tall buildings a knowledge of the expected tilt, as well as compressive ground strain, is essential. Careful town planning can minimise damage considerably and it is preferable to orientate the buildings such that the shorter axis coincides with the direction of the anticipated maximum curvature of the ground surface. OrchardB.10 found that weak zones in the subsoil absorb considerable amounts of horizontal strain, whereas in fairly homogeneous ground, the strain is spread evenly. This fact has been used on some sites by cutting deep trenches close to the walls of structures where the trenches are subsequently back-filled by a compressible medium such as loose coke. Engineering opinion is that this has saved a considerable amount of damage, but clearly the trenches must be deeper than the adjacent foundations to reduce lateral thrusts effectively.
141
also reduce damage due to compression. In extreme cases, part of a house in a long terrace has been cut out, or even a complete house removed, to allow compression. Use of tie rods is justified only if the predicted extension of the ground is sufficiently severe to create serious loss of bearing for roof trusses when the supporting walls move apart. Extra bearing has been provided by means of temporary corbels in some cases. Bridges generally require complete protection against the effects of mining subsidence but this is not dealt with in this Guide.
Rigid construction
With regard to the design of rigid structures, Mautners methodB.14 was considered to be the answer to mining subsidence for some years after publication in 1947. At this time a large school-building programme was under way in Britain and the building industry developed a method of rapid construction called the modular system. When this technique was employed, the framework of the superstructure was built using a basic unit or module, hence any room or section of the building had a height, length and breadth which were simple multiples of the module. It is, therefore, not surprising this method of construction was adopted also in areas of mining subsidence where the ground movement problem was catered for by special foundations. For schools in the Midlands, Geddes and Cooper B.15 describe a rigid foundation scheme, designed according to Mautners conditions, which ran longitudinally and transversely, and a single storey building of timber construction was erected upon it. Similar rigid foundations can be constructed using a grid of post-tensioned concrete beams. How such precautions are generally effective is not known with any certainty but observations have revealed a number of buildings with strongly reinforced foundations which have still been damaged. As a principle, it appears preferable to construct buildings in a way such that they can accommodate movement.
ble steel sections. There is no rigid junction between any beam and its supporting column but all connections are made with the aid of one or two large diameter bolts, which permit a limited degree of angular rotation. The majority of the columns rest on simple steel pins which permit angular movement to take place but the columns on the outer perimeter of the building may be secured by a single nut and bolt against uplift from the wind. In order to keep the frame upright and in alignment, a number of diagonal braces are employed which are of a special type, incorporating a heavy spring at each end which is stressed to the load which the tie is designed to carry.
B.4.3 Consolidation of mine workings General

Old workings, whether collapsed or open, are most commonly treatable and this section concentrates on grout injection through boreholes sunk from the surfaceB.17. The area of treatment is larger than the surface structure to be protected (see Fig. B12), and when the plan areas requiring absolute protection are designated, it is common to extend these dimensions downwards by employing an angle of draw in solid strata for shallow seams of approximately 15o20o (3 vertical to 1 horizontal) in order to determine the perimeter for consolidation at seam level. Allowance should be made for deposits of fill or loose superficial materials. A larger angle of draw may be used when steeply inclined seams are encountered. Irrespective of ground conditions some engineers specify that the periphery of the area to be grouted should extend beyond the building line by a distance of not less than 0.75 times the depth of the seam from the base of the foundations to be supported.
Probe drilling
Before treatment commences on a site, it is often necessary to enlarge upon the site investigation data already available by carrying out advance probe drilling over the site to intercept the workings and to penetrate at least 1m below pavement level of the old workings to prove sound rock. Holes at 3m
Flexible construction
In general, it is not easy to incorporate full articulation in reinforced concrete structures and this has led to the choice of flexible steel frames for construction of buildings in areas subjected to mining subsidence. At Peterlee New Town, County Durham, a factory for clothing production was erected where a minimum vertical movement of around 450mm accompanied by a horizontal movement of approximately 300mm was predicted. The structure was designed to accommodate this movement without any change in stress and without damage to glazing and finishes. The main workshop area is 3500m2 and it is spanned by welded steel frames constructed and erected on independent footings, the whole structure being covered with lightweight roofing frame and wall panels. Geddes and CooperB.15 state that the frame is fully articulated and has a clear span of 36.5m. Probably the most widely adopted method of construction in this country is the CLASP or Nottinghamshire system. This method was developed by GibsonB.16 to meet the requirements of a large school-building programme on sites overlying coal workings. Buildings designed according to the system are erected on a flat base which is founded on a subgrade, such as sand, which facilitates relative horizontal displacements between base and subgrade. Vertical and horizontal displacements are catered for separately the horizontal movement by the base and subgrade and the vertical component by the design of the superstructure. The entire foundation is a simple concrete slab 125mm150mm thick containing a continuous steel mesh which is usually placed at middepth. This reinforcement is sometimes called the subsidence mesh and its function is to prevent the slab being split in two by the ground strain developed during mining. The design of the structure calls for a light building to facilitate slipping, not only capable of following the slope of the ground, but also of re-assuming its original shape if necessary. Hence the framework is fabricated of the lightest possi142
Fig, B12 Typical injection hole layout for grout consolidation of collapsed old coal workings
alternate centres at strategic locations should be selected to form a grout hole plan for this purpose, and ultimately be incorporated in the overall grouting programme. Bearing in mind that drilling will often be carried out by percussive or rotary-percussive means, the driller must monitor carefully water returns and chippings, rate of drilling, morning and evening standing water levels, together with horizons, i.e. interfaces between different types of ground and locations where the drill string falls freely which may suggest voids. After completion of the exploratory drilling and possibly some trial grouting, the result should be studied in conjunction with the original site investigation in order that a recommended grout hole layout, including depths and diameter, may be prepared. With Measurement While Drilling, modern drilling rigs can be equipped with a continuous read-out of bit pressure, torque, penetration rate, etc., which can be used to identify very soft/voided areas. Used by experienced drillers, these read-outs can provide hard, continuous data on the ground conditions which is akin to that obtained from dynamic cone tests.
Collapsed workings
Where the workings are collapsed or partially collapsed, containing voids and cavities of height not greater than 0.5m, and which are generally isolated, i.e. have no interconnecting roadways, then primary holes are often installed at 6m centres on a square grid followed by secondary holes at 3m centres to tighten up. In certain circumstances a closer pattern, e.g. 1.5m centres or a double line of injection holes, may be deemed necessary to form an outer perimeter wall, and thereby contain the infill grouting. Where a perimeter wall is planned in advance, 50mm75mm dia. holes are drilled at close centres (1.5m2m centres) down to the required depth. A 25mm50mm dia. tremie pipe is then inserted to the bottom of the hole, and raised about 200mm before injection is started using a sand/fly-ash/cement/bentonite grout mixture. If the grouting pressure, measured at the top of the hole, rises significantly in a short time, or grout surfaces at the top of the hole, the tremie pipe is lifted until the pressure dissipates and the grout travels freely again into the workings (see Fig. B13). Injection is normally continued until 15m3 of grout have been placed, or a limiting pressure has been reached. Where the pressure limit or surfacing of the grout has not occurred, the tremie pipe is removed from the hole and further injections in this hole are suspended until the mix has set.
Fig. B13 Typical sections of grouted workings
0.4 to 0.5 to minimise bleed, and a cement content of 50kg/m3 to 75kg/m3 of grout for durabilityB.18. Sand may be added to the mix to limit grout travel if takes are high.
Multiple seams
In the case where more than one seam requires consolidation on any site, the upper seam is normally treated first, followed by the lower seams in descending order. This approach results in limited use of casing, leakage loses are minimised, a grout return can be achieved, and finally a grouting pressure can be applied.
Open workings
The majority of workings in the UK are in a collapsed, partially collapsed or stowed condition, but some remain open and in this situation a perimeter wall is essential if grout wastage is to minimised. In the construction of a perimeter wall 75mm100mm holes usually at 1.5m centres are drilled to intercept the open workings. On completion of a series of holes, grout injection is started through the casing (overburden only) whilst pea gravel is fed simultaneously through a hopper. Once the cone of grout and pea gravel has been formed, the flow of grout is stopped first, otherwise the excess grout will cause the cone to slump. The cones formed in this way usually have a side slope between 35o and 45o. When the grout has hardened, the final gaps in the perimeter wall may be closed by injecting a sealing grout through a tremie pipe fitted with an elbow at the end, and where the nozzle is pointed slightly inside the wall. In general, work should commence from the deepest section of the seam and proceed in opposite directions around the perimeter of the site. The final few holes at the upper end of the seam are left ungrouted until infilling has almost been completed.
Grout injection of rock

Each hole should ultimately be filled with grout and further injection attempted at a nominal pressure to ensure final tightening up of the hole and the consolidation of any joints, fissures or separation beds in the rock overlying the workings. It is of utmost importance that every care is taken to ensure that no uplift occurs adjacent to existing structures during these injections.
Post treatment testing

At locations selected by the Engineer, holes can be drilled to intercept the workings after which water or preferably infill grout is injected and the absorption noted. Analysis of a series of these tests will determine the efficiency of treatment and whether further consolidation is required.
Infill grouting
Primary holes are commonly installed at 6m centres followed by secondaries at 3m centres to tighten-up. The grout is often a simple fly-ash/cement mix with a water/solid ratio of
B.4.4 Shafts General

Old mine shafts can conveniently be categorised according to the following conditions:
143
Open, or empty and merely capped at the top Completely backfilled Partially backfilled where the fill rests on a platform or obstruction.
Conclusions
The key to success for all grout consolidation contracts is a detailed understanding of the mining and geological conditions on site. With this knowledge, the optimum remedial treatment can be designed, and construction techniques with anticipated variations can be properly assessed. Based on this philosophy, consolidation of old workings and mine shafts by injection of cement-based grouts has been used successfully and extensively throughout Britain for the past 30 years but the necessity for thorough pre-contract investigation is re-emphasised. Many important structures have been protected by grouting in old cities and towns underlain by coal workings, and as these urban areas have expanded, land previously left barren has now been stabilised to permit the safe development of new factories, office blocks and residential estates.
Once the condition of the shaft has been established, the shaft depth and diameter, together with the character of the fill and presence of groundwater have the main influence on the method of treatment irrespective of the backfilling or grout consolidation treatment employed. A shaft cap, approximately twice the internal diameter of the shaft, is normally regarded to be adequate.
Empty shafts
In an empty shaft, it is normal to simply backfill from the base of the shaft with suitable frictional materials. Sands are satisfactory in dry shafts, but larger-sized materials such as gravels are recommended in waterlogged conditions to ensure efficient placement and adequate compaction. As general filling materials broken stone, broken bricks, broken concrete, quarry crusher waste or other similar materials may be economically attractive. Where colliery waste is considered, it should be verified as far as practicable that the material is incombustible and chemically inert. Where insets or roadways still exist within the shaft, it is advisable to grout the fill to prevent ingress of the new fill over time into the openings which could lead to loss of support.
B.5 Treatment of site with natural cavities

Several forms of ground treatment can be used to improve the stability of sites influenced by natural cavities, e.g.: pressure grouting excavation and infill dynamic consolidation deep compaction (vibro) appropriate foundation types
Backfilled shafts
Where the backfill is poorly consolidated, cement grout can be injected to fill all major voids and cavities thereby eliminating the possibility of collapse. Based on the information obtained from exploratory drilling including porosity and grading from undisturbed samples of the fill, it should be possible to assess the quantity of grout to be injected and the most suitable grout mix. The standard method of treatment is to drill (and case) one or more holes to the bottom of the shaft and then to inject a cement-based grout under pressure through the casing as it is withdrawn up the shaft.
These have all been discussed in detail earlier in this Guide.
References
B.1 B.2 B.3 B.4 B.5 B.6 B.7 B.8 B.9 B.10 B.11 B.12 B.13 B.14 B.15 B.16 B.17 B.18 Site investigation for low rise buildings: The walkover survey. Watford, BRE, 1989 BRE Digest 348 Site investigation for low rise buildings: procurement. Watford, BRE, 1987 BRE Digest 322 BS 1377. Soils for civil engineering purposes Parts 1/9 London, BSI BS 5930: 1981. Code of Practice for site investigations. London, BSI, 1981 NHBC Standards: Chapter 4.2. Building near trees. Amersham, NHBC, 1999 BS 5837: 1991. Guide for trees in relation to construction. London, BSI, 1991 National Joint Utilities Group. Guidelines for the planning, installation and maintenance of utility services in proximity to trees. Publication 10, Apr 1985 The Party Wall, etc. Act 1996 Orchard, R. J.: Underground stowing , Colliery Guardian v203 1961 p258 Orchard, R. J.: Surface effects of mining main factors Colliery Guardian v198 1956 p159 Institution of Civil Engineers, Ground subsidence, London, ICE 1977 Ministry of Works, Mining subsidence; effects on small houses. London: HMSO 1951 National Building Studies Special Report 12 National Coal Board, Subsidence Engineers Handbook, 2nd edition. London NCB, 1975 Mautner, K. W.: Structures in areas subjected to mining subsidence. The Structural Engineer vol 26 no 1 1948 p35 Geddes, J. D., Cooper, D. W.: Structures in areas of mining subsidence. The Structural Engineer vol 40 no 3 1962 pp79-93 Gibson, D.: Buildings without foundations on moving ground RIBA J v65, n2, 1957, pp47-53 Littlejohn, G. S.: Consolidation of old coal workings, Ground Eng., vol 12 No 4 1979 pp15-21 Littlejohn, G. S., Head, J. M.: Specification for the consolidation of old shallow mine workings, Mineworkings 1984 pp131-140 Engineering Technics Press, Edinburgh
Partially backfilled shafts

Where the shaft has only been backfilled down to a platform or obstruction, the safest permanent solution is to drill through this barrier down to the base of the shaft and then backfill with sand or gravel to the underside of the barrier. Depending on the size of aggregate a large diameter hole of 100mm200mm should be cased through the fill and barrier, together with a second small diameter hole, which permits the release of air or water trapped in the empty section of the shaft. On completion of the placement of fill, a fluid cementbased grout is then injected to close the final gap beneath the barrier. The fill above the barrier can be grouted in the manner already described in the section above on backfilled shafts.
Grout mixes
Mix designs are related to the conditions existing within the workings and the specialist contractor should always be given the facility to alter the constituents and their proportions according to these conditions and any variations encountered. The materials most commonly used in the consolidation of backfilled shafts or workings are cement and fly-ash with the possible addition of sand if large voids or cavities are encountered.
Records
Drilling logs should be kept of all holes with reference to major categories of ground, fissures, and size and depth of cavities encountered. Accurate records are also required of injection sequence, grout quantity consumed and maximum injection pressure for each hole. For shaft filling, the amount of fill deposited in the shaft should be recorded and compared with the calculated volume of the shaft. Regular measurements should also be taken to the top of the fill during the operation to ensure that cavities are not formed.
144
Appendix C Certificate of structural adequacy
145
Appendix C Certificate of structural adequacy

A sample Certificate of Structural Adequacy is given opposite. The draft has been prepared as providing a reasonable professional opinion for an owner or prospective purchaser. It has been reviewed by the Institutions Solicitors, CMS Cameron McKenna. However, the following notes should be considered when using the Certificate: It is advised that the Expert/Expert Firm should obtain the approval of their Professional Indemnity Insurers to the exact wording of the Certificate that the Insurers are prepared to accept within the terms of their P.1. policy cover. It is strongly advised that Terms of Appointment should always be in writing and that these should also clearly define the responsibilities which the Expert undertakes as regards inspection and certification of the works. If (perhaps in order to save fees) the terms curtail the services which the Expert believes are required in order to issue a Certificate with confidence, he should inform the Client immediately. Any Certificate should refer to this and be caveated accordingly. It is recommended that any visits to site by the Expert during the course of the works should be recorded and a file note kept of the general state of the works at the time. The Expert will delete any part of the certificate which is not factually correct. This may require prior discussion with Professional Indemnity Insurers. For example if, in the case of a property which has been previously underpinned but not under the control of the Expert, and the Report option is being followed as opposed to the Works option, then the name of the Contractor who undertook the work may not be known. Alternatively, if drawings and specifications are not available for the works then the extent of the works may not be known. Any limitations as to the professional assurance given should be made clear. The underpinning contractors guarantee should be for a period of, say, 10 years and should be insurance backed. The Association of Specialist Underpinning Contractors has a relevant scheme in place. Reference is made to the Experts Report. The Expert is referred to the Institutions guidance on contents of reports contained in Surveys and inspections of buildings and similar structuresC.1. Where other Experts were called in and their advice relied upon, this should be mentioned and Section 3 of the certificate should be adapted accordingly.
References
C.1 Institution of Structural Engineers. Guide to surveys and inspections of buildings and similar structures. The Institution of Structural Engineers, 1991
146
Certificate of Structural Adequacy (suggested format)

Name of Client: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Address of Property: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Terms of Appointment: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. Brief description of damage to the property: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ................................................................................................... ................................................................................................... 2. Cause of damage to the property This is to certify that, as required by our Terms of Appointment, we have appraised the property as regards to the above damage which in our professional opinion has been caused by . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ................................................................................................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .(see our report dated) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3. Property stabilisation measures (if required) The following remedial action of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ................................................................................................... ................................................................................................... was taken on our professional advice/on the advice of [name] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . to remove or minimise the cause of damage identified under Section 2 above. The property was monitored by us/by [ . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .] from . . . . . . . . . . to . . . . . . . . . . . and found to be stable/unstable (delete as appropriate). Where a property is unstable see Section 5 below. 4. Superstructure repairs/redecoration. (if not required, delete this section) Repair work has been undertaken to the property. The works consisted generally of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ................................................................................................... all as detailed on the attached drawing(s) and/or specification prepared by . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The work was undertaken by . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5. Underpinning Certificate. (if not required, delete this section) Building Regulation approval for the work was granted by . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . and is dated . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . We confirm that we have carried out our design work in relation to the remedial works required to the foundations of the property, exercising reasonable skill, care and diligence. From visual inspections in accordance with the Terms of Appointment, we confirm that the works appear to have achieved the objective of stabilising the foundations of the property against progressive movement at the locations where those foundations had previously shown signs of significant structural movement. N.B. Where designs are carried out by underpinning contractors, the Expert will review the adequacy of the design. The contractor will additionally provide a guarantee for design (if applicable), materials and workmanship, which should ideally be an insurance backed guarantee. This underpinning certificate is in respect of the foundations of the property only, and does not apply to any other structure or works unless specifically stated. Signed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Date . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . For the Underpinning Contractor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Signed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Date . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . For the Expert 6. This Certificate should be read in conjunction with the accompanying as built drawings and/or specification, reference . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .(complete as appropriate). This certificate is a considered professional opinion and is not a warranty or guarantee as regards the works undertaken, and no liability shall attach to us except to the extent that we have failed to exercise reasonable skill, care and diligence in the provision of our services under our Terms of Appointment. This certificate does not in any way increase our liability beyond that agreed under the Terms of Appointment. This certificate is not a certificate of design of construction as defined in The Building Act 1984 and The Building (Approved Inspectors, etc.) Regulations. This certificate is for the sole benefit of the above named Client and may not be relied on by any other person whatsoever. Transfer of the benefit of this Certificate to any party other than the Client to whom it is addressed will only be permitted with the written permission of the Expert/Experts firm. Before agreeing to any transfer of benefit the Expert/Experts firm may require to re-inspect the property, for which a fee may be charged. Signed (Partner/Director): . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Date: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . For Name of Expert: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Address: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Ref. No. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
147
148
Appendix D Specimen underpinning guarantee

(from the Association of Specialist Underpinning Contractors)
149
150
151
152
Appendix E ABI Domestic Subsidence Agreement and Tree Root Claims Agreement
E.1 ABI Domestic Subsidence Agreement E.1.1 The Agreement E.1.2 Guidance on the Agreement E.2 ABI Domestic Subsidence Tree Root Claims Agreement E.2.1 The Agreement E.2.2 Guidance on the Agreement 154 154 155 157 157 158
153
Appendix E ABI Domestic Subsidence Agreement & Tree Root Claims Agreement
Note in any particular instance, advice should be sought with regard to the relationship between this agreement and current legislation, e.g. Party Wall, etc. Act. the handling Insurer agrees to settle the claim on an ex gratia basis for commercial considerations no contribution should be sought from the previous Insurer. In a case where the handling Insurer is bound by the decision of the Insurance Ombudsman, the contributing Insurer will also be bound by that decision. Nothing in this Agreement shall prevent any Insurer from voiding a policy for fraud, non-disclosure or misrepresentation, or from relying otherwise on any policy term or condition except that late notification of the initial claim by the Insured alone shall not prevent the operation of this Agreement. Where one Insurer specifically excludes all or part of the damage, this Agreement will apply only to that part of the damage covered by both Policies. In the event of any dispute arising under this Agreement the matter shall be referred to the ABI Disputes Committee whose decision shall be binding. The Committee will be a body of last resort and disputes will only be referred to it after discussions between senior claims officials at Head Office level of the Insurers involved have failed to produce a solution. This Agreement shall not apply to mortgage lenders block policies where the Insurers concerned have made separate arrangements. This Agreement shall not apply where expert evidence shows the damage to have been caused by a sudden subterranean event, e.g. swallow holes. Nothing in this Agreement binds any Insurer to adopt a similar approach to claims involving Insurers who are not parties to this Agreement nor does it affect in any way the contractual entitlement of any Insurer to reject or require contribution in relation to uninsured preinception damage.
E.1 ABI Domestic Subsidence Agreement (operative from 1 January 2000)

E.1.1 The Agreement Subsidence/heave/landslip change of insurer claims agreement
This Agreement relates to claims arising under policies covering domestic properties owned by an Insured in a personal capacity and situated in Great Britain, Northern Ireland, Isle of Man and the Channel Islands, where there has been a Change of Insurer (but not a change of ownership of the insured property), where the insured event of Subsidence and/or Heave and/or Landslip has/have occurred causing damage to the insured property. Every Insurer subscribing to this Agreement undertakes to deal with such claims in the following manner: Option 1 Where the Date of Notification is eight weeks or less from the date of inception of the current Insurers policy, any claim shall be accepted and dealt with by the previous Insurer and no contribution shall be requested from the current Insurer. Option 2 Where the Date of Notification is one year or more from the date of inception of the current Insurers policy, any claim shall be accepted and dealt with by the current Insurer and no contribution shall be requested from the previous Insurer. Option 3 Where the Date of Notification is more than eight weeks but less than one year from the date of inception of the current Insurers policy, any claim shall be accepted and dealt with by the Insurer to whom notification is given and the Cost of Settlement shared equally between the two Insurers. The handling Insurer shall keep the other Insurer advised of material developments, including the original reserve and any revision. Contributions shall be paid within 21 days subject to full details being supplied with supporting documentation (to include apportioned VAT invoices in respect of fees incurred on behalf of both Insurers). Interim contributions will not be collected for sums less than 5000.
(iv)
(v)
(vi) (vii) (viii)
Definitions
Change of Insurer A change of Insurer which maintains continuous cover to the Insured. For this purpose a gap in cover of less than 30 days shall be regarded as continuous cover. Cost of Settlement The net cost of settlement of the claim together with professional fees (including loss adjusters and experts) incurred by the handling Insurer. This includes: alternative accommodation/loss of rent (net of any contributions available from Contents Insurers) professional fees incurred by the Insured and the handling Insurer (but excluding internally incurred expenses of the handling Insurer)
Provided that: (i) Notice to the contributing Insurer by the Insurer to whom the claim is notified must be made as soon as possible and no later than six months after the Date of Notification. (ii) The contributing Insurer shall be provided with copies of all relevant reports (including covering letters) from loss adjusters, engineers, surveyors and the like when available and kept fully advised of the progress of the claim. (iii) The contributing Insurer shall abide by the decision of the handling Insurer as to the method of investigation and the settlement of the claim. In circumstances where
but offset by: policy excess being the single excess applicable to the current Insurers policy any recovery for the benefit of Insurers.
Date of Notification The date on which the written or verbal communication notifying the damage and/or claim was first received by the current or previous Insurer or such Insurers agent. NB: Whilst this Agreement is written in terms applicable only as between two Insurers, it is expected that Parties to this Agreement will apply similar principles to those cases where three or more Insurers are potentially involved.
154
E.1.2 ABI Guidance on their Agreement

Questions and Answers to assist signatories in the application of the Agreement.
the original policy the policyholder may be justifiably upset should an Insurer seek to apply the excess.
Answer
There is no easy answer to this question but it should be remembered that the policyholder is receiving the benefit of two policies of insurance for the one claim. There are different levels of excesses and it is always possible that it might be more advantageous to claim under one policy than the other. In general terms, it is the current Insurer who is handling the claim and it is the current Insurers excess which should apply. To fit in with the working of the Agreement, the line should always be maintained with a policyholder that his claim does lie against the current Insurer rather than against any previous Insurers but if he is to receive the benefit of both policies then it is the current Insurers excess which is applied to the loss. It is recognised that an Insured may insist on the Insurer with the lowest excess dealing with their claim, and may well choose to do so if the available evidence indicates that substantial damage occurred in their period of cover. Where this arises, Insurers may have to agree only to deduct the lower excess and share the resulting net claim in accordance with the Agreement. Alternatively, the Insurer with the lower excess should pay the difference between that and the other Insurers excess.
Question 1 Definition of premises covered by the Agreement

What premises are covered by the Agreement?
Answer
The premises must be a domestic property owned by an insured in a personal capacity.
Question 2 Cost of Settlement

Under option 3 the Cost of Settlement will be shared equally between the two Insurers. Is this irrespective of the sum Insured?
Answer
The level of contribution by an Insurer should be limited by the sum insured. In a situation where there is a shortfall, then that will be for the consideration of the Insurers whose sum insured is not exhausted. By that time, the Agreement will have done its job and the dispute between the two Insurers will be resolved. The attitude of the Insurer with the adequate sum insured to the shortfall should be governed by the terms and conditions of the relevant policy and its own claims handling policy.
Question 7 Application of agreement to retrospective claims

Some Insurers, while confirming they wish to subscribe to the Agreement have expressed concern about its application to retrospective claims without their being any limit as to how long a claim has been outstanding.
Question 3 Block policies

Under (vi) it is stated that the Agreement will not apply to mortgage lenders block policies where the Insurers concerned have made separate arrangements?
Answer
The Agreement does apply where the Insurers concerned have block policies unless they have already made separate arrangements when the block business changed hands. Where a block of business is changing hands then, if the Insurers do not wish to be bound by the Agreement, it will be necessary for the two or more Insurers to enter into separate binding arrangements.
Answer
To avoid a potentially open-ended commitment, the Agreement will apply retrospectively to claims first notified to the Insurer on or after 1/1/93, where: (a) there is a current dispute between the Insurers over their respective liabilities for the damage, or (b) the handling Insurers claim has not been re-opened for the purposes of the agreement, or (c) there has not been a previous sharing agreement reached between the current and previous Insurer or for the loss or damage. The Agreement shall not apply to claims notified to the Insurer prior to 1/1/93, but Insurers should be encouraged to apply the spirit of the agreement to cases where it is considered equitable to do so, except in cases where: (a) repairs to the policyholders property have been effected, or (b) the claim has been re-opened for the purpose of the agreement, or (c) there has been a previous sharing Agreement reached between the current and previous Insurer for the loss or damage.
Question 4 Registering a claim

Is it true that any delay on the part of the Insured in notifying a claim will not affect the application of the Agreement?
Answer
This is a correct statement of the position in that the date of notification will determine strictly which of the three options apply.
Question 5 Date of Notification

Within provision (iv), it is stated that late notice alone shall not prevent the operation of the Agreement. This then suggests that where a policyholder is slow to notify a claim this could impact upon the need for contribution. Is this correct?
Answer
Consideration was given as to what should be the trigger date for the Agreement. The date of discovery was considered but rejected as probably being unworkable. The date of discovery is frequently imprecise and could be many years prior to the date of notification of the claim, i.e. a policyholder may have noticed damage 10 years previous but only notified the claim when the damage became worse. While this may oblige an Insurer to contribute (or avoid a contribution) due to late notification, the only practical solution is for the Agreement to be driven by the date of notification.
Question 8 Application of agreement to flats

What is the position in respect of a single flat owned and occupied in a personal capacity if it is insured in an individuals name?
Answer
As the Agreement only applies in respect of property owned and Insured in a personal capacity it will only operate if a single flat is insured in an individuals name. The Agreement also includes: Individual flats insured on a block basis in respect of which each is owned and occupied by the Insured in a personal capacity. Low-rise property such as a single flat above a shop owned and occupied by the Insured in a personal capacity.
Question 6 Application of excess

What is the position where a policyholder feels they are being unfairly penalised due to the different levels of excess applied by Insurers? For example, the original policy may have had a 500 excess and the current policy a 2500 excess. If there is evidence to suggest that the damage occurred in the period of
155
Maisonettes or the part of any building owned, occupied and insured by a collection of private individuals.
claim arising would be covered by the terms of the Agreement.
The Agreement does not cover: Flats over shops where they are insured as part of the commercial insurance arrangements. Flats occupied by an individual which are owned by another person or property company and from which an income is derived on a commercial rental basis. Blocks of flats let to tenants who pay rent, e.g. Local Authority accommodation, holiday flats, student accommodation, Housing Association tenants and any other commercial lettings such as flats occupied by an individual which are owned by another person or property companies and from which an income is derived on a commercial rental basis.
Question 14 Does the Agreement apply to a claim that arises under a policy covering a domestic property which is repossessed by a Mortgage Lender?
Do the terms of the Agreement apply to a claim that arises under a policy in respect of a domestic property that Is repossessed by a mortgage lender?
Answer
Title to a repossessed property does not pass to a mortgage lender. The property can still be regarded as being insured in a personal capacity and so the Agreement will apply to a claim notified after repossession IF the borrowers policy subsists for the benefit of the mortgage lender. Where a claim arose, and was accepted by an Insurer, prior to repossession and prior to a change of Insurer, it should be dealt with by the Insurer on risk at that time.
Question 9
Does the Agreement apply to Housing Association properties and are they to be classified as domestic residences, which fall within the scope of the Agreement, or commercial properties which do not?
Question 15 Subsidence caused by leaking pipes

Where a claim arises as a result of subsidence caused by leaking pipes, at a domestic residence, would it not be appropriate for this to be dealt with under the Agreement?
Answer
The Agreement covers a policyholder in a personal capacity and as such, property owned by a Housing Association in a commercial capacity is deemed to be outside the Agreement.
Answer
It is acknowledged that traditionally such claims have been dealt with under the water peril. Given that the Agreement refers specifically to ... where the insured event of subsidence has ... occurred it is accepted that where leaking pipes can be proven to have been the cause of the subsidence claim then it should be dealt with under the terms and conditions of the Agreement.
Question 10 Holiday or second home

Does the Agreement apply to holiday or second homes?
Answer
The Agreement will apply to holiday residences or second homes owned and occupied by the Insured in a personal capacity.
Question 16 Alternative accommodation

What is the position with regard to previous insurers contributing to alternative accommodation costs?
Question 11 Definition of Cost of Settlement of a claim

Does the Agreement apply in cases reported as subsidence claims where fees are incurred by loss adjusters or other agencies when, after a period of investigation, it transpires that the claim falls below the excess the damage was caused by a peril not insured but alleged to have been subsidence is caused by subsidence but one of the standard exclusions applies?
Answer
It is recognised that there is a diversity of approach with regard to the question of dealing with the alternative accommodation aspect of claims. The Agreement operates as a buildings Insurer arrangement with no provision being made officially for a contribution from the current or previous contents Insurer.
Question 17
What is the position where the previous Insurer might wish to challenge the chosen repair method of the Insured handling the claim?
Answer
In cases where the Agreement has been confirmed between the Insurers and the claim subsequently falls within the excess or is determined as not being caused by a subsidence peril then any investigation costs will be the responsibility of the investigating Insurer and no contribution should be sought from a previous insurer.
Answer
There is now a clause in the Agreement which says that the contributing Insurer will abide by the decision of the handling Insurer as to the method of investigation and settlement of the claim. In doing so, the position of the previous Insurer should not be prejudiced by any commercial relationship between the handling Insurer and the policyholder or intermediary. In circumstances where an ex gratia method of settlement is used by the handling Insurer, no contribution should be sought from the previous Insurer. In circumstances where a dispute arises and cannot be settled between the Insurers involved, the matter can be referred to the ABI Disputes Committee for consideration.
Question 12 Treasury Solicitor

What is the position under the Agreement where a policyholder dies and their property passes to the Treasury Solicitor?
Answer
In such circumstances, where a subsidence claim arises, it would be regarded as being outside the Agreement given that there had been a change of ownership of the property.
Question 18 Tied housing

Do the terms of the Agreement apply to a claim arising from a domestic property occupied by a tied tenant?
Question 13 Repossessed property

Would a subsidence claim, arising under a policy covering a property in the hands of an executor, fall to be dealt with under the Agreement?
Answer
Where the responsibility for arranging and buying insurance cover lies with the tied tenant, such an arrangement comes within the Agreement. Where the provider of tied housing has the responsibility of arranging and paying for the insurance cover then such an arrangement would be outside the Agreement.
Answer
In such a situation where there was a change of policy interest in name only, from a policyholder to a trustee, a subsidence
156
Question 19 Operative date of Agreement for new signatories

What is the operative date from which new signatories should adhere to the Agreement?
It is not expected that disputes involving small amounts will be submitted unless a significant issue of principle is involved. Reference of disputes to the Committee will be on the alternative basis that the parties involved jointly agree (a) to be bound by the Committees decision, or (b) that the Committees decision will not be binding. 5. Decisions. The decisions of the Disputes Committee will, when appropriate, be advised to Insurers who are signatories to the Domestic Subsidence Agreement direct by the secretariat. The identity of parties involved in the dispute will not be disclosed.
Answer
Any new Insurer wishing to join will automatically be recorded as adhering from 1 January 2000, the introductory date of the new Agreement.
Question 20 Procedure for a signatory who wishes to cease adherence to the Agreement
What is the procedure for an existing signatory to no longer be bound by the terms of the Agreement?
Answer
An existing signatory will be required to give a minimum of 3 months notice, in writing to ABI, that they wish to cease adherence to the terms of the Agreement. During the period of notice claims notified will continue to be dealt with under the Agreement.
E.2 ABI Domestic subsidence Tree Root Claims Agreement third party liability
E.2.1 The Agreement (operative from 22 August 1997) ABI Domestic subsidence Tree Root Claims Agreement third party liability
This Agreement relates to third party liability claims where both the liability and damage arise under policies covering domestic properties owned/tenanted/occupied by an Insured in a personal capacity and situated in Great Britain, Northern Ireland, the Isle of Man and the Channel Islands. Every Insurer subscribing to this Agreement agrees: 1. that where a claim arises in respect of subsidence or heave and where damage to the building and/or contents has been caused wholly or partly by tree root encroachment the Insurer holding the buildings and/or contents insurance for the damaged property undertakes to investigate, handle and where appropriate meet the claim on the basis of their policy cover; not to pursue recovery against the Insurers of the owned/tenanted/occupied property responsible for the liability of the tree root encroachment regardless of whether the damage has been caused wholly or partly as a result of the tree root encroachment; that in the event of there being a recurrence of damage and no reasonable preventative measures have been taken by the person/persons who have liability for the tree root encroachment this Agreement will have no effect in regard to any subsequent claim; that this Agreement will have no bearing or consideration in any uninsured loss claim which may be pursued against the person/persons having a potential liability for the tree root encroachment.
Question 21 Disputes Committee

How will the Disputes Committee operate?
Answer
The Disputes Committee will operate as set out in Appendix 1 which follows.
Appendix 1
1. 2. The function of the Disputes Committee is to resolve as expeditiously as possible disputes arising between insurers who are parties to this Agreement. Notes for Guidance (a) The arrangements detailed here are entirely voluntary; there is no compulsion on any Insurer to refer a dispute to the Committee. (b) The Committee will be a body of last resort and disputes will only be referred to it after discussions between senior claims officials at Head Office level of the Insurers involved, have failed to produce a solution. (c) It is not intended that the Committee should replace or restrict any other arrangements for the resolution of disputes, particularly any formal arrangements between Insurers which contain provisions for the resolution of disputes in matters of contribution. Where informal arrangements exist however, the Committees jurisdiction can apply. 3. Structure. The Disputes Committee will be chaired by a member of the secretariat of the General Insurance Department of the Association of British Insurers (hereinafter referred to as the secretariat) who will provide independent chairmanship but will not vote. All necessary services will be provided by the secretariat at its offices. Membership of the Committee shall comprise one representative each from 3 subscribing Members, such representation to be chosen by the secretariat. Procedure. When agreement has been reached between Insurers for reference to the Disputes Committee, it is the responsibility of the Insurers concerned to: (a) advise the secretariat that a stage of dispute has been reached and to request a meeting of the Disputes Committee (b) pass to the secretariat all pertinent evidence to place before the Committee in addition to a written submission.
2.
3.
4.
Provided that: (i) Immediate notice shall be given to the other Insurer by the Insurer to whom the claim is notified, together with copies of all relevant reports (including covering letters) from loss adjusters, engineers, surveyors and the like. (ii) Nothing in this Agreement shall prevent any Insurer from voiding a policy for fraud, non-disclosure or misrepresentation, or from relying otherwise on any policy term or condition except that late notification alone shall not prevent the operation of this Agreement. (iii) In the event of any dispute arising under this Agreement the matter shall be referred to the ABI Disputes Committee whose decision shall be binding. The Committee will be a body of last resort and disputes will only be referred to it if discussions between senior claims officials at Head Office level of the Insurers involved fail to produce a solution.
4.
157
E.2.2 ABI Guidance on their Agreement

Questions and answers to give guidance in applying the agreement.
Question 1 Why has the Agreement been prepared? Answer

The intention is that the material damage Insurer of the buildings or contents suffering subsidence damage will not seek recovery against the liability Insurers of the party responsible for the tree, be they the tree owner or the tenants or occupiers of the property on which the tree stands. This will avoid the need for duplication of costs by both the liability and material damage Insurer followed by disagreement over interpretation of specialist reports.
achieving this is for the loss adjuster or claims inspector acting for the damage Insurer to identify the neighbour responsible for the tree, and his liability Insurer, as early as possible. The damage Insurer should write not only to the neighbour holding him responsible for the damage and requiring that the letter be sent to his Insurers but also direct to the liability Insurer at the same time so that they are made aware of the matter and so that they can confirm application of the agreement. The damage Insurer shall exchange copies of expert evidence with the liability Insurer if asked to do so. It is NOT intended, within this Agreement, that Expert reports are disclosed to the neighbour by the damage Insurer.
Question 8
What if there is a recurrence of the damage?
Question 2 What is a tree root? Answer

The words tree root(s) should be widely interpreted to include the roots of all vegetation, for example trees, shrubs, climbing and creeping plants.
Answer
Where the ownership of the tree and the Insurer has not changed and no reasonable preventative action has been taken, clause 3 means that a recurrence is outside the Agreement and as a result the expenses associated with the recurrence will be recoverable. Any change in the ownership of the tree or the original Insurer is going to cause problems unless it can be proved unequivocally that the purchaser of the home/tree and/or any new Insurer had been fully informed of the problem so that appropriate reasonable preventative action or underwriting action could have been taken. In some cases it might be very difficult to get to this position and moreover it is clearly impracticable for these guidelines to address the many situations which might occur when there is a change of householder or Insurer. It is therefore suggested that the Insurers involved agree among themselves how these particular cases are to be resolved as pragmatically as possible.
Question 3 What premises are covered by the Agreement? Answer

The premises must be a domestic property owned and/or tenanted and/or occupied by an Insured in a personal capacity. The Agreement will only apply to domestic property claims in connection with the material damage and the legal liability aspects.
Question 4 Does the Agreement apply to Housing Association properties? Answer

The primary intention of the agreement is to apply to claims between personal owner-occupiers of neighbouring properties. Although the position of Housing Association properties is somewhat different, the agreement will apply only if BOTH neighbouring properties are insured in a personal capacity. This will be a question of fact in each case.
Question 9
What if the owner-a occupier of the damaged property claims directly against the liability Insurer of the property causing the damage and does not involve his buildings Insurer?
Answer
The agreement does not apply because this is an uninsured loss claim, mentioned specifically in clause 4 of the Agreement.
Question 5
Would a tree root subsidence claim, arising under a policy covering a property in the hands of an executor, fall within the Agreement?
Question 10
Will any delay on the part of the Insured in notifying a claim affect the application of the Agreement?
Answer
Yes. Where there was a change of policy interest in name only from a policyholder to a trustee, a tree root subsidence claim arising would be covered by the terms of the Agreement.
Answer
No.
Question 11
What is the operative date for new signatories to the Agreement?
Question 6
Does the Agreement apply to a claim that arises under a policy covering a domestic property which is repossessed by a mortgage lender?
Answer
Any Insurer wishing to join will automatically be recorded as adhering from XX/XX/XXXX, the introductory date of the Agreement, but the terms of the Agreement would apply only to claims notified to the joining Insurer after they had indicated they wished to adhere to the Agreement.
Answer
Title to a repossessed property does not pass to the mortgage lender. The property can still be regarded as being insured in a personal capacity and so the Agreement will apply to a tree-root subsidence claim notified after repossession IF the borrowers policy subsists for the benefit of the mortgage lender.
Question 12
What is the procedure for withdrawing from the Agreement?
Question 7
What is the procedure for confirming the Agreement between insurers?
Answer
A signatory will be required to give a minimum three months notice, in writing to ABI, that they wish to cease adherence to the terms of the Agreement. During the period of notice, claims notified will continue to be dealt with under the Agreement.
Answer
The agreement will operate most effectively if notifications are made directly between Insurers. The simplest way of
158
Appendix F Building Regulations

F.1 Building Regulations (England & Wales) F.1.1Introduction F.1.2Requirements of the regulations F.1.2.1 Part A: Structure F.1.2.2 Other requirements F.1.3Scope of the regulations F.1.3.1 Exemption by Schedule 2 F.1.3.2 Exemption by prescription F.1.3.3 Crown property F.1.4Application of the regulations F.1.4.1 Full plan route F.1.4.2 Building notice route F.1.5Building regulations as they apply to underpinning F.1.6Building control reverting to a local authority F.1.7Regularisation F.1.8Building regulation charges F.1.9Building over a sewer F.1.10 Determinations F.1.11 Relaxations or dispensations F.1.12 Requirements of other related legislation F.1.12.1 Inner London F.1.12.2 Other local Acts F.1.12.3 Other relevant legislation F.2 Scottish regulations F.2.1Introduction Building standards (Scotland) regulations 1990 F.2.2 Part A: Structure F.2.3 Part C: Structure F.2.4 Further requirements F.3 Northern Ireland regulations F.3.1Building regulations order F.3.2Scope of the regulations F.3.3How to ensure compliance with the regulations F.3.4Regulations as they apply to foundations 160 160 160 160 161 162 162 162 162 162 163 163 163 163 163 163 163 163 163 164 164 164 164 164 164 164 164 164 165 165 165 166 166
159
Appendix F Building Regulations

The contents of this appendix deals with the Building Regulations at some length because it is a subject that might impinge on various aspects of work connected with subsidence. affected by buildings or matters connected with buildings). This limitation makes it clear that the purpose of the regulations is simply to safeguard the health and safety of persons in or about building work controlled by the Regulations. There is no requirement regarding quality of finishes or works which are not building work directly controlled by the Regulations. Generally, all buildings which become or have their use changed to public buildings or buildings where people sleep, are regarded as those where a material change of use has occurred and therefore subject to the Regulations. They may, however, have to comply with all the requirements. Whether or not any actual building work is proposed, the building must comply after the use has changed. The 1994 amendment to the Regulations added Part L (Conservation of fuel and power) as a relevant requirement to be complied with when a material change of use occurs. This amendment also includes a further category of building work which must be classed as a material change of use, i.e. when the number of dwellings contained in a building is either increased or reduced. Where a new dwelling is created by building work or a material change of use, the energy rating of the dwelling must be calculated and notice of the rating given to the Local Authority. The notice must be given not later than the notice of completion or occupation of a dwelling. The calculations are to be in accordance with the Standard Assessment Procedure, details of which are set out in Approved Document L. There is a possibility that, in order to achieve the performance required by Part L, thermal insulation may be required to be installed between the ground and directly bearing slabs.
F.1 Building Regulations (England and Wales)

F.1.1 Introduction
Building Regulations were a product of the Building Act 1984F.1 which gives the Secretary of State the Power to make regulations, imposes a duty on Local Authorities to enforce the provisions of the Act, and defines the scope of Approved Inspectors. The Building Regulations 1991F.2 apply in England and Wales to what is now called Building Work, but do not apply in Scotland or Northern Ireland where there are different arrangements. The Regulations are generally administered by the Local Authority, being a City or Borough Council, District Council or Unitary Authority. For specified types of work, Approved Inspectors, either Corporate or Individual, can carry out site inspections and or plan checking, and developers have a choice whether to use the Local Authority or Approved Inspector for these functions. However, Approved Inspectors cannot carry out enforcement, local enactments and approvals for building close to or over sewers. Building Regulations approvals are not to be confused with planning consents which are totally separate and controlled under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990F.3, and it must be remembered that the Building Acts and Regulations are subject to constant review, with the result that certain provisions contained in them change from time to time. It is therefore advisable to check with your Building Control Authority as to the currency and applicability of the legislation to the proposed work. Note that in some instances, work which may be exempt under building regulations may require consent under the Town and Country Planning Act, particularly in new housing developed where conditions regarding alterations have been attached to the original planning consent. Similarly, work exempt from planning requirements may need Building Regulation approval. Building Work is defined as the erection, extension or material alteration of a building, provision, extension or alteration of a controlled service or fitting in connection with a building, but also includes a specific definition to work involving the underpinning of a building. A Building is defined as any permanent or temporary building, but not any other kind of structure or erection, and reference to a building includes part of a building. Building work must be carried out with proper materials which are appropriate and in a workmanlike manner. Proper materials include materials which comply with either an CE Mark in accordance with the Construction Products Directive of the EC, or a harmonised standard or European technical approval, or a British Standard or British Board of Agreement Certificate or other equivalent specification issued by a member of the EC. It is recommended to consult your local authority regarding the effect of the European Construction Products Directive. There is an important limitation which applies to all the Regulations with the exception of fuel and power and access and facilities for disabled people. This is that the requirements shall not require anything to be done except for the purpose of securing reasonable standards of health and safety for persons in or about buildings (and any others who may be
F.1.2 Requirements of the Regulations

The Secretary of State produced The Building Regulations 1985F.4 which came into force in January 1986. These have since been superseded by The Building Regulations 1991F.2 that came into force on 1 June 1992. Part 11 Regulation 3 Meaning of Building Work includes the erection or extension of a building which could include the formation of the foundation, as well as work involving the underpinning of a building. Regulation 4 states that building work shall be carried out so that it complies with the relevant requirements of Schedule 1 of The Building Regulations. The following two subsections give a summary of the requirements.
F.1.2.1 Part A Structure

This requires a building to be constructed so that the combination of dead load, imposed load and wind load are sustained and transmitted to the ground. This should be achieved safely and without causing deflection or deformation of the building or part, or movement of the ground which will affect the stability of the building or another building. Buildings having five or more storeys (each basement level being counted as one storey) must be built so that in the event of an accident, the building would not suffer collapse to an extent disproportionate to the cause. The requirements for foundations, and all other structural elements of a building are contained in the following extracts from Part A of schedule 1 of The Building Regulations 1991. Loading: The building shall be constructed so that the combined dead, imposed and wind loads are sustained and transmitted by it to the ground safely and without causing such deflection or deformation of any part of the building, or such movement of the ground as will impair the stability of another building. Ground movement: The building shall be constructed so
160
that the ground movement caused by swelling, shrinkage or freezing of subsoil, or landslip or subsidence (other than subsidence arising from shrinkage), in as far as the risk can be reasonably foreseen, will not impair the stability of any part of the building. To support, and running alongside The Building Regulations, The Secretary of State also produced a series of Approved Documents which provide practical guidance. Provided the guidance contained within these documents is followed then this will be evidence tending to show compliance with the regulations. Approved Document AF.5 relates to building structure. The first parts of this document, A1 and A2, gives practical guidance on matters relating to loading and ground movement. In the general section at the beginning of the document there are a series of definitions including those for: dead loads, which are the load of the building itself imposed loads, which are the loads that can be brought into or put onto the building such as those due to snow, furniture, machinery or the people who use the building wind loads.
sion into compartments does not apply to prisons). External walls and roofs of buildings must offer adequate resistance to the spread of fire over the walls and the roof from one building to another. The degree of resistance depends on use and position.
Part C Site preparation and resistance to moistureF.12

The ground covered by a building must be free of vegetable matter and precautions must be taken to avoid danger to health from contaminants. Attention is drawn to the EC Directive 96/61 concerning integrated pollution control, (IPPC), which has been implemented in the UK by the Pollution, (prevention and control) Act 1999, and The Groundwater Regulations 1998. This legislation imposes additional requirements to the Building Regulations. The subsoil must be drained as necessary and the walls, floors and roofs must adequately resist moisture passing into the building.
Part D Toxic substancesF.13

Fumes from cavity wall insulation must be prevented from permeating into occupied buildings.
Part E Resistance to the passage of soundF.14

Walls and floors must resist airborne sound and floors must also resist impact sound. This part only applies to dwellings, walls separating dwellings from other users of the building, and flat conversions.
These are the different types of loading for which a building or part of a building must be designed to support or resist. There then follows a series of deemed to satisfy standards for elements of construction of small buildings. Section 1E relates to strip foundations of plain concrete and contains a section which relates strip width to linear load. There are no other specific requirements relating to foundations or underpinning in Approved Document A. Section 4 of the Approved Document A is a list of the British Standards and Codes of Practice referred to in the Document including amongst others: BS 12 BS 5328F.7 BS 6399F.8 CP3F.9 BS 8004F.10.
F.6
Part F VentilationF.15
Adequate ventilation must be provided for people in the building (excluding buildings into which people do not normally go, e.g. storage buildings and private garages). Provisions must also be made to prevent condensation in roofs and roof voids of buildings.
Part G HygieneF.16
An adequate number of sanitary conveniences must be installed. They must be designed to allow effective cleansing and must not be situated in rooms used for the storage and preparation of food. A bathroom or shower room with bath and hot and cold water must be provided in dwellings. Unvented hot water storage systems must have devices built in to ensure safety and must be installed by a competent person.
Reference is also made to a series of Department of Environment documents on the matter of subsidence. It should be noted that the above list of technical documentation is not exhaustive and other technical information, test data, codes, etc. can be used to prove any proposal or form of construction, provided that the Local Authority can agree its relevance to the case in hand. Finally section 91 of The Building Act 1984F.1 lays a duty on the Local Authorities of England and Wales to implement The Building Act and therefore The Building Regulations. This means they not only have the power to control how the building works are carried out in their area, but they have an obligation in law actually to exercise that control.
Part H Drainage and waste disposalF.17

Adequate systems of foul water and surface water drainage must be provided. Cesspools and septic tanks must be of adequate capacity and so sited and constructed to allow access for emptying and to avoid contamination of water supplies. Satisfactory means of storing solid waste must be provided together with adequate access to the storage space and to a street for its removal.
Part J Heat producing appliancesF.18

Applies to fixed appliances which burn solid fuel, oil, gas and to incinerators.
F.1.2.2 Other requirements Part B FireF.11

B1. Means of escape The requirements, which now apply to all buildings, except prisons, are that means of escape capable of being safely and effectively used at all times must be provided from the building to a place of safety. B2.3.4 Fire spread (Internal and external) Internal surfaces must offer adequate resistance to the spread of flame and, if they do catch fire, have a reasonable rate of heat release. Structurally there must be sufficient fire resistance to maintain stability for a reasonable period. The building may be divided into compartments to restrict fire spread and concealed spaces must be sealed or if they are extensive subdivided and sealed. (In this paragraph, the reference to divi-
Part K Stairways, ramps and guardsF.19

Stairways and ramps must afford safe passage and be adequately guarded. Vehicle barriers must also be provided where necessary.
Part L Conservation of fuel and powerF.20

Reasonable provision must be made for the conservation of fuel and power in buildings by limiting heat loss through the fabric of the building, controlling the operation of and limiting the heat loss from hot water systems and installing efficient artificial lighting systems. The requirements, other than those relating to lighting, apply to dwellings and other buildings with a floor area of more than 30m2.
Part M Facilities for disabled peopleF.21

Disabled people are those who have an impairment which
161
limits their ability to walk or who have impaired hearing or sight. Reasonable provision must be made for means of access and use and for sanitary conveniences for disabled people. Provision must also be made to accommodate disabled people in audience or spectator accommodation.
and Science, schools and other educational establishments are exempt from the requirements of the Regulations. Certain buildings of statutory undertakers and other specified bodies are also exempt. F.1.3.3 Crown Property At present there is no legal obligation for the Crown to comply with the requirements of The Building Regulations. Section 44 of The Building Act 1984F.1 provides for the substantive provisions to be applied to work carried out by or on behalf of a Crown Authority, whether or not in relation to a Crown building. Crown immunity for Building Regulation purposes was removed from 1 April 1991 from building work to be carried out on land used or occupied by health service bodies (Section 60 of the National Health Service and Community Care Act 1990F.26). Removal of Crown immunity is proposed for a range of other bodies, including former public utilities now privatised. It is recommended that works to a suspected immune body be checked, as, for example, the Police lost their exemption in April 2000.
Part N Glass and glazingF.22

Glazing with which persons are likely to come into contact, shall be shielded, resist impact or break in a way that is unlikely to cause injury. Glazing in buildings other than dwellings shall incorporate features that make it apparent.
F.1.3 Scope of the Regulations

F.1.3.1 Exemption by Schedule 2 The buildings contained within the Regulations are as in F.1.1 with exemptions clearly defined in Schedule 2 to the Regulations, shown in Table F.1. F.1.3.2 Exemption by Prescription The Building Act 1984F.1 by virtue of Section 3 may exempt a prescribed class of building service or fitting and the Secretary of State may by direction exempt a particular building, or buildings at a particular location from the provisions of The Building Regulations. The Act by virtue of Section 4 provides that where plans have been approved by the Secretary of State for Education
F.1.4 Application of the Regulations

As explained in 10.6.2 there is the choice of using an Approved Inspector for certain types of work. The provision of the building control service under this route is a matter for
Table F1 Description of Exempted Building England & Wales Class Description Buildings controlled under other legislation: Buildings subject to the Explosives ActsF.23 Buildings other than houses or offices erected on a site licensed under the Nuclear Installations ActF.24 Buildings included in the schedule to section 1 of the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas ActF.25 Buildings not frequented by people: These are detached buildings into which people do not normally go or only go intermittently to inspect plant and machinery. The exemption applies only if the building is sited at least one and a half times its height from the boundary or from the point to which people normally go. Greenhouses & agriculture buildings: Greenhouses are only exempt providing they are not used for retailing, packing or exhibiting. Greenhouses used as a garden centre shop are not exempt. Agricultural buildings and buildings principally for keeping animals are exempt if they are not used as a dwelling, are at least one and a half times their height from any building where there is sleeping accommodation and have a fire exit not more than 30m from any point in a building. Temporary buildings: Those which remain for less than 28 days Ancillary buildings: Builders huts containing no sleeping accommodation Estate sales buildings Buildings other than dwellings or offices used in connection with a mine or quarry Small detached buildings: Single storey buildings under 30m2, containing no sleeping accommodation, constructed substantially of noncombustible material or sited at least 1m from the boundary or curtilage, e.g. detached garages and sheds Nuclear shelters under 30m2 floor area: excavation for a shelter not to be nearer to other buildings than the depth of the excavation plus 1m Floor area not more than 15m2, with no sleeping accommodation, constructed of any material Extensions to buildings: At ground level with a floor area not more than 30m2 which is a conservatory or porch providing the glazing they contain complies with Part NF.22 a covered yard or covered way a carport open on at least two sides
162
contractual arrangement, so it is only possible to describe the application of the Regulations as this relates to the provision of Building Control by a local authority. There is a choice as to which of the two Local Authority Building Control routes may be followed, the Full Plan route or the Building Notice route. If there is any doubt as to what requirement may have to be satisfied, or if information is required before submitting a Building Regulations application, it is advisable to contact the building control office for an appointment when proposals can be discussed. F.1.4.1 Full plan route Building Regulations 11, 12 and section 16 of The Building Act 1984F.1 Deposit of Full Plans apply in particular. The proposals are submitted to the Local Authority for them to be formally examined by the Authority within stated time limits. If all the plans and details, including those for foundations, are found to be in compliance with the legislation, the proposals will be passed. If any part of the proposals, including those for foundations, are shown not to be in compliance with the Regulations then by prior agreement a conditional pass may be issued. This lists such modifications as the Local Authority require to show the plans fully comply with the Regulations. Alternatively, a rejection may be issued and a suitably amended resubmission may have to be made. Once the proposals have been passed, and the work is carried out fully to the details shown thereon, in a proper and workmanlike manner, the Local Authority will signify compliance. Before work actually starts on the site it is necessary for notice to be served on the Local Authority of the intention to start work; the Building Control Officer will agree an inspection regime at local site level. This procedure is necessary to ensure that the inspections are carried out in accordance with the site programme. It should be noted that if the work is to be carried out on a designated building under the Fire Precautions Act 1971F.27, e.g. factory, office, shop, railway premises, hotel, boarding house, etc. a Full plan application must be made, where there are provisions for the Statutory Consultation with the Fire Authority.
F.1.6 Building Control reverting to a local authority

Should an Approved Inspector cancel an initial notice, or default on the duty, the work can revert to the Local Authority. Opening up, details or other requirements to ensure compliance may be required.
F.1.7 Regularisation
In the event of works having being undertaken without the building control function having been involved, the Building Regulations provide for a Local Authority to regularise the work. As with reversion opening up, details or other requirements to ensure compliance may be required.
F.1.8 Building Regulation charges

As from 1 April 1999, the Prescribed Fees Regulations were repealed and Local Authorities are empowered to levy charges when they exercise the building control function. The level of charges is set by a scheme that each Local Authority is required to set, therefore it is recommended that definitive information be sought from the applicable Local Authority. Value Aded Tax is chargeable on all charges except reversion and regularisation. The regulations also make provision for a determination fee which is the amount which has to be paid to the Secretary of State for a determination on a matter of dispute upon the plans.
F.1.9 Building over a sewer

If deposited plans show that any building or extension will be built over or will interfere with a sewer the plans may be rejected or the Local Authority, or the Water Authority may state conditions under which they will agree to the building work taking place. The Water Act 1989F.28 made a significant extension to the grounds for rejection of plans. Previously this operated only when a sewer was actually built over, but now includes work both near a sewer and work which may affect access to it. This only applies to sewers that a sewerage undertaker has to keep under Section 199 of the Water Industry Act 1991F.29. Sewerage undertakers have the power to direct local authorities how to deal with such applications and different sewerage undertakers may have different views on the subject.
F.1.4.2 Building Notice Route

By this alternative the Local Authority only requires 48 hours formal notice of an intention to start work, accompanied by a description of the work and as much detail as is available for which Building Regulations 11 & 12 apply. The Building Control Officer may require additional details to assist with the inspections and will agree an inspection regimen at local site level. This procedure is necessary to ensure that the inspections are carried out in accordance with the site programme. It should be noted that there is no requirement for the work to proceed in accordance with any pre-approved drawings or details, provided the work on the site complies with the requirements of the Building Regulations, no objection will be raised. However it must be emphasised that without details it may be necessary for the Building Control Officer to inspect all elements of work before covering up, and such arrangements can involve substantial delays on site, even if the Building Control Officer visits daily. So this is a more uncertain route because the approvals of the Local Authority are only being given stage by stage as the work progresses, therefore the risk of disagreement arising with the Local Authority is much more likely than by the Full plan route, where the Local Authority approval is already given, and there could be a requirement to open up certain works.
F.1.10 Determinations
If a question arises between the applicant and the Council as to whether plans comply with the Building Regulations, an appeal can be made to the Secretary of State for a determination. Applications for determination cannot be made if the work in question has been started.
F.1.11 Relaxations or dispensations

The requirements of the Regulations are all written in functional terms, and their purpose is to secure reasonable standards. It is therefore not possible to relax where something is required to be reasonable because any relaxation of the requirements would mean that the result would be less than reasonable. Dispensation means that the whole particular requirement is dispensed with and this is acceptable only in exceptional circumstances. Applications for dispensation are usually made on a special form which must state the requirement to be dispensed with and the grounds upon which the dispensation is sought. The application must be made to the Local Authority who can either allow the dispensation or refuse it. If no decision is reached after two months it can be presumed that it has been refused. Appeals against refusal to dispense with requirements may be made to the Secretary of State. There is no fee payable and Secretary of State has no time limit in which to reach a decision.
F.1.5 Building regulations as they apply to foundations and underpinning

This was described previously in 10.6.3.
163
F.1.12 Requirements of other related legislation

There are in force a number of Local Acts which have provision related to the construction of buildings. Some of these are linked powers, that is to say that where plans are deposited under the Building Regulations, the Local Authority has power to reject the plans if compliance with these local provisions is not achieved. F.1.12.1 Inner London The 1987 Regulations also amended certain provisions of the London Building Acts (Amendment) Act 1939F.30 which still remain in force. F.1.12.2 Other Local Acts Many Local Acts have been promoted to control matters relating to specific buildings in certain areas and some of the provisions differ from some requirements of the Building Regulations. There are over 30 of these Acts in force. Measures controlled include access for the fire brigade, fire precautions and means of escape in certain buildings, and provisions in connection with flammable substances. F.1.12.3 Other relevant legislation Clean Air Act, 1993F.31 Cinematograph Acts 1909F.32 and 1952F.33 Factories Act 1961F.34 Fire Precautions Act 1971F.27 Gaming Act 1968F.35 Highways Act 1980F.36 Housing Act 1985F.37 Licensing (Amendment) Act 1985F.38 Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1982F.39 Offices, Shops and Railway Premises Act 1963F.40 Safety of Sports Grounds Act 1975F.41 Theatres Act 1968F.42 Town & Country Planning Act 1990 F . 3 and General Development Orders Water Industry Act 1991F.29
of construction must therefore be at least to the standards set out in the Technical StandardsF.45. Part A of the Technical StandardsF.45 gives information on the general application of the Regulations and provides: a full list of defined terms used in both the Statutory Instruments and Technical Standards instructions of the interpretation of references to other published standards a complete extract of Regulations are applied generally covering: exempted buildings fixtures not requiring a Building Warrant limited life buildings classification of buildings by purpose occupancy capacity rules of measurement, and means of compliance and a set of the Schedules of the Statutory Instrument essential to interpret and apply the Regulations.
F.2.2 Part A Structure
The exemptions defined in Part A are very similar to those noted for England and Wales covering the same broad range subject to defined exceptions.
F.2.3 Part CF.46 Structure

The intention of this part is to ensure that the structure of a building is safe, listing the criteria which are relevant in all cases: loading properties of materials structural analysis details of construction safety factors workmanship, and the nature of ground
F.2 Scottish Regulations

F.2.1 Introduction Building Standards (Scotland) Regulations 1990
Building Control in Scotland is based on the administration by local authorities of the Building Standards Regulations (Scotland) 1990 F.43 made by the Secretary of State for Scotland subject to approval by Parliament. The Building Standards RegulationsF.43 are made by the Secretary of State for Scotland under the powers in Section 3 of The Building (Scotland) Act 1959F.44 as amended. The Regulations do not apply retrospectively to existing buildings. The Secretary of State, in framing Building Standards Regulations, is required to consult the Building Standards Advisory Committee and such other bodies as appear to be representative of the interests concerned. Regulations are published in the form of Statutory Instruments which are subject to annulment by resolution of either House of Parliament. Regulation 9 sets out the ways by which the requirements of the Regulations can be satisfied: by compliance with the relevant standards set out in the supporting Technical StandardsF.45 by conforming with provisions which are stated in the Technical StandardsF.45 to be deemed to satisfy the relevant standards, or by any other means which can be shown to satisfy the relevant standards
and notes that loads used in calculations must allow for possible dynamic, concentrated and peak load effects that may occur. Part CF.46 Regulation 11 states that every building shall be so constructed that the combined loads to which the building may be subject are sustained and transmitted to the ground without impairing the stability of the building..... Part CF.46 The Standards notes the application of this part of this part of the Regulations, the construction and loads acting on a building and the requirements relating to disproportionate collapse. Part CF.46 The Provisions deemed to satisfy the standards list how the requirements of the above can be met.
F.2.4 Further requirements
To satisfy the Regulations the design, materials and methods
Further requirements are found in Part G F . 4 7 of the Regulations relating to the preparation of sites and resistance to moisture. The above Regulations mirror those of England and Wales in many aspects in referring to a number of British Standards and Codes of Practice that satisfy compliance with the substantive requirement of the Regulations. Generally in Scotland, local acts were replaced by the Civic Government (Scotland) Act 1982F.48 and thus do not pose a difficulty. Other relevant legislation as noted at the end of F1.2.3 should be considered in their Scottish context. Partial underpinning, if considered to comply with the relevant standards, will generally be approved. At the present time there are no Approved Inspectors in Scotland, but there has been self-certification of structural design carried out by chartered engineers since November 1992.
164
F.3 Northern Ireland Regulations

F.3.1 Building Regulations (Northern Ireland) Order.
The Building Regulations (Northern Ireland) Order 1979F.49 (as amended) confers power on the Department of the Environment (NI) to make regulations for: all or any of the matters as set out in Schedule 1 of the Order, and such other matters relating to buildings considered relevant to the purposes of the Order, after due consultations with the Building Regulations Advisory Committee.
Within Northern Ireland the Building Regulations are administered and enforced by district councils rather than by Approved Inspectors as found in England and Wales. Currently no provisions exist for Approved Inspectors in Northern Ireland.
F.3.2 Scope of the regulations

A valid application and appropriate notices are required to be made and given to the district council for relevant building work in the following circumstances: erection of buildings altering and extending buildings provision of services and fittings to buildings material change of use of buildings.
In the Order building can be defined generally as any permanent or temporary building, and any reference to a building includes a reference to part of a building. Building regulations in themselves may be expressed in terms of performance, types of material, methods of construction or of ensuring safety, or otherwise. Requirements as specified in any building regulation set reasonable levels so as to secure the health, safety, welfare and convenience of persons in or about buildings and of others who may be affected by buildings or matters connected with buildings and for furthering the conservation of fuel and power.
The method of application can be either a full plans submission, or a building notice application (the notice route only being applicable to domestic works). Building Regulations are expressed in functional format specifying performance standards to be reasonable and adequate for their purpose. Supporting Technical Booklets and specific British Standards are given deemed to satisfy status in meeting the requirements of relevant regulations however their use is not a mandatory requirement of the regulations.
Table F2 Description of Exempted Building Northern Ireland Class Description Buildings controlled under other legislation: Buildings subject to the Explosives Acts (NI) 1875F.50 & 1924F.51 Buildings other than a dwelling, office or canteen accommodation erected on a site licensed under the Nuclear Installations Act 1965F.24 Buildings subject to Part II of the Historic Monuments and Archaeological Objects (NI) Order 1995F.52. Buildings not frequented by people: Buildings to which people intermittently go to for the purpose of inspecting and maintaining plant provided it is located not less than one and a half times its height from a relevant boundary or any building to which people normally go. Buildings for agriculture and keeping of animals: Provided no part is used as a dwelling, it is located not less than one and a half times its height from a relevant boundary, or any building containing sleeping accommodation, and the maximum travel distance to any fire exit is not more than 30m. Temporary buildings: Those not intended to remain in use where it is erected for more than 28 days Ancillary buildings: Construction site huts provided they contain no sleeping accommodation Buildings other than those containing a dwelling used in connection with a mine or a quarry Small detached buildings: Single storey buildings not more than 30m2, constructed of substantially of non-combustible materials and sited not less than 1m from any relevant boundary Detached nuclear shelter or similar provided it is not more than 30m2, building excavation not closer to any other building than the depth of excavation plus 1m Single storey buildings not more than 15m2, located more than 1m from any dwelling and contains no sleeping accommodation Extensions: Conservatory, porch, covered area or way, or carport open on at least two sides provided the floor area is not more than 30m2, and the glazing to a conservatory or porch complies with Part VF.53 Glazing Other buildings: Air-supported structures Tents or marquees Greenhouses attached or detached but excluding those used principally for retail, packaging, or exhibiting Refer to Schedule 1 of the Building (Amendment) Regulations (NI) 1995F.54.
165
Exemptions
The following do not require Buildings Regulations applications: Building work in connection with any building belonging to a statutory undertaking and held or used by them for the purposes of their undertaking provided that this exemption shall not extend to dwellings or to buildings used as offices, shops, showrooms or passenger stations for air, road, rail or sea travel. Crown Property however Article 22 of the Building Regulations (NI) OrderF.49 implies that the substantive requirements of the regulations shall apply to work carried out by or on behalf of a Crown authority. The erection and alteration or extension of any exempted building (including the provision of any service or fitting) as shown in Table F.2.
loads used cater for possible dynamic, concentrated and peak load effects, and (b) the design and construction of the work is carried out in accordance with the relevant recommendations of the following: (i) foundations: BS 8004: 1986F.59 or DOE (NI) Technical Booklet D: 1994F.60 Sections 1 & 5 for houses and small buildings.
(ii) structural work of reinforced, prestressed or plain concrete: BS 8110 Pt 1: 1997F.61, BS 8110 Pt 2F.62 & Pt 3F.63: 1985.
F.3.3 How to ensure compliance with the regulations

The Building Regulations are the mandatory requirements to be complied with regarding the design and construction of relevant buildings, and the method chosen to demonstrate compliance is open for choice to the applicant or his agent. District councils will most probably for assessment purposes benchmark alternative or innovative proposals against the deemed to satisfy documents named within the regulations. It is to be noted that these documents are not regulations in themselves and therefore do not set mandatory requirements. They do, however, indicate methods and standards of construction which if followed demonstrate compliance with regulation requirements and consequently cannot be challenged by district councils.
(iii) structural work of steel: BS 449 Pt 2: 1969F.64; or BS 5950 Pt 1: 1990F.65 and BS 5950 Pt 2: 1992F.66.
(iv) structural work of composite steel and concrete construction: BS 5950 Pt 3: Section 3.1: 1990F.67 and BS 5950 Pt 4: 1994F.68
(v) structural work of aluminium: CP 118: 1969F.69 BS 8118 Pt 1 & 2: 1991F.70, F.71
F.3.4 Regulations as they apply to foundations

Building work means the erection of a building, the structural alteration or extension of a building (including work in connection with the making of a material change of use) or the provision of a service or fitting. There is no specific definition for work relating to the underpinning of a building within the Northern Ireland regulations such work will tend to be considered under Regulation A7 Applications to alterations and extensions.
(vi) structural work of masonry: BS 5628 Pt 1: 1992F.72, BS 5628 Pt 2: 1995F.73 and BS 5628 Pt 3: 1985F.74; or DOE (NI) Technical Booklet D: 1994F.60 Sections 1,3 & 4 (for residential buildings not more than 3 storeys, small single storey non residential buildings and small buildings forming annexes to residential buildings
Part D Structure
Building work shall be carried out so that it complies with the relevant requirements of the regulations. The requirements for foundations and other structural elements of a building are contained in the principal regulations, as amended by the Building (Amendment) Regulations (NI) 1999F.54.
(vii) structural work of timber: BS 5268 Pt 2: 1996F.75 and BS 5268 Pt 3: 1998F.76; or DOE (NI) Technical Booklet D: 1994F.60 Sections 1 & 2 (for single family houses of not more than 3 storeys)
Regulation D1 Stability
A building shall be designed and constructed so that the combined dead, imposed and wind loads are sustained and transmitted to the ground, taking into account the nature of the ground: safely, and without impairing the safety of any part of another building.
Further requirements
Additional requirements need to be taken account of when considering foundations of new buildings, altering or extending existing buildings, and buildings undergoing a material change of use: Regulation C2 Preparation of site and resistance to dangerous and harmful substances such that the site of the building and adjacent ground require adequate measures to be taken so as to prevent within practical reason any harmful effect on the building or the health and safety of the occupants caused by: vegetable soil, and dangerous or harmful substances, e.g. radon or landfill gases, etc.
The requirements of D1 are deemed to be satisfied if: (a) the loads to which a building will be subjected are calculated in accordance with: dead and imposed loads (excluding imposed roof loads) BS 6399 Pt 1: 1996F.55 imposed roof loads BS 6399 Pt 3: 1988F.56 wind loads BS 6399 Pt 2 1997F.57: or CP 3 Chapter V Pt 2 1972F.58 (S3 not to be taken as less than 1) Provided that: actual loads are used, where actual loads to which a building is to be subjected is likely to exceed calculated loads, and
166
Regulation C4 Subsoil drainage such that the site of the building and adjacent ground require adequate measures to be taken so as to prevent any harmful effect on the building or the health and safety of the occupants caused by:
ground water, and existing subsoil drainage
F.24 F.25 F.26 F.27 F.28 F.29 F.30 F.31 F.32 F.33 F.34 F.35 F.36 F.37 F.38 F.39 F.40 F.41 F.42 F.43 F.44 F.45 F.46
Regulation C5 Resistance to ground moisture and weather such that every wall, floor, and roof shall be constructed so as to prevent any harmful effect on the building or the health of the occupants caused by the passage of moisture to any part of the building from: the ground, and the weather.
The requirements for the above regulations are deemed to be satisfied if the requirements of: Regulation C3 Deemed to satisfy provisions relating to radon, and The recommendations of DOE (NI) Technical Booklet C: 1994 F.60
are taken into account. (NB: Appendix 1 of the Technical Booklet provides limited guidance on the preparation of contaminated sites). Additional exemptions on compliance are contained within Regulation A7 Application to alterations and extensions and Regulation A9 Application to material change of use.
References
F.1 F.2 F.3 F.4 F.5 F.6 F.7 F.8 F.9 F.10 F.11 F.12 F.13 F.14 F.15 F.16 F.17 F.18 F.19 F.20 F.21 F.22 F.23 Building Act 1984 Building Regulations 1991 Town and Country Planning Act 1990 The Building Regulations 1985 London HMSO 1985 The Building Regulations 1991: Approved Document A: Structure. London, HMSO, 1992 BS 12: 1996. Specification for Portland cement. London, BSI BS 5328 Parts 1-4. Concrete. London, BSI. BS 6399 Parts 1-3. Loading for buildings. London, BSI. CP3: Chapters I-X. Code of basic data for the design of buildings. London, BSI. BS 8004: 1986. Code of practice for foundations. London, BSI, 1986 Building Regulations 1991, Approved Document B. Fire safety. London, HMSO, 1992 Building Regulations 1991, Approved Document C. Site preparation and resistance to moisture. London, HMSO, 1992 Building Regulations 1991, Part D. Toxic substances. London, HMSO Building Regulations 1991, Approved Document E. Resistance to the passage of sound. London, HMSO, 1992 Building Regulations 1991, Approved Document F. Ventilation. London, HMSO, 1995 Building Regulations 1991, Approved Document G. Hygiene. London, HMSO, 1992 Building Regulations 1991, Approved Document H. Drainage and waste disposal. London, HMSO, 1992 Building Regulations 1991, Approved Document J. Heat producing appliances. London, HMSO, 1992 Building Regulations 1991, Approved Document K. Stairways, ramps and guards. London, The Stationary Office, 1998 Building Regulations 1991, Approved Document L. Conservation of fuel and power. London, HMSO, 1995 Building Regulations 1991, Approved Document M. Access and facilities for disabled people. London, The Stationary Office, 1999 Building Regulations 1991, Approved Document N. Glazing safety in relation to impact, opening and cleaning. London, The Stationary Office, 1998 Explosives Act 1923
F.47 F.48 F.49 F.50 F.51 F.52 F.53 F.54 F.55 F.56 F.57 F.58 F.59 F.60 F.61 F.62 F.63
F.64 F.65
F.66 F.67
Nuclear Installations Act 1965 Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act 1979 National Health Service and Community Care Act 1990, Section 60 Fire Precautions Act 1971 Water Act 1989 Water Industry Act 1991 London Building Acts (Amendment) Act 1939 Clean Air Act 1993 Cinematograph Act 1909 Cinematograph Act 1952 Factories Act 1961 Gaming Act 1968 Highways Act 1980 Housing Act 1985 Licensing (Amendment) Act 1985 Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1982 Offices, Shops and Railway Premises Act 1963 Safety of Sports Grounds Act 1975 Theatres Act 1968 Building Standards (Scotland) Regulations 1990 Building (Scotland) Act 1959 Technical Standards for compliance with the Building Standards (Scotland) Regulations 1990 HMSO Building Standards (Scotland) Regulations 1990 Part C Structure Building Standards (Scotland) Regulations 1990 Part G Preparation of sites and resistance to moisture Civic Government (Scotland) Act 1982 The Building Regulations (Northern Ireland) Order 1979 Explosives Act (Northern Ireland) 1875 Explosives Act (Northern Ireland) 1924 Historic Monuments and Archaeological Objects (NI) Order 1995 Part II The Building Regulations (Northern Ireland) Part V Glazing 1990 Building (Amendment) Regulations (NI) 1995 BS 6399 Pt 1: 1996. Loading for buildings: dead and imposed loads (excluding imposed roof loads). London, BSI, 1996 BS 6399 Pt 3 :1988. Loading for buildings: Imposed roof loads. London, BSI, 1988 BS 6399 Pt 2: 1997. Loading for buildings: Code of practice for wind loads. London, BSI, 1997 CP 3 Chapter V Pt 2: 1972. Code of basic data for the design of buildings: Loading: Wind loads. London, BSI, 1972 BS 8004: 1986. Code of practice for foundations. London, BSI, 1986 DOE (NI) Technical Booklet D: 1994 BS 8110 Pt 1: 1997. Structural use of concrete: Code of practice for design and construction. London, BSI, 1997 BS 8110 Pt 2: 1985. Structural use of concrete: code of practice for special circumstances. London, BSI, 1985 BS 8110 Pt 3: 1985. Structural use of concrete: Design charts for singly reinforced beams, doubly reinforced beams and rectangular columns. London, BSI, 1985 BS 449 Pt 2: 1969. Specification for the use of structural steel in building: metric units. London, BSI, 1969 BS 5950 Pt 1: 1990. Structural use of steelwork in building: Code of practice for design in simple and continuous construction: hot rolled sections. London, BSI, 1990 BS 5950 Pt 2: 1992. Structural use of steelwork in building: Specification for materials, fabrication and erection: hot rolled sections. London, BSI, 1992 BS 5950 Pt 3: 1990 Section 3.1. Structural use of
167
F.68 F.69 F.70 F.71 F.72 F.73 F.74 F.75 F.76
steelwork in building: Code of practice for design of simple and continuous composite beams. London, BSI, 1990 BS 5950 Pt 4: 1994. Structural use of steelwork in building: Code of practice for design of composite slabs with profiled steel sheeting. London, BSI, 1994 CP118: 1969. The structural use of aluminium. London, BSI, 1969 BS 8118 Pt 1: 1991. Structural use of aluminium: Code of practice for design. London, BSI, 1991 BS 8118 Pt 2: 1991. Structural use of aluminium: Specification for materials, workmanship and protection. London, BSI, 1991 BS 5628 Pt 1: 1992. Code of practice for use of masonry: Structural use of unreinforced masonry. London, BSI, 1992 BS 5628 Pt 2: 1995. Code of practice for use of masonry: Structural use of reinforced and prestressed masonry. London, BSI, 1995 BS 5628 Pt 3: 1985. Code of practice for use of masonry: Materials and components, design and workmanship. London, BSI, 1985 BS 5268 Pt 2: 1996. Structural use of timber: Code of practice for permissible stress design, materials and workmanship. London, BSI, 1996 BS 5268 Pt 3: 1998. Structural use of timber: Code of practice for trussed rafter roofs. London, BSI, 1998
Bibliography
Hamilton, W. N., et al.: The Scottish Building Regulations explained and illustrated, 2nd edition. Oxford, Blackwell, 1996
168
Appendix G The Party Wall, etc. Act 1996

G.1 Introduction G.2 Scope of the Act G.3 Definitions G.4 Notices G.4.1 Work to an existing party wall G.4.2 New wall astride a boundary line G.4.3 New wall against the boundary line G.4.4 Excavation near neighbouring buildings G.5 Dispute procedure G.6 Award G.7 Costs of work 170 170 170 170 170 170 170 170 171 171 171
169
Appendix G The Party Wall, etc. Act 1996

G.1 Introduction
The Party Wall, etc. Act 1996G.1 came into effect on 1 July 1997 throughout England and Wales extending to the whole of England and Wales the provisions of the 1939 London Building Acts. It authorises the carrying out of work that would otherwise constitute a trespass and also confers rights of entry. It is relevant to: work on an existing wall shared with another property building on the boundary with a neighbouring property excavating near a neighbouring building. According to a DETR leafletG.2, this does not include such things as wooden fences, and party structure a wider term which includes a floor partition or other structure separating buildings, or parts of buildings approached by separate staircases or entrances.
The ActG.1 defines an owner as anyone (other than a mortgagee) with an interest greater than a tenancy from year to year. This means that there may be several owners of one property.
If the work, falls within the scope of the ActG.1 the appropriate notice must be served on all those defined by the ActG.1 as adjoining owners. This triggers machinery enabling a building owner to resolve disagreement with adjoining owners enabling building works to be carried out. Reaching agreement with any adjoining owner does not remove the possible need for planning permission, Building Regulations approval or any other statutory requirement. Some of the aspects likely to relate to subsidence are detailed in the following sections.
G.4 Notices
A building owner intending to carry out work covered by the ActG.1 must give notice in writing of the intended works to all the relevant adjoining owners. This notice must include: the owners name and address the buildings address (if different) full details of what is proposed (including plans where appropriate) and the proposed starting date.
G.2 Scope of the Act

It applies to: New building at or astride the boundary line between properties. Various work directly affecting an existing party wall including: extending it underpinning it rebuilding it repairing it or reducing its size.
In the case of excavations, the notice must also state whether the owner proposes to strengthen or safeguard the foundations of the building or structure belonging to the adjoining owner, and it must be accompanied by plans. At least two months notice is needed of works to an existing party wall; and one month for a planned new wall or for excavation within the specified distances.
G.4.1 Work to an existing party wall

An adjoining owner cannot stop someone from exercising the rights given to them by the ActG.1, but can influence how and when the work is done. Under the Act G.1 , a person who receives a notice about intended work may give consent within 14 days, or give a counter-notice setting out what additional or modified work they would like to be carried out. If an adjoining owner does not do either of these things, a dispute is deemed to have arisen.
Excavation, or constructing foundations for a new building, within 3m of a neighbouring owners building where that work will go deeper than the neighbours foundations. Excavation, or constructing foundations for a new building, within 6m of a neighbouring owners building where that work will cut a line drawn downwards at 45 from the bottom of the neighbours foundations.
G.4.2 New wall astride the boundary line

If the adjoining owner gives a notice within 14 days agreeing to the building of a new wall astride the boundary line, the work (as agreed) may go ahead. If an adjoining owner does not respond, or objects to the proposed new wall, the building owner may only build the new wall wholly on their own land. They may place footings and foundations under the adjoining owners land. Such footing may not be made of reinforced concrete unless the adjoining owners express consent is given.
G.3 Definitions
A wall is a party wall if: it stands astride the boundary of land belonging to two (or more) different owners; or it belongs totally to one owner but is used by two (or more) owners to separate their buildings. Where one person has built the wall in the first place, and another has butted their building up against it without constructing their own wall, only the part of the wall that does the separating is party sections on either side or above are not party.
G.4.3 New wall against the boundary line

By agreement or following publication of an award, the building owner may start work, including placing footings and foundations that extend under the adjoining owners land, one month after the notice is served. Such footings may not be made of reinforced concrete unless the adjoining owners express consent is given.
The ActG.1 also uses the expressions: party fence wall a wall which is not part of a building, that stands astride the boundary line between lands of different owners and is used to separate those lands.
G.4.4 Excavation near neighbouring buildings

If the adjoining owner gives a notice within 14 days agreeing to the work, that work (as agreed) may go ahead. If an adjoining owner does not respond, or objects to the proposed work, a dispute is deemed to have arisen.
170
G.5 Dispute procedure

The Act envisages that, in most cases, there will be agreement about the proposed works between the relevant owners. This agreement must be in writing. However, where agreement cannot be reached, the dispute resolution procedures of the ActG.1 come into play. The preferred solution is for the owners to agree upon one surveyor to draw up an award. If they do not agree upon one surveyor, they must each make an appointment. The two surveyors thus appointed select a third surveyor who can be called in if the first two surveyors can not agree. Surveyors appointed under the dispute procedures must act impartially, taking into account the interests of both owners. This is not a client/agent relationship. Note that an owner can not act as their own surveyor.
G.1
Order 1997 (SI 1997/671) The Pyramus and Thisbe Club The Party Wall Act explained. Weedon, Parrot House Press, 1997 Anstey, J.: Party walls and what to do with them 5th ed, RICS Books, 1998 Bickford-Smith & Sydenham: Party walls: The new law. Jordan Publishing, 1997 Anstey, J., Victor Vegoda, V.: An introduction to the Party Wall, etc. Act 1996, Lark Productions, 1997
G.6 Award
An award is drawn up by the appointed surveyor or surveyors. The award is a statement laying down what work can be carried out, and how and when it is to be done. The award may also specify how the surveyors fees will be apportioned usually the owner who initiates the works pays. The award is served on all relevant owners, each of whom is bound by the award unless they appeal within 14 days to the county court.
G.7 Cost of work

The general principle in the ActG.1 is that the building owner who initiated the work pays for it. However, there are various exceptions, for example: where an adjoining owner agrees to the construction of a new wall astride the boundary line and makes use of it, the owner will contribute to the cost where work to a party wall is needed because of defects or lack of repair for which the adjoining owner may in whole or in part be responsible where an adjoining owner requests that additional work should be done for their own purposes.
The building owner must pay compensation to an adjoining owner for damage to property caused by the carrying out of work pursuant to the ActG.1 which includes not only the temporary effect of the works but also diminution in value of the property. Compensation may also extend to disturbance and inconvenience. The building owner may be expected to pay for the strengthening or safeguarding of the neighbouring owners foundations where excavation within the specified distances is proposed. Where the dispute resolution procedure is called upon, the award may deal with apportionment of the costs of the work. The dispute procedure may be used specifically to resolve the question of costs.
References
G.1 G.2 The Party Wall, etc. Act 1996 Dept. of the Environment, The Party Wall, etc. Act 1996: Explanatory booklet DETR
Bibliography
The Party Wall, etc. Act 1996 (Commencement) Order 1997 (SI 1997/670 (c.24)) The Party Wall, etc. Act 1996 (Repeal of Local Enactments)
171
172
Appendix H Acknowledgements
173
Appendix H Acknowledgements
For the First Edition
This Appendix lists the names of people and organisations who cared to make their views known to the Task Group either via correspondence or attendance at the contractors seminar in November 1992. Anderson, D. W. Andrew, J. Atherton, D. Baker-Jones, R. J. Bamford, S. H. Banks, G. J. Banks, R. Barron, H. D. Baskeyfield, I. D. Batten, J. Bebbington, R. Bengree, N. J. Bovington, G. Byrom, R. Callow, S. Caputa, M. J. Carrol, M. J. Charles, B. Clarke, J. Cook, C. F. Cook, J. M. Cook, N. J. Copeman, S. Cowan, R. L. Dodwell, J. F. Doran, David Driscoll, R Dufton, F Dutton, A Eccles, A. F. Edmondson, S.J. Edwards, R. L. Farmer, G. Gaby, J. George, B. Goodger, D. Gray, M. J. Hall, C. M. Halstead, D. Handley, V. Hardy, R. G. Hasper, D. M. Heaton, R. Helm, J. Jessey, D. R. Jessey, R.G. Johnson, R. Kiss, P. Kitching, D. N. Langley, R. L. Lawson, M. D. Lilley, S Lilley, S. F. Lord, A. L. Mascarenas, K. A. Dudley Anderson Ltd. University College London Arnold & Green Peter Brett and Associates Thomas Howell Selfe (Southern) Ltd. Griffiths & Armour G. J. Banks (IW) Ltd. Morcon Foundations plc. Barron & Partners Massy Foundations & Piling Ltd. Sun Alliance Insurance Essex Beacon Foundation Systems Advanced Underpinning Brierley Lovell Partnership Kenneth Brown & Partners Byrom Clark Roberts Generation Foundations Ltd. Abbey Underpinning & Foundations Limited John Mowlem Construction plc. Cass Hayward & Partners Article Post Magazine Sun Alliance Insurance UK Jaycee Civil Engineering Jaycee Civil Engineering Building Research Establishment RIBA Robert Cowan Partnership John F Dodwell Consulting Engineers Consulting Engineer Building Research Establishment Brian Clancy Partnership Hurst Peirce & Malcolm Branlow Ltd. Foundation Piling Ltd. AMEC Civil Engineering Foundations Ltd. Sidevale Building Contractors Ltd. Trent Foundations Ltd. Pick Everard M. J. Gray & Sons. Griffiths Cleater and Associates Jakobi & Co. Donald Halstead and Associates Trent Foundations Ltd. Van Elle (Holdings) Harris Assessors London. Alan Pipe & Partners Brian Clancy Partnership Insurance Institute of Manchester Durranby Construction Durranby Construction NHBC Abbey Foundations Limited Underpin & Makegood Ltd. Construction Unit P. OCallaghan & Associates The Insurance Ombudsman Bureau Anley Foundations A G F Insurance Southern Drywall Ltd. McCarthy, P. McIntyre, D. G. McManus, G. Mead, F. J. Minogue, E. A Minett, P. Mooney, K. W. P. Morley, P. S. Mullarky, J. Murphy, D. Nash, D. Nash, F. M. Nelson, P. H. Netley, R. J. Nicholls, R. A. Nolan, J. Norville, D.P . OReilly, M. Packman, R. K. Parsons, J. Pollard, W Prall, D. W. Radevsky, R. Raighkhar, R. Redshull, R. Richardson, I. B. K. Robbins, S. Roberts, J. Roberts, H.M. Rudgley, B.W. Rutherford, P. J. Seely, P.J. Scott, J.S. Stain, R.T. Steeden, L.P. Stowell, M Squire, P.W. Towes, H.L. Trollope, C. Tyrer, T. P. Walsh, P. A. Wilkins, D. Woodcock, C. W. Woodfield P. Sidevale Building Contractors Ltd. McLarens Crack Bonding Repairs Ltd. Hertsmere Borough Council McKenna & Co. Peter Minett & Associates John Mowlem Construction plc. Morcon Foundations Guardian Foundations Guardian Royal Exchange Thomas Howell Selfe TSB General Insurance Ltd. Masey Foundations & Piling Pick Everard NESCOT Nolan Davis Ltd. G J Banks (IW) Ltd. University of Nottingham Packman Lucas SEPIA Loss Adjuster Firm Foundations Ltd. Loss Adjuster Underpinning & Make Good Ltd. Architect Richardsons Botanical Identifications Stuart Robbins Associates Allott & Lomax McLarens Concrete Foundations Ltd. Turnpike Construction Ltd. P J Seely Associates Torrington Underpinning Ltd. Testing and Consulting Services Zurich Insurance Griffiths and Armour A D Underpinning Ltd. Perkins Slade Ltd. Trent Structural Ltd. Amphipile (London) Ltd. A. D. Underpinning Ltd. Advanced Underpinning Topliss Loss Adjusters Woodcock Bros. Branlow Builders
For the 2nd Edition

The Task Group is grateful for the comments received from the following persons: Ayling, B. Baldwin, S. Batten, P. Boobier, T. Beal, A. N. Beal, N. Beggs, A. Brown, K. Coleman, R. J. Collins, R.V. Cook, D. Day, P.J.C. Doran, D. Dorber, P. A. Dunn, P. Gill, L. A. Harris, N. Hazell, J. Consulting Engineer Bettridge Turner & Partners Upton McGougan Cunningham Group Thomason Partnership Hughes Beal & Wright Pty Ltd Building Control Service Belfast City Council Kenneth Brown & Partners Richard Coleman & Partners AVC Associates University of Bath P. D. Associates Consulting Engineer Consulting Engineer Mini Soil Surveys Richard F Gill & Associates Oceans Engineering Ltd. Arboricultural Association
174
Hill, A. J. Hurst, B. L. Kiss, P. Lazarus, D. McCombie, P. F. McFerran, A. Minogue, A. Ness, B. Parkinson, J. Parsons, J. Payne, M.C. Pike, C. I. Porter, J. R. Price, R. N. Sibbald, B. Smithers, N. Snelson, J. Stevenson, D. Tarrant, R. Wernick, A. S. Wills, C. Woodman, J.
Maddocks Lusher & Matthews Hurst Pierce & Malcolm Association of Specialist Underpinning Contractors Ove Arup & Partners University of Bath Building Control Service Belfast City Council CMS Cameron McKenna Edinburgh City Council Curtins Consulting Engineers Indemnity Management Services Ltd. Mid-Sussex District Council ABS Associates Ltd Consulting Engineer Consulting Engineer Edinburgh City Council Smithers Purslow & Co. C. F. Mountain and Partners Stevenson & Associates Consulting Engineer Reddin & Nuttall Chartered Surveyor Malcolm Hollis
175
176

Subsidance in Low Rise Buildings

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Subsidance in Low Rise Buildings

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Licensed copy from CIS: carlos_delima@bathnes.gov.

uk, BATH and NORTH EAST SOMERSET COUNCIL, 02/08/2013, Un

A single copy of this document is licensed to

The Institution of Structural Engineers

Subsidence of low-rise buildings

A guide for professionals and property owners

The Institution of Structural Engineers

Constitution of Task Group

IStructE Subsidence of low rise buildings 2nd edition

IStructE Subsidence of low rise buildings 2nd edition

IStructE Subsidence of low rise buildings 2nd edition

IStructE Subsidence of low rise buildings 2nd edition

IStructE Subsidence of low rise buildings 2nd edition

Notes for readers of the 2nd edition

IStructE Subsidence of low rise buildings 2nd edition

Flowchart for the handling of a potential subsidence claim

Building insurance policy

Damage to policyholders property

Submit claim form

Liaise Insurer Continue to advise Insured

Inspection and initial appraisal of property

Damage caused by other insured peril?

Position monitoring studs

Report to insured and insurer with advice on further action/investigation

Appoint specialist consultants/contractors/ laboratories as appropriate

IStructE Subsidence of low rise buildings 2nd edition

Chapters 5-6 (possible Chapter 8)

Purchase of insurance policy

Insureds Expert if appointed

CONTINUED FROM PAGE 9

Tree root identification if required

Soil analysis Monitor to identify pattern of movement and probable cause

Cause other Major

Expose drain junctions

Cause defective drains Repair drains

Put adjoining owner on notice

No Trial hole data

Is further site investigation required Yes

Site investigation report

Insurers (Expert) design

CONTINUED OPPOSITE ON PAGE 11

IStructE Subsidence of low rise buildings 2nd edition

CONTINUED FROM PAGE 10

Items to consider, e.g. Programme of works

Take possession of site

Redecoration as agreed with claimant

Interim payment certificates Interim payments

Final payment certificate

Final completion Defects liability period

Final payment Payment of Expert Contractors guarantee Certificate of structural adequacy

To Insured & lender

Improved customer service quality

IStructE Subsidence of low rise buildings 2nd edition

IStructE Subsidence of low rise buildings 2nd edition

IStructE Subsidence of low rise buildings 2nd edition

1.2 Historical perspective

IStructE Subsidence of low rise buildings 2nd edition

1.2.2 Reaction to the problem

1.3 The Institution initiative

IStructE Subsidence of low rise buildings 2nd edition

No. Claims (000)

1.3.2 Consultation with other bodies