Flooding in basement. Construction error? Hidden defects?

[Ulf2121]

Hi friends,
We moved into our newly purchased house in June and have experienced 2 floods in our basement (excavated and built in 1974) up until today. Luckily, we didn't "have time" to restore the basement after the first incident. The insurance company (LF) covers "restoration to existing condition" of the interior, but not the exterior.
The area around the house is now being excavated, and both stormwater and drainage are done for. "Drained 2015 by a professional."
1) We assume hidden defects, right!?
The floor is cement with self-leveling compound over it where the electric floor heating is installed.
2) Construction defect? Hidden defect? Can we get LF to realize that there is a high risk of moisture damage from below = new cost for LF?
The walls from bottom to top are framed with wooden studs, with insulation directly against the exterior wall.
3) Construction defect? Hidden defect?
Best regards, Johan

 

[Unikt namn]

How is it that a basement excavated in '74 floods twice for the first time in 2022?
That's still almost 50 years of no flooding.

Something must be different now compared to before.
What is the root cause of your double floods in a short time, so to speak?

 

[Claes Sörmland]

What might be a hidden defect is the drainage/stormwater system. You apparently received an assurance that it was done by a professional in 2015, meaning someone who works with this. The question then is what a knowledgeable buyer, such as an inspector, could have discovered if the accessible parts of the drainage/stormwater system and any drawings had been reviewed? Did you inspect this system before purchase? The question is whether the faults in this system are the cause of the flooding.

Having electric underfloor heating on leveling compound on uninsulated concrete floors against the ground is a risk construction but not uncommon. Especially not in old houses from 1974 when insulation. This doesn't sound like a hidden defect unless there was something indicating it was done differently, such as the seller stating that the floor had been broken up, insulation laid under the slab, and a new casting done.

Building interior walls with studs/boards with insulation against the exterior wall in the basement was very common in 1974. Expected and furthermore, the wall was available for you to inspect. Probably not a hidden defect.

 

[Ulf2121]

Thank you for the reply!

How is it that a basement excavated in -74 floods twice only in 2022?
That's almost 50 years of no flooding.

Of course, I'm thinking the same, just like the sludge remover and those digging, but we're redoing and doing it right now. Asked the seller and it has NEVER happened before... It's stated both in SMS and email. Also, no insurance claim for it. I've checked that. Hmmm...

[/QUOTE]
Something must be different now compared to before.
What is the root cause of your double floods in a short time, so to speak?[/QUOTE]

2 massive downpours affecting many in the area. Regardless, the house foundation has stood in water many times or constantly during "non-drought" (?) See below...

Drainage and stormwater runoff 1974 (?) redone in 2019 is shocking (according to both me as a layperson and professionals). Everything is documented continuously. The stormwater from a massive roof + wells was led out under the lawn and stopped abruptly in clay... Everything went back and up in the "leaf catcher" at the downspouts and down next to the house wall... The well in the basement stairs leads stormwater (when it saturates from the top, 1 meter directly under the house where the pipe ends against a rock crevice) and is aided outside the gravel by... yes, see 2 "fun" videos of what happened when the drainage pipe emerged behind the clay that clogged the outlet was removed. What happens at the end of this pipe (into the clay as well?) we don't care about (we've already destroyed enough of the deck, stone slabs, and lawn) and bypass it down the slope using a drainage pump (the house stands directly on bedrock). I already have sufficient evidence for mistakes, mistakes, mistakes...

 

[Ulf2121]

What could be a hidden fault is the drainage/stormwater system. You've apparently been assured that it was done by a professional in 2015, meaning someone who works with this. The question then is what a knowledgeable buyer, such as an inspector, could have discovered if the accessible parts of the drainage/stormwater system and any drawings had been reviewed? Did you inspect this system before purchase? The question is whether the shortcomings of this system are the cause of the flooding.

Having electric underfloor heating in leveling compound on uninsulated concrete floors against the ground is a risky construction but not uncommon. Especially not in old houses from 1974 when insulation. This does not sound like a hidden defect unless there was something indicating that it was done differently, such as the seller specifying that the floor had been broken up, insulation had been placed under the slab, and a new casting had been done.

Building interior walls with stud/board with insulation against the outer wall in the basement was very common in 1974. Expected, and moreover, the wall was available for you to inspect. Probably not a hidden defect.

Yes, that's the cause, as it turned out after deep digging. Impossible to fully know without digging. The seller's duty of disclosure... who should know a bit more since he built on the house and did most of it himself?!

Maybe the insurance company still doesn't want to at least get a new case later with moisture creeping/crept up into the floor?

I believe the same about studs, but couldn't you try? And how do you inspect behind a wood panel that has been glued to the studs without damaging it?

 

[Ulf2121]

Yes, that's the reason it turned out to be after deep digging. Impossible to fully know without digging. The duty of disclosure from the seller... who should know a bit more as he has built on the house and done most of it himself?!

Maybe the insurance company still doesn't want at least a new case later with moisture creeping/has crept up into the floor?

I think like you about studs, but might as well try? And how do you inspect behind a wood panel that has been glued to the studs without damaging it?

Can't be risk-free with electric coils in moisture either, right?

 

[MathiasS]

I have enough evidence already for wrong, wrong, wrong..

Rainwater and drainage that ends up rather randomly is not uncommon in old houses. It is not necessarily wrong. When you buy an old house, you can't expect everything to be done "correctly" because things weren't done "correctly" in the past.

You should consider what commitments have been made by the seller regarding rainwater and drainage. Has it really been stated that everything was redone by a professional?

 

[ingenmansland]

Yes, that is the reason it turned out after deep digging. Impossible to fully know without digging. The seller's duty of disclosure... who should know a bit more since he has worked on the house and done most of it himself?!

Maybe the insurance company still doesn't want to eventually get a new case later with moisture creeping/crawling up into the floor?

I believe like you about studs, but can't you try anyway? And how do you inspect behind a wood panel glued to the studs without destroying it?

As soon as you see wood paneling on the walls in a basement, it is automatically a risk construction, and it cannot be considered a hidden defect in any way. You must always assume the worst and conduct a thorough investigation or point out the risk construction when buying and try to negotiate a lower price. However, all such materials should be removed, especially the insulation. Insulation should be done on the outside of the wall in connection with drainage. Panels work if they are raised a bit with steel studs and allow for ventilation.

 

[Ulf2121]

Stormwater and drainage that ends somewhat randomly is not uncommon in old houses. It is not necessarily wrong. When buying an old house, you cannot expect everything to be done "right" because things were not done "right" in the past.

You should probably consider what promises the seller made regarding stormwater and drainage. Have they really said everything was redone by a professional?

Stormwater and drainage that ends somewhat randomly is not uncommon in old houses. It is not necessarily wrong. When buying an old house, you cannot expect everything to be done "right" because things were not done "right" in the past.

Yes. It is stated in the inspection report:
"2015 Basement from 1974 drained by professional". Also: "Information was provided verbally by the property owner at the time of inspection".

You should probably consider what promises the seller made regarding stormwater and drainage. Have they really said everything was redone by a professional?

Yes. It is in the inspection report:
"2015 Basement from 1974 drained by professional". At the bottom: "Information was provided verbally by the property owner at the time of inspection".

 

[växelventil]

I don't know why a drainage company exposes itself to such risks considering the high amount of work and money involved for both the customer and the company performing the job, when they lay the drainage out towards the lawn and hope it doesn't rain much to prevent backflow. It increasingly feels like it doesn't matter how poorly or well the drainage is done; during heavy rain, the system just can't keep up. Looking back over the years during the autumn and in heavy rain, there weren't large water accumulations in fields, for example, whereas today, it doesn't take much rain to create ponds in the fields. I hope that after you've fixed the drainage, it works as it should, but it's strange that the previous owner didn't experience flooding given the state of the drainage.

 

[ingenmansland]

Regarding the flooding issues, you can say that since drainage was done in 2015, you assume it should be okay. A latent defect doesn't need to be "hidden"; it's enough that it's not expected considering the house's age and what has been done to it. If the drainage is improperly executed, at least I think it's clearly a latent defect since it's only 7 years old.

 

[Claes Sörmland]

Yes. It states in the inspection report: "2015 Basement from 1974 was drained by a professional." At the bottom: "Information was provided verbally by the property owner at the time of the inspection."

However, note that the commitment does not apply to the stormwater system but to the drainage of the basement. For example, the roof drainage and piping system are not part of the drainage and therefore not part of the commitment.

 

[Ulf2121]

As soon as you see wood paneling on the walls in a basement, it is automatically a risk construction, and it cannot be considered a hidden defect in any way. One must always assume the worst and conduct a thorough investigation or point out the risk construction when purchasing and try to negotiate the price down.
However, all such materials should be removed, especially the insulation. Insulation should be applied to the wall on the outside in conjunction with drainage. Panels work if they are raised a bit with steel studs and allow for ventilation.

You are probably (unfortunately) spot on about the walls.

 

[Ulf2121]

Note, however, that this commitment does not apply to the stormwater system but to the drainage of the basement. For example, the roof drainage and piping system are not part of the drainage and therefore not part of the commitment.

True, but this is installed 20 cm above the drainage where a "professional" has of course also placed it.

 

[ingenmansland]

You're probably (unfortunately) spot on about the walls.

Additionally, ants like to build nests there if it is insulated with foam plastic, which can lead to significant ant invasions that can be difficult to find the source of.