When I spoke to builders a few years ago about a potentially attractively priced underpinned property, they advised not to get involved with a house that has been underpinned on more than one side.
I'm interested in the logic behind this if you know it?
You’re the engineer, so I’m sure you have a good understanding, but thought I’d read previously that part underpinning to correct differential settlement can lead to a reverse of the situation, where the non underpinned bit starts to settle faster.
Depends on a few things including geology, what's driving the movement, its extent, age of building. Consolidation settlement can take a long time (years to decades) so I can see a situation where partial underpinning of a relatively new build that had one side on a good stiff clay and the other on soft alluvial clay could lead to that scenario and an apparent reversal. [totally hypothetical example - not saying this is applicable here in any way!]