Whilst I don't know, it wouldn't surprise me if some of the housing stock in London is lower quality compared to places which perhaps didn't have the pace and quantity of development at that time.
The other thing about much of London's Victorian housing stock is that it's built on clay soils with very shallow foundations, resulting in varying degrees of movement / subsidence being common. That and residual bomb damage.
Out of interest, is this in London or elsewhere?
Whilst I don't know, it wouldn't surprise me if some of the housing stock in London is lower quality compared to places which perhaps didn't have the pace and quantity of development at that time.
The other thing about much of London's Victorian housing stock is that it's built on clay soils with very shallow foundations, resulting in varying degrees of movement / subsidence being common. That and residual bomb damage.