No building regs

stressed_out_girl

Help! Am about to exchange contracts and solicitor has just informed me there is no completion certificate and build was carried out on rejection notice.

Offered me idemnity insurance against lack of building regs. Council told sol not interested as house 8 years old, cannot enforce action.

Have heard rejection notice only given if something major. All searches have come back ok, only had valuation survey have now arranged for full survey.

Spoke with previous owner,(house is a repo) not aware of lack of regs, had no problems with their sale or survey.

Anyone bought build without any regs/rejection?

Incisor

Although the Council won't enforce, the house is always going to be blighted by this issue - so expect problems when you come to sell. Not quite sure what you mean by "build was carried out on rejection notice". I might accept indemnity insurance for no completion certificate, but in this case, unless it is something relatively benign, I would want the seller to get a completion certificate, but as it is a repo, there is not a lot of leverage over the seller.

stressed_out_girl

Copy of letter from building regs to sol states 'unable to provide copy of building regs approval as works were built on rejection notice...comp cert not issued as comp inspection never requested or carried out'
Sol says this means initial plans were refused, builder may or may not have complied with reccomendations, but build unlikely to have ever been inspected!
House is one of 6 builds in a small development all built by same builder at same time, friend lives in one of them and says had no problems with any certs. Find it hard to believe building inspector would oversee other 5 house builds and ignore one? Have copy of NHBC cert - would they issue without building regs??

Doozergirl

An indemnity policy will be void now that the solicitor has been in touch with the council.

I'd say that I can't believe the sol was that stupid but as it's a repo, there's no-one to say that no completion certificate was ever produced. It isn't really an issue for anyone that understands it but some people do get cold feet. Personally, I would have no qualms about buying an 8 year old house without building regs as long as my surveyor was happy it was sound. An 8 year old house wouldn't meet current regs and many, many houses were built before regs existed in any proper format - they are still standing. As long as it's safe, I'd be happy.

I would try to renegotiate slightly based on the fact that being a repo, your sol had no choice but to go to the council and so now no indemnity is available.

I'd buy an indemnity policy when you come to sell. It will still be void but it still won't matter because the council won't be chasing the new owners either.

I have no idea what rejection notice is either

silvercar

I agree with doozer, but only if its a building regs issue. If it is a planning issue and the council served a rejection notice because the place wasn't built according to plans, I'd be more concerned. Theoretically councils have nly 4 years to object on planning gorunds, but you don't know if an objection was made within 4 years (indeed that could have been the rejection notice). If its a change of use rejection, then the council would have 10 or 12 years to object. What was there before the property?

What a council staff member says over the phone is useless; I would want a letter from the council stating that they won't be raising any objection or pursuing the rejection notice.

blueboy2001

Usually a new dwelling would be subject to a Full Plans Building Regs application. The process is handled in 2 phases - plans and associated information are submitted and are vetted by a Building Inspector. If they meet the regulations, the plans are approved. More often, there will be some elements that don't meet the regs and they will write to the applicant or agent and request amendments. If these aren't forthcoming, they can issue a "Conditional Approval" which is an approval subject to conditions, for example if a fire door is required and not shown on the plans this could be conditioned. If amendments aren't received in time, or the plans are way off the mark they will be rejected. I assume this is what the Council mean by a "rejection notice".

The second phase is the inspection phase during construction. There is also a process called a Building Notice, plans are not required for these, only the inspection phase. Even with a full plans application, there is nothing to stop you starting work on site prior to your plans being approved - in fact it's not that uncommon only to get plans after work has started!

If I were you I'd contact the Council and ask them if they carried out any inspections on the plot during construction. Most Council's computerised their BC departments by the mid 90's so they should be able to tell you this in a few seconds. I'd be very surprised if a builder applied for building regs and didn't have the requisite inspections carried out, and if this is the case it may be a sign that corners have been cut. Solicitors routinely asking for completion certificates is a relatively recent development, and most BC departments have hundereds if not thousands of jobs on their books that are under construction because people don't request completion inspections. If inspections were carried out with the exception of the completion inspection, there is nothing to stop you booking one and obtaining a completion certificate yourself. It will be assessed against the regs in force at the time of construction, so the time lapse is not an issue.

stressed_out_girl

Have looked into indemnity, only void if requests to BC go beyond asking for mere existence of documents, which is only what sol did. Would like to know why plans were rejected. Site was a field before the row of 6 were built. I will contact NHBC and query the cert off them before going back to the council. Would feel happy if inspections were carried out during construction and only comp cert not requested. Cant help thinking CPL sol is using idemnity as easy way out??

Incisor

stressed_out_girl wrote: »

Have looked into indemnity, only void if requests to BC go beyond asking for mere existence of documents, which is only what sol did. Would like to know why plans were rejected. Site was a field before the row of 6 were built. I will contact NHBC and query the cert off them before going back to the council. Would feel happy if inspections were carried out during construction and only comp cert not requested. Cant help thinking CPL sol is using idemnity as easy way out??

What Blueboy2001 says. You are right, indemnity is the easy way out. In truth, the property has the shadow of a potential problem hanging over it - a failed inspection won't make it much worse, but a certificate will make things much better. Your problem is to get this sorted [if you buy], before you come to sell on, because your buyer will face the same issues - but you face the risk of something happening which might prevent an indemnity policy being taken by your buyer.

The only problem is whether the seller will permit an inspection which could 'damage' the value of the property if Building Regs are found to have been breached. But if they won't, then it could be time to walk away.