Does this sound dodgy to you?

LondonDiva

A colleague from work is thinking of buying a property from a cousin of his which I think sounds not quite kosher.

He's planning on buying a house which has been converted to 2 flats, without planning permission. He wants to live in one and rent out the other.

His cousin has apprently said that the conversion has been sound for 2 years and that the council will have to grant planning permission when 4 years is up.

I'm a little bit uneasy as I don't think he'd be able to pass a morgage survey ( I haven't found my first place yet, so don't know the ins and outs of morgages) or get planning permission.

Am I being over cautious and naive or is my 'spider sense' right?

thanks

Diva

Doozergirl

I think a lender would have issues with such a recent conversion that didn't have planning permission or (I assume) building regs approval. I very much doubt that they'd lend on it. It would be fairly obvious to the surveyor if it were being purchased as one property and it were in fact two.

Building Regs are very stringent on things like emergency escape and fireproofing. Even if he did manage to secure a mortgage, if he rented out that downstairs flat and anything happened to the tenant as a result of a fire, I suspect he would be facing a jail term. A landlord would have to prove 'due diligence'; that they did everything possible to avoid the situation to avoid prosecution.

I think it's abhorent that anyone would split a property without appropriate approvals. Safety should always come before profit.

clutton_2

i absolutely agree with every word Doozergirl has written.

Doozergirl

Thanks clutton. I feel physically sick just thinking about it.

HelpWhereIcan

Both of you are, IMO, correct. When any mortgage lender does a survey of the property, the valuer is bound to point out the fact that the property has been converted into flats. This will cause 2 problems:

1. Most lenders will have a problem with this as they will want to know the proposed use and how that affects their ability to repossess and sell if there is a problem - that's the shortened version. I would be inclined to suggest if his lender is uncomfortable with this sort of property, he will have problems getting the mortgage agreed and may find his choice of lender and deal severely limited.

2. Even if he does get a mortgage offer, the solicitor dealing with the sale will be instructed to ensure that all relevant permissions have been obtained. He will not be able to do this and therefore, the lender would (more than likely) withdraw their offer.

IMO, only a cash buyer should look at this property. They would be able to create 2 leasehold flats in theory which could make for quite a good resale value - assuming permission can obtained retrospectively. I am not sure many people would buy a property on the basis that they need to go another 2 years without the council finding out - neighbours and ex tenants can be vindictive.

Just my tuppence worth

Careful_girl

My solicitor would have kittens if I tried to buy something without all its boxes ticked!! She's great!! :A I think another consideration (always at the forefront of my mind) is RESALE!!:eek: Having sold a few houses with buildings regs problems I would beware. Make the vendor sort it out then pay up.
Spider sense is working well!!:rotfl:
All the best
CG

travel_freak

Hi there,

I too agree with the above posts. I looked at a place recently which had been converted many years ago and let out as two flats without planning permission or building regulations consent. It's now on the market for well below market price (and has gone to sealed bids) because it has become virtually unmortgageable. (It was also in an absolutely terrible state - damp, ceilings falling down etc. and the tenant has only recently vacated - I think that Landlord should be strung up!).

Anway, I had a long chat with the Council about it and they told me there is no time limit in terms of their ability to take enforcement action for failure to apply planning permission (although there may be for building regs consent). The longer the conversion has been in place the better are the chances of a successful claim for retrospective grant of planning permission but this is not by any means conclusive because the Council's other criteria would still need to be met. For example, the property I was looking at had inadequate parking and this particular Council apply a very strict policy that there must be a ratio of 1.5 parking spaces to each flat and they told me it was highly unlikely that permission would be granted retrospectively if this condition could not be fulfilled. That's just one example of a long list of things that would need to be fulfilled. Also if the surrounding properties are all houses that would be another reason to refuse consent for flats as it wouldn't be inkeeping with the area.

If you apply for retrospective planning permission and it is refused you have a right of appeal but if you lose the appeal the Council can force you to restore the property back to its former glory which might be an expensive exercise.

I would say tread very carefully and perhaps liaise with the Council in question to sound them out as to policy before proceeding - it is possible to make enquiries without giving the property address and I found that my Council were very willing to advise.

Good luck.
Regards,

LondonDiva

thanks for the info guys, I'll pass it on and hope that the issues you've raised will ring some alarms.

It's hard to argue about somthing when you've only got a theorethical (sp) knowledge of it - so you've been really helpful

Diva