How important is an Environmental Search?

jmt

Hello all,

I am after some thoughts and advice.

I am currently in (and have been since 10th August) the process of buying a property.

I am a cash buyer, but my conveyancer has advised that although I can buy what I want, I should always proceed as if I needed a mortgage so that if I want to sell I would not have a problem.

The property I am buying is on land that was historically a sand/gravel pit. Properties in the area have been built over the last 40 years and the property I am buying is 24 years old. My conveyancer applied for an Environmental search, but that was not signed off. We applied to the Council for more information but they have not given any additional information that will enable the Environmental Company to sign approval. My only option is to get insurance.

This is now a bit of a problem as some insurance companies will not insure as they say we are already aware of a problem.

Would you buy, or do you think we should steer clear - is this failure to get an Environmental sign off something that a Bank or Building Society would refuse to lend against for a mortgage?

G_M

Why have they not signed it off? What problem has been identified? Have you spoken to the council? If not why not?

jmt

G_M wrote: »

Why have they not signed it off? What problem has been identified? Have you spoken to the council? If not why not?

The search company stated that they need extra info to prove that the area was 'dealt with correctly' before being built on and the Council say they have no additional info. My conveyancer advises that years ago buyers did not do Environmental searches, but with the problems with lending she feels that a Bank may refuse to lend.

pararct

Cant help with your general question save to say a lot of gravel pits were used for landfill.

Usually nothing to be worried about though. I am aware of at least 2 (large) Barrett estates built to the West of London.

jmt

pararct wrote: »

Cant help with your general question save to say a lot of gravel pits were used for landfill.

Usually nothing to be worried about though. I am aware of at least 2 (large) Barrett estates built to the West of London.

I think this is the problem, landfill = possible land contamination = potential problems in the future.

tyllwyd

I think you need to have a good chat with your solicitor about the implications. I'm not legally qualified, but I recently worked on a book on Environmental Law, which covered contaminated land. If there is a problem with contaminated land, the question is who pays to sort it out, and there are rules to try to work out who is responsible. I imagine that banks are pretty keen to make sure it isn't them! If this is being flagged up as a problem for you, I guess the same issue is likely to come up again in the future, and if you are in a situation where only cash buyers can buy the property, that's going to hit its value pretty substantially. So I think you need to find out all the implications before you go any further.

jmt

tyllwyd wrote: »

I think you need to have a good chat with your solicitor about the implications. I'm not legally qualified, but I recently worked on a book on Environmental Law, which covered contaminated land. If there is a problem with contaminated land, the question is who pays to sort it out, and there are rules to try to work out who is responsible. I imagine that banks are pretty keen to make sure it isn't them! If this is being flagged up as a problem for you, I guess the same issue is likely to come up again in the future, and if you are in a situation where only cash buyers can buy the property, that's going to hit its value pretty substantially. So I think you need to find out all the implications before you go any further.

Thank you, you have put into words exactly what I am thinking. I will talk to my conveyancer next week, but I think unless I can get an insurance policy, I think we will walk away - pity because it is just what we want :sad:

Richard_Webster

The problem is that whilst in practice in a lot of cases like this the locals wonder what all the fuss is about because although they "have never had a problem" nobody can prove that a problem won't arise.

Councils often don't have much information about estates built 20+ yaers ago. Nowadays they impose planning conditions requiring soil reports as soon as there is a sniff of possible contamination - but going back to the 80s or earlier you just don;t get that kind of concern.

If they have kept building inspector records going back to when the houses were built they might be able to say that the foundations were inspected and there were no signs of any issues and that might help but you will probably find that the Council will be reluctant to do the detailed research.

jmt

Richard_Webster wrote: »

The problem is that whilst in practice in a lot of cases like this the locals wonder what all the fuss is about because although they "have never had a problem" nobody can prove that a problem won't arise.

Councils often don't have much information about estates built 20+ yaers ago. Nowadays they impose planning conditions requiring soil reports as soon as there is a sniff of possible contamination - but going back to the 80s or earlier you just don;t get that kind of concern.

If they have kept building inspector records going back to when the houses were built they might be able to say that the foundations were inspected and there were no signs of any issues and that might help but you will probably find that the Council will be reluctant to do the detailed research.

Thank you very much for your post Richard.

You are right about the locals, the next door neighbours have lived in the area for 40 years, bought off plan and watched these properties being built.

We have visited our local Council and were very fortunate that the Building Control Officer is still employed in the same role and inspected these properties every few days whilst being built - he even joked that the foundations were so deep that they dropped him down into them in the digger bucket. He mentioned that all of the records are historical and would take too long to find, but he did not think there would be any problems with the land and the foundations were heavier than the house.

My conveyancer has written to this person, but I am not sure if he will be happy to put in writing what he told us as with no documents to refer too.

Like the neighbours, I'm sure that the property and land is fine, my concern is that we buy, don't like the area and cannot sell to anyone other than a cash buyer, or for less than we paid.

Richard_Webster

A lot of major lenders such as Halifax and Santander don't require Environmental searches to be done, so some buyers' solicitors won't do them.

However I have to say that if I am acting for a buyer one of the reasons I suggest that they have an Environmental Search done is so they can assess any such risk factors themselves. A lot of people don't worry about this kind of thing, but I do have warn buyers that when they come to sell they may get an overcautious buyer worrying about the issue.