HELP Loft conversion doens't have planning permission now what...

mrsc_4

As above really.

Just called the planning office to see whether the property we're puchasing has planning permission and they say it doesn't. But on our searches it says planning permission was applied for when I questioned this they said our searches were incorrect!!!! How can this be!!! Our Vendor didn't do the conversion it was done by the previous owner so surly this should have been picked up on then????

Hubby wants to pull out but I can't bare the thought of pulling our I love the house and don't want to lose or mess about our buyer.

HELP

mrsc_4

Just spoke to Solicitor who has accused me of shopping the vendor to the planning people by notifying them that there is a conversion! She was really quite nasty and I can't say i would deal with her again! She thinks I have invalidated any possible indemnity insurance now (which I knew) but something doesn't seem right to me!

BMSGuy

mrsc wrote:

Just spoke to Solicitor who has accused me of shopping the vendor to the planning people by notifying them that there is a conversion! She was really quite nasty and I can't say i would deal with her again! She thinks I have invalidated any possible indemnity insurance now (which I knew) but something doesn't seem right to me!

Was it your solicitor who got nasty?
Any wrong doing can be reported to the law society, they have been helpful to me in the past.

As for the indemnity, which one is being referred to?

Only certain conversions require planning permission but all must be buildings regs approved.

If you do need permission then speak to the local council about retrospective approval.

But just as a thought.

If it did need permission and didn't get it and doesn't have buildings regs approval then I would question the quality of the conversion. Was it done by cowboys or a reputable builder/specialist?

Debt_Free_Chick

mrsc wrote:

She thinks I have invalidated any possible indemnity insurance now (which I knew) but something doesn't seem right to me!

Yes you probably have. You can't take out insurance for an event that you know has actually happened. It's a bit like taking out motor insurance after you've had an accident.

But let's think about this ..... so it doesn't have PP...... What's the worse thing that could happen?

Mrs_Optimist

eh? The Council could order that it is restored to the original roof. Or you could try and get retrospective planning - at the Vendors expense. I would image that the house would be unsaleable (or at least a lot cheaper) without the requisite PP?

mrsc_4

I am lucky there is a Surveyor at work who has been advising me quite closely with this, he says the indeminty insurance can still be given regardless, but I am concerned it is quite a big conversion 2 double bedrooms and it has been standing a while but.........something doens't add up!

She was really nasty but I wonder if this is becaues I have found something out that she should have been doing!

Debt_Free_Chick

Mrs_Optimist wrote:

eh? The Council could order that it is restored to the original roof. Or you could try and get retrospective planning - at the Vendors expense.

Depends on when it was done. They are time-barred from taking enforcement action after four years.

I would image that the house would be unsaleable (or at least a lot cheaper) without the requisite PP?

But is that fact or perception? I know this "problem" comes up a lot, but given that planning permission is a fairly modern thing, there are plenty of properties around without changes that never had, nor needed, PP.

It seems to me that there is a lot of "noise" about this topic, but no posts from people who have actually experienced any problems :rolleyes:

Mrs_Optimist

I have to confess that I have not myself experienced this problem because we have always gone through the right channels with PP (and thank god he did now we are sellijng up - the EA wants copies of all certificates) HOWEVER I DO know of two acquantances who have had this problem and one had to drop the asking price because they couldn't shift the plcae becxause of the PP problems (it was a coverted Loft into a 4th bedroom that did not have the requisite fire doors etc and so was not able to be classed as a 4th bedroom) and the other had a real battle with the Council to get retrospective PP on a house they had purchased with a rear single storey extension, hence why I posted what I did. I don't want to appear to come across as unhelpful but sometimes when you are typing it comes across differently to a reader compared to how it would if you were physically talking to someone IYSWIM)

tifnstav

I agree that you are entitled to ask questions but it might have been sensible to ask your Solicitor if you should actually do what you did.
Internal works like loft conversions don't need planning permission, they do need building regulations approval though. Thats why planning permission wouldn't be on the search - the Seller didn't apply for it as it wasn't needed so the council won't have records of it.
By speaking to the planning office you might not necessarily have invalidated indemnity insurance - the planning office could be a different animal than the building control department and council depts rarely communicate with each other, so you may not have actually broken the insurer's rules on disclosure.
If you have inadvertently tipped off the council, the Seller's Solicitors won't be able to get indemnity insurance and will need the council to go to the property to grant retrospective building regulations approval. This could take a few days, but if there are problems the Seller will have to do work to meet the regulations. Hopefully you haven't tipped the council off - otherwise you might not be in the property for a good few weeks.
I must say, if I was selling to you and found out that you had potentially delayed my sale for a number of weeks I would not be happy at all.
Why try to do the job of your Solicitor if you don't understand the consequences of your actions?

BobProperty

What is it about some people? :mad: The OP is entitled to ask such a question, PP may be needed and it has shown up that although one record says PP applied for there is no PP. If my solicitor said I shouldn't ask questions like that then I'd, one, go to someone else, and two, complain to their practise that they aren't looking after my best interests. Sounds like someone was just looking for the easy life.
Why is the vendor trying to sell somewhere without the necessary permissions? I'll bet that without the conversion the place is worth £10,000's less than it's on the market for. I really would be furious and telling everyone that it hasn't got PP and the vendor better sort it out. That includes the EA, who can now change the details to reflect the situation. :mad:

tifnstav

I agree you're entitled to ask the question but if you're going to go round tipping off the council about something that can be cleared up with indemnity insurance (paid for by the seller, not by mrsc) then take advice on it and have the options explained to you before making decisions.
maybe if mrsc's solicitor hadn't been snotty with her this wouldn't have cropped up as mrsc may have been more inclined to ask the questions.
In any case, I would have pressed for a clear response to the query if I didn't understand the position.
I'm not an estate agent but i doubt that the lack of building regs would have meant it was worth £10k less, it just doesn't make sense.
By the way bobproperty, how do you do that angry face?