FTB- Building Reg question for a 1993 extension

cindy01

Hello All, Have been around for some time however this is my first post in the forums.
The information here has been very useful so far, but need opinion on a situation w.r.t the building reg certificate for an
extension in the property we are considering buying.
Had our offer accepted over a month ago.Had to go a bit higher than we would have liked..as the Seller wouldn't budge quoting
their investment on a pre-existing kitchen extension..
The building survey has been completed and solicitors engaged. Now it turns out that this extension was built in mid/late
1993 and involved removal of a load bearing wall and a chimney breast, the survey did not find any major issues with the
extension and only asked us to ensure that the relevant approvals are in place.
The Seller has only supplied the planning permissin approval. It seems that they don't have the building reg completion
certificate. The EA says that building reg approval were not necessary and that completion certificates weren't issued back
then. Does anyone know if that's the case and if we have anything to worry about if we proceed.
Our concern is -
1. We wanted to replace the windows and open up the wall between reception and kitchen, for which we would need to approach
the council and would it then open a can of worms w.rt the missing buiding reg.
2. Would we have difficulty selling the property later on
So, really want to see what our options are. Having spent some money on the full building survey, morgage application fee &
solicitors we would ideally like to move forward, but at the same time do not want to be stuck with a property which we can't
improve on.
Is indemnity insurance worth considering at all ? we think that Sellers have spoken to the council,as the EA said they can get a certificate from the council saying that building reg wasn't required for a 1993 extention..

would appreciate some advice

Doozergirl

Answer to Q1 is that they won't be interested in a 20 year old residential extension. If they didn't have the resource to deal with it then when they knew that PP had been given, they certainly don't now and they can't make it comply with current regs, so there is little point going after you when the regulations were so different back then. No building control officer has ever mentioned previous work to us when they've come out to inspect our subsequent work. I'm sure they would say something if it was clearly brand new, but not something old, they'd see it was safe and not even mention it.

If they have not spoken to the council about it, then the indemnity would be a sensibly calculated risk to take. If they have spoken to the council formally about the address and the lack of compliance then they'd better hope they get that letter saying that the LA will not take enforcement action because the indemnity policy won't stand up to it.

Q2. It will be fine to sell on with the indemnity policy. This is so common. Fact is that the majority of actual houses in this country have no formal building regs sign off because they pre-date them, yet solicitors have to ask questions about extensions. If I were buying something that had been done recently, I would walk away wondeirng why they hadn't bothered with it, but with something old that is standing the test of time, then as long as a surveyor is happy with it, most people seem to be. If I did any work myself, I'd get it signed off. It's not difficult, which is the shame.

G_M

You've asked 2 questions, but what about Q3?

Q3) How can I be confident that the extension is well-constructed and safe, bearing in mind that the surveyor can only base his opinion on an external inspection? The Building Regulator, had he been inspecting, would have checked at each stage of construction. Supporting beams (if they exist) will by now be covered up/hidden by plasterwork.

Doozergirl

G_M wrote: »

You've asked 2 questions, but what about Q3?

Q3) How can I be confident that the extension is well-constructed and safe, bearing in mind that the surveyor can only base his opinion on an external inspection? The Building Regulator, had he been inspecting, would have checked at each stage of construction. Supporting beams (if they exist) will by now be covered up/hidden by plasterwork.

Indeed how can they be sure with most of the housing stock in the UK when it had no sign off and standards, regardless of what people like to argue, were lower? It's one of those things. If there's no sign of structural instability in a house, then they have to call it one way or the other. But after 20 odd years, it's easier to call than after 20 days. I'm pretty sure that the front of my own house has no foundations to speak of but it's been there for possibly 200 years...

It's a hard one when we're actually operating double standards. At some point (and I'm not sure where that should be, I'd certainly ask a surveyor if he was happy with it) you have to apply the common sense factor that it's been there long enough that there is no significant structural fault and that if something did happen, it's more than likely to be outside factors, not the original build quality, iyswim.

cindy01

quick update- building approvals is sorted for us, the Seller's probably didn't know that it existed and were able to get a copy from the council eventually.
Just wanted to add a few things we learnt/have been told in the process, if it helps anyone..
1. Building approvals are required since 11th Nov 1985, especially for structural work.
2. Building completion certificates were only introduced around 1993-1994ish.
3. Indemnity insurance does not cover for enforcement action if it was a direct result of any contact with the council i.e even for another future development on the property.

So It is one of those things that you need to decide one way or other depending on your situation and comfort...
Thanks