Should the vendor reduce the price?

leedom

sunshinetours wrote: »

Hold on - was the extension compliant to building regs at the time it was done ie was planning permission needed, any paperwork etc?

The vendor certainly has no obligation whatsoever to ensure his extension done presumably sometime ago complies with current building regs (think about consequence of that being true!)

I think without further details of what is actually described and what you actually potentially have and what actual work is required - difficult for anyone to say and bottom line is vendor can say yes or no as they wish.
This doesn't sound like something structural has been found which needs sorting before mortgage is released for example

No planning permission and no building regs and it was built mid 80's (house build 1973).

The work required (after 1st 'ball park fugure quote) is around 10-15K which is quite a lot considering my offer of 140K was accepted for a house what I believed to be useable and iaw building regs.

It basically needs a second skin - timber frame with insualtion, supporting pillars, plastering all round including ceilign and floor raising + door raising.

I am getting a bit bogged down by it all to be honest. As a FTB it is a bit confusing plus the sale is progressing very slowly due to probate issues - no chain involved at all.

The upshot is when we veiwed the property it all looked ok to us; we were not told about any single skin extension (although I did notice this but am as you can see no expert!) or any problems with regs/planning permission. The extension is safe and council will not be interested. However, if I want to sell at a later date surely I will have the same issues (unless we get indemnity insurance?).

All I wanted was a house with no major problems, unfortunately when something rears its head at approx 10% cost of the purchase price to put right I would hope for some reduction - but that said I am aware the vendor could say no.

thanks to all once again.

leedom

sunshinetours wrote: »

Yes wasn't rally aimed as far as "legality" at you but I got impression OP has either got hold of the impression that the extension is a structure that has to meet current building regs which is obviously nonsense.
Ultimately it will come down to whether the OP and vendor can agree a suitable price between them whatever any of us may discuss!! It could be a knock down price already of course!

original price 145k
we offered 138K - rejected
then offered 140K - accepted

this was before we had any idea about the extension.

With regard to the extension, are you saying that as it was built in 1985ish then building regs don't matter and only because we want to change the use to a kitchen do we need to get retrospective building regs approval?

I am not sure what constitutes an 'outbuilding' as opposed to an extension - all I can say is that the extension houses a toilet, radiator, electrics but is not insulated/double skinned.

blimey I get more confused as I go along LOL

sunshinetours

leedom wrote: »

original price 145k
we offered 138K - rejected
then offered 140K - accepted

this was before we had any idea about the extension.

With regard to the extension, are you saying that as it was built in 1985ish then building regs don't matter and only because we want to change the use to a kitchen do we need to get retrospective building regs approval?

I am not sure what constitutes an 'outbuilding' as opposed to an extension - all I can say is that the extension houses a toilet, radiator, electrics but is not insulated/double skinned.

blimey I get more confused as I go along LOL

That is exactly what I was saying. Its only because you wish to undertake some notifiable work i.e kitchen installation that you would need to incorporate the additional works you refer to.
If you bought the house and used "as is" you would not have to upgrade insulation or add second wall unless you wanted to.
Lincrofts point are very valid about it being harder to heat etc if insulation isn't great.

Run it by your solicitor aswell

As I said you can ask for a reduction fur to work that "needs" to be carried out but as it is unlikely to be in the "essential works to be done before mortgage" type column I wouldn't hold your breath - especially on the sort of figures you are talking about

lincroft1710

If you can find out if any houses nearby of same style without extensions have sold and their price, it should give you an indication of whether or not £140K is is a reasonable price for this particular house.

leedom

Quick update:

Builder has provided a quotation and the vendor has agreed to reduce the purchase price by another 4K which is about 65% of the cost of the remedial work.

So quite happy :beer:

poppysarah

leedom wrote: »

Quick update:

Builder has provided a quotation and the vendor has agreed to reduce the purchase price by another 4K which is about 65% of the cost of the remedial work.

So quite happy :beer:

Ah the british. Happily overpaying for housing since 2004.[1]



[1] And other times I know. Probably sound better if I put 1911?

Moi_non

The thing I do not understand here is this -

In the good old 80s it was deemed perfectly reasonable
Now because as time goes on different regulations come into force in construction all of a sudden you do not like the extension

If you was happy when you viewed it why change your mind because of current regulations

It doesnt mean it will fall down

It might mean it isnt as warm as a new build but then what about in 20 years when this method is deemed 'not conforming'

people worry about stuff to much

No wonder the housing marking isnt moving

get it bought