Build Over/Thames Water ISSUE!!

The_Bridge

Please can someone help as I’m in a desperate situation. I am in the process of buying an investment flat which is in a block of 7. My solicitor’s searches found that the block was built over a public sewer in 1989. So he wanted to see building consent which the other side are saying they have never had. The council have no record of this as their records don’t go back that far! Thames Water are also saying they don’t have anything on file either……..

What the other side did manage to find was letters between the freeholder in 1989 and the council, asking if he can build this block, the council’s reply was no because it’s over a public sewer and the only way round this would be to divert the sewers. SO! The freeholder said he would do this BUT there’s no confirmation that this was granted.

My solicitor is telling me not to go ahead without proof but the other side are saying he’s taken a bit of a dim view. It would all be OK if they just got an Indemnity policy, trouble is I’m a cash buyer! I suppose the risk is I would have trouble selling it but then again I could take out an Indemnity policy for the buyer as they’re more than likely to need a mortgage.

I have also come across the 4 year rule which may help me???

The absolute worst case scenario is if the council or Thames Water come round and say, you didn’t get approval-the whole block’s coming down!

I just can’t believe that the block has been there for 20 odd years and if it was illegal then someone would have noticed! Also the flats have changed hands x amount of times and they obviously didn’t have a problem?!

I am so drained, as the seller is saying he might put it back on the market if I don’t take a view. So much time, money and effort has been input and I don’t want to lose out.

Any views/experience would be much appreciated!!!

cwcw

We're in a very similar position. I didn't get much response from the thread I created and it looks like you're getting a similar response - I think it's because it's a complicated issue and nobody really seems to know the answer - including our solicitor, I would add!

In our case, the extension is 30 years old and over a sewer pipe. The water company do know about it but there is no record of approval. There was planning permission at the time, when the local authority were responsible for sewers and not the water company. However, nobody can give a definitive answer on if it is ok now, or if it could get torn down by the water company if they needed to!

Unfortunately I think you may find the same thing. I guess it's up to the buyer's aversity to risk. Personally, as much as I love the house, I'd be too risk averse to pay for an extension that could get torn down at some point in the future.

The_Bridge

it's all very vague and driving me mad. have you looked at the 4 year rule at all? if you say there was planning permission at the time, then the water company will honour it but if there's no record of approval..... in your case it's 30 years ago and in mine 20....it's logical that a certificate of approval is hard to find isn't it?!

camptownraces

It's not just Planning Permission that's the issue. (The "4 year rule" is probably connected with a Certificate of Lawful Existing Use or Development, which may be granted in the absence of planning permission)

You need to know that Building Regulations were met. If the building was not signed off by Building Control, run a mile.

Richard_Webster

It's not just Planning Permission that's the issue. (The "4 year rule" is probably connected with a Certificate of Lawful Existing Use or Development, which may be granted in the absence of planning permission)

The fact that it may have planning permission or be immune from planning enforcement as a result of the passage of time has nothing to do with the point about the building being over a sewer.

As has been said - it is Building Regulation compliance that is more critical - not Planning.

RobertoMoir

If its an investment then its not like you're "in love with the place" and have to have it like many people who are buying a place to make a home in. So walk away from it and invest in something that's less hassle.

cwcw

RobertoMoir wrote: »

If its an investment then its not like you're "in love with the place" and have to have it like many people who are buying a place to make a home in. So walk away from it and invest in something that's less hassle.

All well and good but what if the building or extension pre-dates Building Regs coming in (i.e. before 1984)? Planning Permission granted but no building regs since they didn't exist, and no sign of a build over agreement. How can anyone move forwards from that position?

ognum

I am happy to be corrected but my belief is that once you have made enquires regarding building control and planning permission to the relevant authorities it is impossible to get an indemnity cover.

basically it needs to be taken instead of making enquires so my guess is you won't get cover now.

cwcw

Richard_Webster wrote: »

The fact that it may have planning permission or be immune from planning enforcement as a result of the passage of time has nothing to do with the point about the building being over a sewer.

As has been said - it is Building Regulation compliance that is more critical - not Planning.

But if Building Regs weren't in place at the time of a building or extension, so no certificate, and if the water company know about it from a previous buyer who dropped out, where can the new buyer go from there?

geoffky

You can be sure as hell that the water company now they have been notified that this has happened will be taking a keen interest in it..

vuvuzela

geoffky wrote: »

You can be sure as hell that the water company now they have been notified that this has happened will be taking a keen interest in it..

Exactly. OP - you say you will lose time, money and effort. I suspect you will lose far more of all if you buy this place. Use your head not your heart, it's an investment place and there will be more coming up all the time in better situations.