Roof terrace has no planning permission or building regulations

hf105

Hello,
We would be really grateful for anyone who can help us!

We are first time buyers, and about to buy a flat but our solicitor has raised some issues about it's roof terrace. The reason we were so keen to buy the flat was because of it's roof terrace.

The building was converted into 4 flats in 2004, at which time they were refused planning permission for roof terraces to be built on top of the downstairs flat roofs for the 2 upstairs flats. Instead planning permission was granted for 2 juilliet balconies. These julliet balconies were never built and the roofs have always been used as roof terraces with patio doors for the bedroom onto the roof.
The next door flat erected a balustrade soon after 2004, but the people we are buying from chose to put one up in 2009. At this time, one of the neighbours reported this to the council and they refused planning permission for the balustrade. The terrace has been continued to be used as a roof terrace with no railing since.
Because the roof has been used for 4 years, we understand that this can no longer be disputed for a lack of planning permission, however it has no building regulations.

If we move in, we would plan to put large planters around the edge of the terrace, but also want to put a small portable bike storage unit out there.
The couple we are buying from would provide indemnity insurrance to prevent the terrace from being taken away.

Does anyone have any experience with this?
Is it foolish to buy somewhere on the basis of its roof terrace, when this has no building regs?
Would we be liable if any damage was done to the downstairs property?
Are we legally allowed to put things such as a bike store and plants on the roof or could the council ask us to remove them?

We would really appreciate any help on this. We have already spent a fair amount on solicitors fees, so are not keen to pull out.

Thank you.

BitterAndTwisted

Having committed good money towards a prospective purchase is not a good enough reason not to pull out. It could be the best money you ever spent.

If the property was not granted PP you risk the Local Authority's Planning people deciding to enforce. That is what the indemnity is for. More worrying is the lack of buildings regs and as far as I know there's no indemnity policy which will protect you from the possible consequences.

The issues of using a flat roof as a terrace when it was not designed to be one is that there could be all sorts of repair issues in the future and the costs could be ongoing and great. If there is a service charge being administered then all of the leaseholders would have to share their apportioned costs, year after sorry year of repairing them. Do you fancy falling through a flat roof not designed to bear a load like you and your planters?

I'd start looking elsewhere.

Fuzzyness

in respect of the four years you are kind of correct in that the roof terrace has been used for a use which is does not have planning permission for more than four years. this in itself does not make it immune from enforcement action. to avoid the council enforcing against the continued use of the roof terrace you would need to submit an application for a Certificate of Lawfulness of Existing Use or Development. As part of this application you would need to demonstrate that the roof had been used as a terrace for four years. the current owners could sign an affidavit swearing that they had been using the roof as a terrace since 2004 and thsi would need to be submitted with the application alogn with any other evidence i.e. photos with dates on etc. if you are successful in getting the certificate this should ensure that you can lawfully use it, but this does not address the lack of building regs. i'm not sure how and if you can retrospectively apply for building regs.

DannyboyMidlands

It's a roof. It has been designed as a roof, to take roof loading ie a bit of snow every now and then and the odd maintenance man walking around. Terrace loading is reckoned to be about 5 times more than that of a roof.

It has not been designed for planters (surprisingly heavy), bike sheds, groups of people, swimming pools or helicopter landing pads.

Of course you will be liable for damage to the downstairs flat.

ajb69

We were in the opposite situation a few years back - upstairs neighbour using our flat roof as her roof terrace without permission or building regs. Basic advice I have is don't do it, as it cost her a fortune.

The neighbour upstairs just put out some small plant pots and a deckchair, but they over time pushed the tar chippings on the flat roof through the waterproof layer and so we got some very nasty damp coming through our wall.

She was completely liable and had to pay for it herself - and it was very expensive as they had to re-do the roof and also our wall from scratch, and then repaint the entire room to match. She did try to get the management company to pay for it (which was run by us leaseholders) but neither they nor the building insurers were liable as she did not have permission to be out on the roof.

I'd also read the terms of the indemnity insurance _very_ carefully - I'm no expert, but normally I believe these sort of policies will only pay out if the local authority are not aware that the roof terrace exists prior to the cover being taken out. They'll also only pay out for the loss of value to your house if you have to remove the terrace - it won't pay for fixing damage to the flat below or if the cost of the work required is more than the loss in value.

If the council refused planning permission for the balustrade in 2009 then I suppose they potentially could be deemed to be aware that the roof is being used as a terrace, even if they did not or could not take any enforcement action at that time. So any insurance may not be valid - you know how they like to wriggle out of things. Something to ask your solicitor, I guess.

Sorry to be negative, but I would either not use the roof terrace (and reduce the price accordingly), or just walk away.

Drew

PoisonIvy

We pulled out of a purchase in a very similar situation, with a terrace that had been in situ for 12 years. It set us back about £800 in surveys and structural engineers reports. It's a drop in the ocean compared to the £15-20k it would have cost us to bring it up to code and fix the structural damage the terrace had caused. I'd run away, and fast.

hf105

Thank you so much for all your help, much appreciated. Looks like we need to pull out of this one- am really disappointed, but I suppose its better to find out these things before investing all our savings!

bitsandpieces

hf105 wrote: »

The terrace has been continued to be used as a roof terrace with no railing since...If we move in, we would plan to put large planters around the edge of the terrace, but also want to put a small portable bike storage unit out there.

I wouldn't worry so much about indemnity insurance, but more about whether the terrace is safe. I guess the importance of a railing will depend on what the terrace is like and who's going to be using it. It sounds like your plans for putting things on there, though, will be a good way of testing how much weight it can take - it may well be fine, but if not it'll do property damage or worse :eek:

I don't know the market for insurance, but will anyone insure you to put heavy things on a roof terrace without building regs and see what happens?

DadDee

In this case there is a difference. If the original developer planned to use the roof in question as a roof terrace, it most probably have been designed for such a purpose. It was only due to the planning permission being refused the use had to be changed. You could check this with the vendor/developer.

If this is the case then it really is down to how safe the terrace is without railings. I would definitely not include the use of the roof terrace in your valuation of the property and reduce the offer accordingly.