Common misconception re Local Authority Planning and Building Control Departments

Spank_PM

I have a quick question......

I have just been brought on to a Project to build a temporary mezzanine in a warehouse, I know I will require planning and a building warrant. But I have found out that an office structure has been built within the warehouse without a warrant or a certificate of completion. This is in Scotland, where does my client stand on getting retrospective planning and a warrant. They would prefer to push on with the mezzanine and get PP and BW for everything when it is all finished.

harryhound

mr_taffy wrote: »

A friend of mine has just had the front of his house replasterd. And today has had a letter from the local council to say Renovation of thermal elements and he needs building regulations and its going to cost him £142 for this.

is this true????

This is news to me too and too the majority of the country, I would think.
I've put Renovation of thermal elements into google and created a snowstorm of hits.
It would seem that this is part of part L implemented in 2006 and boils down to: If one side of the building structure is significantly hotter or colder than the other and you entend to change more than 25% of that structure (eg rerendering or reroofing or reflooring) then you have to upgrade the thermal performance to modern standards.

Have fun with a solid 9" wall. That could be a whole lot more than 142 quid.

CarMadMoneySaver

nelly wrote: »

And also different councills have different rules

I am a Building Control Officer and I can tell you categorically that all Councils in England and Wales have the same set of rules for Building Regulations. They also have the same set of guidance documents - the Approved Documents.

Similar sets of rules exist in Scotland and Northern Ireland - both areas have detail differences, but are broadly the same as in England and Wales.

So nelly, if you think the rules have been applied differently from Council to Council, check it out - they shouldn't be!

I probably shouldn't say this, but my Boss regularly has to intervene on our customers' behalf when a colleague of mine interprets the rules in his own unique (i.e. harsh) way. If someone's gone off on a limb like my colleague does, it will be obvious to their manager - although there's room for interpretation on some things, most are there in black and white. If you have a problem, complain! Not doing so can cost you a lot of money in some cases.

While I'm on, it might be worth pointing out that most Councils recognise how difficult it is navigating your way through Building Regulations and Planning, and often provide a free service where you fill in a simple form and you get an answer back, in writing, telling you what permissions you need for your project. They quite often send the relevant forms out too. These forms are often on Councils' websites too, so you don't even need to buy a stamp!

CarMadMoneySaver

harryhound wrote: »

This is news to me too and too the majority of the country, I would think.
I've put Renovation of thermal elements into google and created a snowstorm of hits.
It would seem that this is part of part L implemented in 2006 and boils down to: If one side of the building structure is significantly hotter or colder than the other and you entend to change more than 25% of that structure (eg rerendering or reroofing or reflooring) then you have to upgrade the thermal performance to modern standards.

Have fun with a solid 9" wall. That could be a whole lot more than 142 quid.

There is a way round this (albeit a long winded one).

An application is required when in excess of 25% of a thermal element is replaced, 24.9999% being classed as a 'repair'. If you really, really want to avoid the application being necessary (and I can understand that you do, because not only is there the hundred and forty odd quid to pay, but there's the major head-scratcher of how to insulate a solid wall) do approximately 24% at a time, with a suitable time period between bouts of rendering (say three months). Take plenty of dated photographs and flag up to your neighbours what you're doing too. That should mean that if your Local Authority proceeds with Enforcement action you have photographic proof AND witnesses that you broke no rules. No sensible Authority would proceed with a case in those circumstances.

Going back to the fee - that seems very steep. In the Authority where I work, the Application Fee under a Building Notice would be under £80 for this. There are fee guidance regulations in place from Central Government, with a variance of a few percent allowed (either ten or twenty five percent - I know it's one or the other). Sounds like the Authority in question are being a bit naughty with their fees.

Even if you do have to submit an application and get the works inspected you only have to provide a 'reasonable' (the wording in Approved Document L) level of insulation. If by insulating this wall you would lose over 5% of the floor area of a room, then it is deemed unreasonable to ask for the full amount of insulation. Also, if the building is listed or in a conservation area then in some cases English Heritage and/or the Authority's conservation officer have the final say over whether or not it would be permitted to change the building to incorporate the required degree of insulation.

All is not lost.

CarMadMoneySaver

Spank_PM wrote: »

I have a quick question......

I have just been brought on to a Project to build a temporary mezzanine in a warehouse, I know I will require planning and a building warrant. But I have found out that an office structure has been built within the warehouse without a warrant or a certificate of completion. This is in Scotland, where does my client stand on getting retrospective planning and a warrant. They would prefer to push on with the mezzanine and get PP and BW for everything when it is all finished.

I don't know if the system in Scotland varies from the one in England, but down here there is a way of sorting this problem out - a little known thing called a 'Regularisation Application'. It costs another 20% on top of a normal Building Regulations application (so that people are discouraged from doing this all the time). Basically the Building Control Officer would come out, assess the works as they currently are and work out if any opening up works are needed to prove other parts of the work (trial holes to check foundations, holes in plasterwork to check steel beam or timber sizes etc.). They'll then either tell you what needs doing to ensure compliance or declare the works OK. A few visits might be needed.

At the end of the job, if your works are OK and/or you've done everything asked of you a 'Certificate of Regularisation' will be issued, meaning operating in the premises and/or selling them on should pose no problems.

Having said all that, as this building is a workplace and you haven't gone down the 'normal' Building Control route then the normal consultations that Building Control would have carried out at plan checking stage with the Fire Service, Environmental Health etc. haven't been done. There may be other hoops to jump through as well, such as you Fire Risk Assessment.

For domestic properties where works have been carried out in ignorance of the need for a Building Regulations Application, a Regularisation is ideal. I regularly do this type of inspection, usually when a house sale has been progressing and the problem of no certification from the Council has come to the attention of the purchasers' solicitor.

CarMadMoneySaver

mary43 wrote: »

We are intending to do exactly the same as this and hadn't even thought about needing permission of any sort for it so my question is the same.......do I just go ahead and do it ?

If you 'just go ahead and do it' you may well get away with it for years, but not forever.

Surveyors sent round to assess properties by mortgage providers are pretty savvy and will no doubt identify works in the property that post date the original construction. If you cannot provide the relevant Completion Certificates from the Council proving that the works complied with the Building Regulations in force at the time then the mortgage provider for the potential purchaser of your property may give the thumbs down. Result: the sale process grinds to a halt at the 59th minute of the 11th hour - usually when you're surrounded by boxes and your removal van is on its way.

Unless you only sell your property to someone with cash on the hip, all this will come back to haunt you.

Do things properly, and get the relevant Building Regulations/Warrant application in BEFORE works start.

Oh, and don't lose the Certificate of Completion over the years either.

mr_taffy_2

CarMadMoneySaver wrote: »

There is a way round this (albeit a long winded one).

An application is required when in excess of 25% of a thermal element is replaced, 24.9999% being classed as a 'repair'. If you really, really want to avoid the application being necessary (and I can understand that you do, because not only is there the hundred and forty odd quid to pay, but there's the major head-scratcher of how to insulate a solid wall) do approximately 24% at a time, with a suitable time period between bouts of rendering (say three months). Take plenty of dated photographs and flag up to your neighbours what you're doing too. That should mean that if your Local Authority proceeds with Enforcement action you have photographic proof AND witnesses that you broke no rules. No sensible Authority would proceed with a case in those circumstances.

Going back to the fee - that seems very steep. In the Authority where I work, the Application Fee under a Building Notice would be under £80 for this. There are fee guidance regulations in place from Central Government, with a variance of a few percent allowed (either ten or twenty five percent - I know it's one or the other). Sounds like the Authority in question are being a bit naughty with their fees.

Even if you do have to submit an application and get the works inspected you only have to provide a 'reasonable' (the wording in Approved Document L) level of insulation. If by insulating this wall you would lose over 5% of the floor area of a room, then it is deemed unreasonable to ask for the full amount of insulation. Also, if the building is listed or in a conservation area then in some cases English Heritage and/or the Authority's conservation officer have the final say over whether or not it would be permitted to change the building to incorporate the required degree of insulation.

All is not lost.

The charges are listed in tabel C the top one on the list.

http://www.carmarthenshire.gov.uk/English/environment/planning/buildingcontrol/Documents/FeesApr08amendedVAT.pdf

harryhound

Jobs for the boys ?
Is this just another revenue raising exercise?

How about re-pointing a brick wall?
Does that count as 10% or 100% of a thermal element?
Money for the lawyers in this one too it would seem.

julieq

This is bananas. We've just found out about it when considering replacing an external back door to remove draughts, and now we have either to use an approved (expensive) contractor or spend money to get a certificate. This is for a job which 10 years ago would have been DIY.

Result is we're not going to bother. I should imagine that faced with a big additional bill for re-rendering very few people would bother either. So what is going to happen is that necessary work to improve standards isn't going to be done at all, a classic application of the law of unintended consequences.

It's no wonder public spending is shooting up if we have departments of officers enforcing standards in fractal detail. Fine, for an extension let's make sure things are safe, but certifying small DIY improvements it's utterly mad.

I imagine the only reason this hasn't caused a major reaction is that people don't know about it. One of the sneakiest Nanny State changes I've ever seen.

seven-day-weekend

Are you supposed to have Building regs to fit a different door that just goes where the old one was? Not a new opening?

Seems a bit mad.