Council and building regs re:wall removed...

tanith

Sorry if this is in the wrong place couldn't find anywhere else that seemed right...
My OH was talking to our neighbour today who has just built an extension and he told my OH that he recently had the council in to OK the new extension and while there they told him that he had to rebuild the wall that had been taken down between the hall and stairs and the living room.. Our house has had the same done to it by a previous owner so that the stairs are in the living room making the living room a little bigger as the hallway and understairs is incorporated into the living room. I understand its a safety issue regarding fires. Is this a legal requirement? I wonder as I know many friends who have houses with the stairs built open plan to the living space... just wonder how this is possible and if the council could make me also replace the wall? My neighbour also has a loft extension and I wondered wether that was the factor that made the difference?
thanks for any info on this subject...

Nile

Hello tanith

I'll move your thread to the 'In my home' board.


Hi, Martin’s asked me to post this in these circumstances: I’ve asked Board Guides to move threads if they’ll receive a better response elsewhere(please see this rule) so this post/thread has been moved to another board, where it should get more replies. If you have any questions about this policy please email [EMAIL="abuse@moneysavingexpert.com"]abuse@moneysavingexpert.com[/EMAIL].


Regards

Nile

HugoSP

TRying to apply building regs logic here.

It seems that the BCO knew that the wall was originally there and that the regs requiring its presence were in place when the house was built. Hence both the planners and the BCOs would need to see it there. The planners would need to have seen it on the plans when they approved them and the BCOs would need to have seen it physically erected when they sign off the development.

Hence its removal was technically at odds with the regs.

Hence a sharp eyed BCO may have spotted the problem and advised the homeowner to stick to it.

Our situation is a little different.

We own a victorian property that has recently had planning permission granted for division into 2 dwellings and remodelling inside.

When permission came through I did suspect that a classic mistake had been made allowing me to have no fire break between the basement and the first floor. We have a staircase going between the ground and first floors, and a new spiral staircase going between the basement and the ground floor.

However before the property started being remodelled we had a conventional staircase in place of the spiral - again with no fire break.

So in effect we have not removed a fire break and so the planners or BCOs cannot insist we put one in. We are not worsening the position from where it was. Plus the regs did not insist on fire walls in places they do now when the property was first built.

In short - your neighbours (and yours) were a requirement of the planning and building control officers when permission was granted for the houses to be built. So they are quite right in insisting that the wall is reinstated in his house, plus I suppose yours as well if asked.

Depending on the detail of survey you had done when you bought the property you may have a case against the surveyor if he didnt pick the problem up

Doozergirl

There is a time limit after which Building Control cannot ask you to reinstate something which has been removed. 1 year is widely banded about on the House Buying board, though I was under the impression it was a bit longer than this.

I'd be more inclined to think that because of the remodelling of the house, there is an issue relating to the new extension that requires the firebreak to be in place in order for the new extension to meet building regs.

If a Building Control officer walked into your house tomorrow, they would not be able to ask you to reinstate the wall.

You should, however, think about your escape routes in the event of a fire, as it is dangerous to not have a decent firebreak between floors that allows you to escape from the house safely. It might mean putting the wall back up to make you feel safe, but perhaps you could put a decent fire-door on the kitchen, ensure that you always close it at night (you should close all doors anyway) and hard-wire in some smoke alarms (which I also think people should do anyway!). Think about your escape route from upstairs windows also.

HugoSP

Doozergirl wrote: »

........If a Building Control officer walked into your house tomorrow, they would not be able to ask you to reinstate the wall..........

I'm sorry but in practice this isn't quite correct IMO.

As stated in the sticky I started at the top of this forum there are two separate cases I know of where a sale was held up due to the lack of a building certificate. I actually carrid out some work to help a client over one of these cases.

In each case the BCO insisted that work was carried out at the 11th hour before a certificate could be issued.

So whilst it is unlikely that the BCO could insist you replace a wall, if a surveyor or solicitor picks up that work has been done that would require a building certificate, and one does not exist, this is a risk that the vendor faces, regardless of when the work was done, unless it was done before a certificate would normally have been needed.

One such example of this is rewiring. Before April 2004 Part P did not apply in England and Wales. If a house has been rewired after this date by someone who is not on a Part P scheme then a building certificate would be needed. However if it was done before this date then no cert would be required.

Doozergirl

I think you're confusing the issue for the OP with talk of Part P etc

The wall was removed years ago. Building Regs cannot demand that the wall is reinstated but a potential buyer in the future could ask whether building regs was obtained. The answer may well be no, but if a surveyor, and subsequently, the mortgage company, is happy that the house is still structurally sound, there isn't a reason why a buyer shouldn't be happy to proceed.

Of course if the OP had decided to rewire her own house last year, I'd be saying something different. I'm not suggesting that anyone carry out any work that doesn't comply with building regs, just that if the OP is not remodelling her house, she has nothing to worry about. It does seem incredibly odd that a small piece of structural work carried out years ago should seem so important to a buyer's solicitor when, much of the time, the actual building didn't have approval approval at all, and even if they did, the vast majority of houses will have items that do not comply with current regs.

If a question does arise when she comes to sell, then a simple call into building control who will hopefully write a little note to explain that they cannot persue the homeowner to reinstate a wall after a certain period of time should save her the money on one of the entirely pointless indemnity policies banded around by solicitors.

I do know what you are saying, HugoSP, I had to drill the extractor for our cooker out through the wall to get the certificate for an entire refurbishment and extension. It would have been stupid for a buyer not to demand that all the work had sign off, but many, many houses have filters that don't comply to current regs at all and no-one would think to ask.