no building regulations - indminty insurance who pays?

domcastro

I bought a house that has no doors between kitchen and conservatory - I paid for an indemnity myself and didn't even mention it to the sellers. I preferred it this way so wasn't an issue for me

topcat007

domcastro wrote: »

I bought a house that has no doors between kitchen and conservatory - I paid for an indemnity myself and didn't even mention it to the sellers. I preferred it this way so wasn't an issue for me

Why did you prefer it this way?

topcat007

Hoploz wrote: »

I would also add that whether you are the seller or the buyer, both sides are likely to have to pay additional solicitors fees for dealing with it. My seller paid for the actual policy, but my solicitor charged something like £70 for dealing with it as they have to request it, read through the proposed policy and report back to buyer and lender on it. I would have complained but read the small print on the 'fixed fee' terms and there it was.

Crikey i will be checking this!! Thank you very much for the heads up

domcastro

topcat007 wrote: »

Why did you prefer it this way?

Because it's a small 2 bedroom mid terrace. I have the dining table in there and makes the house feel bigger and brighter

or if you mean, why I preferred not to involve the seller : The sellers had just split up, I think they were skint and there had already been a delay because she didn't want to pay for an EPC, even though this is legal requirement. I thought trying to sort out the indemnity would just delay things even more, so I told my solicitor to just sort one out without involving the seller's solicitor

kingstreet

eddddy wrote: »

But bear in mind that vendors (and to a lesser extent buyers) often don't like the retrospective regularisation route, because...

- It can take a long time and be expensive
- It may be invasive (e.g. hacking plaster off walls etc)
- The works will be assessed against current regs (not the regs in force when the work was actually done)
- Once you apply for it (or even just enquire about it with the council) you've lost the option of taking out indemnity insurance


Whereas indemnity insurance is quick and cheap.

(So, for example, some people may prefer a structural survey plus indemnity insurance - rather than regularisation.)

That's why I said "first" as the option of indemnity cover at vendor's expense might seem more palatable to them after being asked to consider regularisation.

Not forgetting the indemnity only covers legal expenses in the event of being sued, not the cost of repairing defective/shoddy workmanship.