Victorian conversion building completion certificate

Ogriv

Hello all
I'm attempting to buy a one-bed ground floor flat in a five-storey converted Victorian house.
In my Homebuyer Report the surveyor notes that as part of the conversion, loadbearing walls have been removed, and he indicates that a Building Control Completion Certificate must be provided.
I'm pretty sure my lender demands the certificate too.

I have no idea when the conversion was done, and therefore no idea whether the certificate exists or could easily be obtained from the Council or an inspector. I also have no idea whether the work is structurally up to par.

I have told my conveyancer that the existence of a certificate is the next thing I want investigating, before paying for any more of her services. (My previous purchase fell through as the sellers could not/would not provide a certificate for a dodgy Edwardian conversion.)

I am going to try to avoid ruminating on this over the festive season. However, I did do a little Googling, so I hope you'll indulge me. My research shows that of the five flats in the Victorian building where I am trying to buy currently, four of them have changed hands since 2013. To me that bodes well, because it implies that building regs issues did not prevent those sales happening. (Unless they were all cash buyers.)

I imagine that when conversions are old, it is common not to have these certificates. Yet all over the country, people are buying and selling converted flats.

What do others think?

Doozergirl

I think if your conversion is old then there won’t be a certificate. Pre 1986, current regs and certifiactes did not exist and councils won’t have those in archive even as whatever was in place is pretty irrelevant. Even after 1986, the further away it is, the less point the certificate holds as the building has proven the test of time.

Sometimes an indemnity policiy ends up being purchased just to make things go away, but there has to be a cut off point as the Victorian house itself will never have had a certificate and probably has inadequate foundations - yet no one cares about that!

Could you even make a guess at when it was done? Decades?

blueroyals

Also remember that older conversions would have been less regulated and might be of poorer construction - particularly regarding soundproofing.

Cakeguts

The other flats might have been sold because no one could stand the noise any longer. I would expect the soundproofing in a conversion like this to be terrible.

Ogriv

Thanks all.
No - I have no idea when the conversion was. I wouldn't even know what to look for. I guess this is info that might come out in the New Year when business resumes.

I forgot to say: four out of the five flats have changed hands since 2013... One of those is actually the very one I'm buying! So unless he was a cash buyer, the purchase was not impeded by lack of certificates.

Re: soundproofing - yes, those issues are possible. But I'm on a tight budget, and it will still be superior to renting, where I'm woken by the neighbour's footsteps each morning AND I'm paying someone else's mortgage. Beggars can't be choosers (within reason).

Perhaps I should stop ruminating about building regs until the new year ha ha. But it is so frustrating constantly coming up against building regs issues. I'm amazed any sales ever go through!

Cakeguts

Ogriv wrote: »

Thanks all.
No - I have no idea when the conversion was. I wouldn't even know what to look for. I guess this is info that might come out in the New Year when business resumes.

I forgot to say: four out of the five flats have changed hands since 2013... One of those is actually the very one I'm buying! So unless he was a cash buyer, the purchase was not impeded by lack of certificates.

Re: soundproofing - yes, those issues are possible. But I'm on a tight budget, and it will still be superior to renting, where I'm woken by the neighbour's footsteps each morning AND I'm paying someone else's mortgage. Beggars can't be choosers (within reason).

Perhaps I should stop ruminating about building regs until the new year ha ha. But it is so frustrating constantly coming up against building regs issues. I'm amazed any sales ever go through!

I would disagree that buying a flat where you can hear the neighbour's footsteps each morning is better than renting one for this simple reason. If you are renting you can move after 6 months. If you buy a flat it will not be so easy to move and everytime you sell a property and buy another you lose much more money that you would be moving when renting. The fees are higher.

Doozergirl

Cakeguts wrote: »

I would disagree that buying a flat where you can hear the neighbour's footsteps each morning is better than renting one for this simple reason. If you are renting you can move after 6 months. If you buy a flat it will not be so easy to move and everytime you sell a property and buy another you lose much more money that you would be moving when renting. The fees are higher.

If you own it, you have the opportunity to put the missing soundproofing in. Cheaper than moving. And you're not paying someone else mortgage at any point.

Ogriv

Doozergirl wrote: »

If you own it, you have the opportunity to put the missing soundproofing in. Cheaper than moving. And you're not paying someone else mortgage at any point.

Yes, and I've been very adaptable and survived very well renting for many years, so I'm not too much of a delicate flower re: neighbours.

a) Earplugs
b) I quite like getting up early

When you are trying to get on the bottom of the housing ladder (for the added security it offers) you can't necessarily have *everything* you want. I am OK with that. :cool: