Buying a house without building regs for loft

sevenhills

a) That if consent for the works has already been refused by the Council then the Policy is invalid.


https://www.amdsolicitors.com/news/buying-a-property-without-building-regulation-consent-for-alterations--what-are-the-options


Lots of caviats, one would need to speek to an insurance company directly.

eddddy

sud7890 wrote: »

But that does not satify my worry about the loft falling off..

To address that concern - you'd have to get a structural survey or structural engineers report.

But unless the surveyor lifts floorboards / hacks off plaster, they cannot be sure about the size of steel joists used etc.

If you trust that the builder's invoices and photos are accurate and honest, they might add some reassurance.


(My view is that there is always a bit more risk buying a property that's been altered without building regs sign-off, so I might expect to pay a little less, to compensate for that risk.)

PasturesNew

This man is in the industry - and built it himself. He, more than most people, would therefore be fully aware of building regs and getting the little man out and a certificate at the end - and he chose not to do it "properly".

What makes you think he did the rest "properly"?

knightstyle

Trouble is that if he is admitting to not installing fire doors what else is he not telling you about?
For example is the wall enclosing the stair to the loft built to the correct fire resistance? ETC. ETC>
IMO, if you really want the house get a propper survey done and then quotes to do the necessary work .

sud7890

Exactly my suspicion..

teneighty

davidmcn wrote: »

My policy (with one of the larger insurers) doesn't say anything about statutory regulations - can you give an example of one which does?

I think you are taking the building regulations issue too literally.

This is the standard exclusion by Aviva - Damage caused by faulty or unsuitable materials, design or poor workmanship.

A basic objective test on whether materials, design or workmanship was suitable would be did the work comply with the building regulations at the time of construction.

So in this case a fire that spread due to lack of fire doors could be excluded as clearly the lack of fire doors is a contravention of the building regulations that would have applied when the work was done and therefore classed as poor design and workmanship.

davidmcn

teneighty wrote: »

I think you are taking the building regulations issue too literally.

This is the standard exclusion by Aviva - Damage caused by faulty or unsuitable materials, design or poor workmanship.

A basic objective test on whether materials, design or workmanship was suitable would be did the work comply with the building regulations at the time of construction.

So in this case a fire that spread due to lack of fire doors could be excluded as clearly the lack of fire doors is a contravention of the building regulations that would have applied when the work was done and therefore classed as poor design and workmanship.

It doesn't appear to be a qualification to the risk of fire damage though.

Cakeguts

Does the price you are paying for this house reflect the fact that you can't use the loft space as living accommodation because it doesn't meet the fire regulations for bedrooms in loft conversions. So in other words are you paying the correct price for the house as if it didn't have this luxury storage space?