Missing building regs

SJ50

I am in the process of buying a converted flat. The conversion of the building into flats was in 1989. The seller has no building regs consent documents. The local authority only have computerised details on consents dating back to 1999.
My solicitor has referred this back to my lender (Nationwide) & we await their response. I would become a member of the freehold management company upon completion of the flat purchase, so any problems with the building (& lack of building regs consent) would really affect me.

Any advice on what I should do please ?

davidmcn

SJ50 wrote: »

The local authority only have computerised details on consents dating back to 1999.

and what about their non-computerised details?

My solicitor has referred this back to my lender (Nationwide)

who will probably just tell your solicitor to sort it out in accordance with their standard mortgage instructions i.e. decide whether in their professional opinion you ought to be getting the consent, getting an indemnity policy, or taking a view on it given it happened 29 years ago

Any advice on what I should do please ?

In practice, you're going to have to put up with whatever solution your solicitor and lender can come up with. Isn't your solicitor giving you any advice?

Doozergirl

I don't see why being a member of the freehold management company affects anything to do with the presence of a Building Control completion certificate.

The advice to you is the same as anyone else. You need a good level of survey to point out any potential defects, given that you have no paper assurance of the standards followed at the time.

An indemnity policy is an option for the lender, but you need to do your own due diligence to ensure that the conversion is safe and warm.

AdrianC

1989 was 29 years ago.
There is no way that there can be any comeback for "lack of consent" this far distant.


Whether the work was signed off at the time or not does not affect whether it may need any more work now or in the future. The original work clearly wasn't particularly shoddy, if it's still standing and in apparently good condition three decades later.

SJ50

Thanks for the replies.
My issue about being a freeholder is that I would have a financial responsibility for all the flats, should any work need doing.

SmashedAvacado

What Adrian said. Its not even a case of taking a view - its a non issue. These are historic works, over which enforcement action could not be taken unless there was a danger to life. The survey presumably doesnt raise issues. Your lawyer needs to move this forward.

AdrianC

SJ50 wrote: »

My issue about being a freeholder is that I would have a financial responsibility for all the flats, should any work need doing.

Yes, but that responsibility can be passed on to the leaseholders through the service charge. It's your "leaseholder" hat that'll be reaching for the wallet, not your "freeholder" hat.



And the presence or absence of a 30 yr old piece of paper will make no difference to the work needing doing.