Property has suffered previous Movement but no evidence to suggest this is ongoing

GSLEstate

Have hit another issue before I could get the Building Survey done...

The vendor is unable to provide any planning permission documentation for the double story extension ...

The Local Authority Search done by my solicitor does not reveal any record of passing of plans for the extension held by the council or any Building Regulations for the property.

So my solicitor asked the Vendor's solicitor, if they can provide a copy of the planning consent and notice under the building act ( Note: its Not a Extension completion certificate as they were not issued at that time) and the Vendor in unable to provide any. The extension was built in 1972 and the Vendor has no documentation showing that the council has given consent for the extension.

Not sure what to do now. Should I progress with the purchase (and therefore the building Survey etc ) or should I just back out. As I believe, the lack of this documentation might cause me issues when I want to sell the property at some point in the future.

Please advise.

Many Thanks

davidmcn

GSLEstate wrote: »

Have hit another issue before I could get the Building Survey done...

The vendor is unable to provide any planning permission documentation for the double story extension ...

The Local Authority Search done by my solicitor does not reveal any record of passing of plans for the extension held by the council or any Building Regulations for the property.

So my solicitor asked the Vendor's solicitor, if they can provide a copy of the planning consent and notice under the building act ( Note: its Not a Extension completion certificate as they were not issued at that time) and the Vendor in unable to provide any. The extension was built in 1972 and the Vendor has no documentation showing that the council has given consent for the extension.

Not sure what to do now. Should I progress with the purchase (and therefore the building Survey etc ) or should I just back out. As I believe, the lack of this documentation might cause me issues when I want to sell the property at some point in the future.

Please advise.

It's 47 years old. Anybody who is hunting for paperwork for something built 47 years ago needs their head examined. There's absolutely no risk of the council suddenly noticing it and causing a fuss. It predates the whole of the current building regulations regime. It would be deemed to be lawful in planning terms simply because it's been there so long.

Out of interest, how old is the main portion of the house, and what consents have you seen for that?

GSLEstate

davidmcn wrote: »

It's 47 years old. Anybody who is hunting for paperwork for something built 47 years ago needs their head examined. There's absolutely no risk of the council suddenly noticing it and causing a fuss. It predates the whole of the current building regulations regime. It would be deemed to be lawful in planning terms simply because it's been there so long.

Out of interest, how old is the main portion of the house, and what consents have you seen for that?

The solicitor mentioned that he could just see Planning consent shown dated 1961. I believe thats what the original house was built. He hasn't shared any formal documents on that with me apart from the Local Authority search.

davidmcn

GSLEstate wrote: »

The solicitor mentioned that he could just see Planning consent shown dated 1961. I believe thats what the original house was built. He hasn't shared any formal documents on that with me apart from the Local Authority search.

Ok. My point really is that looking for 1970s consents is as irrelevant as looking for 1960s ones.

There aren't any hard and fast rules about where to draw the line, but to give you some perspective, the usual standard form of contract used in Scotland (different legislation but same principles) assumes consents are only required for works which are less than twenty years old.

GSLEstate

davidmcn wrote: »

Ok. My point really is that looking for 1970s consents is as irrelevant as looking for 1960s ones.

There aren't any hard and fast rules about where to draw the line, but to give you some perspective, the usual standard form of contract used in Scotland (different legislation but same principles) assumes consents are only required for works which are less than twenty years old.

Thanks for your response.
I have now actually managed to get the plans and consent documents from the council's planning department from their archive and the Building regulation certificates were not issues in the 1970s so not bothered about that. So this issue seems sorted now.

Just realised that my solicitor had highlighted that there was a breach of Restrictive Covenant as the original deeds have a clause that says that any owner of this house should ask for permission from the covenant (i.e. the housing company who owned the Estate that time), before they build any extension to the house. The seller of this house hasn't provided any document that shows such an approval from the covenant, therefore looks like a breach of covenant. They might have taken permission when they built the extension but as it stands have no documentation for it (Its been 47 years!).. so who knows.. Considering this, my solicitor has asked for an Indemnity Insurance from the seller's solicitor. But the problem this will cause me is that I can't go back to the covenant to ask for permission to extend the house any further as it will invalidate the indemnity insurance in place.

As the extension is 47 years old and so the breach of covenant has been in place for all these years, is it still enforceable ? Should I be worried about it?

I want to extend the property further so just concerned and want to know if I can ask for this permission from the covenant or should I just not think of any further extension to the property.

I'd appreciate your help on this.

Thanks

Doozergirl

I wouldn't bother seeking permission.

Those clauses are usually in place to protect the developer from people doing awful things to houses while they're still on site.

Does the company still exist, even?

GSLEstate

I searched for the company online and it just takes me to Companies House webpage where it shows this company is still Active. Might have been passed on to some successors.

I just want to avoid any issues which might arise due to not having these permissions when I plan to sell the property later on. So I'd prefer applying for these if needed. But just concerned if that will affect or invalidate the existing indemnity policy or is it that the Breach is just not enforceable after all these years of the extension being in existence.