Two-bed is actually a one-bed - mortgage in peril. Confused first-time buyer - what to do?!

retsinelg

I'm buying a house advertised as a 2-bed. The second bedroom is the attic room. It's not a "converted" loft, as such, the room is original and has always been used as living space, but my surveyor tells me it does not qualify as a bedroom because it does not meet current regs (the exit route in case of fire goes through both kitchen and living room).

My mortgage valuation is based on a 2-bed. My mortgage broker advises me that if the lender finds out it's a one-bed they might reduce the valuation. If the valuation falls below the minimum accepted for the mortgage I'm taking out then I would need to apply for a new mortgage. The products I can afford have been removed from the market due to Covid.

The lender doesn't know unless I tell the solicitor. The solicitor has asked for the survey report. If I send the report, the solicitor knows, then the lender knows, then I risk it being revalued to below the minimum value for the mortgage. My mortgage broker's advice was "it's up to you whether the solicitor ever has to see the survey" (wink, wink).

I have asked the EA to ask the seller if he has any documentation for the room (a regularisation certificate etc.) but having pulled the title deeds, it seems he was a cash buyer so he could have bought the house without this problem ever turning up for him, so he probably doesn't have anything. It's possible there's one floating around somewhere because it's been sold as a two-bed since at least 2000. I've also ask the EA to let me know how she thinks the house would be valued if it were advertised as a one-bed. The EA has advised getting the seller to take out indemnity insurance, but that wouldn't solve the problem - the house would stil be worth less.

My surveyor asks me to ask the council what work needs done to make it a 2-bed, but if I do that it invalidates any indeminty policy (just in case such a thing is useful after all).

I really like the house and want to buy it. My only worry is that the lender will pull out of this particular product and that I will have difficulty getting another given the changes to the market since lockdown. It's anxiety-inducing not to be able to speak to the solicitor about it - and what if the issue comes up anyway when the solicitor runs searches?

Any advice?

davidmcn

retsinelg said:

It's not a "converted" loft, as such, the room is original and has always been used as living space, but my surveyor tells me it does not qualify as a bedroom because it does not meet current regs

Any advice?

Your surveyor is talking nonsense. Current building regulations don't get applied retrospectively to old buildings. "Regularisation" and indemnity policies would only make sense if we were talking about works which at the time they were carried out didn't comply with the then building regulations.

The room is what it is. Now, it might be that buyers would generally downvalue the property because they don't like the size/headroom/location etc of the bedroom, but there's no legal reason why you can't call it a "bedroom" if you want.

Stenwold

Don't do it.

If you're feeling anxious about it now, imagine how you'll feel the whole time you're in there knowing your home insurance may not be valid if anything were to happen.

Are you really saying that your best case scenario is your solicitor and lender are non the wiser about it actually being a 1 bed property, and you pay over the odds for this as it's marketed as a 2 bed? 

AdrianC

Most rooms in most houses don't meet CURRENT regs. Even places built a couple of years ago are unlikely to meet CURRENT regs, because those regs change constantly...

A room that's been converted 20yrs ago? It is what it is. Even if it never had sign-off back then, there's not a sausage anybody can do to stop you putting a bed in there.

The house is the exact same size and shape as it was when you viewed it. That is all there is to it. There is no official register anywhere enumerating the number of rooms that you are allowed to put beds in.

retsinelg

davidmcn said:

retsinelg said:

It's not a "converted" loft, as such, the room is original and has always been used as living space, but my surveyor tells me it does not qualify as a bedroom because it does not meet current regs

Any advice?

Your surveyor is talking nonsense. Current building regulations don't get applied retrospectively to old buildings. "Regularisation" and indemnity policies would only make sense if we were talking about works which at the time they were carried out didn't comply with the then building regulations.

The room is what it is. Now, it might be that buyers would generally downvalue the property because they don't like the size/headroom/location etc of the bedroom, but there's no legal reason why you can't call it a "bedroom" if you want.

That's interesting. I've just looked it up and it seems you're right - there is no firm definition of a bedroom according to RICS. The only work I can see having been done to the room is that they've taken out the old fireplace and obviously they will have replastered etc. This is relieving but I'm worried that the surveyor has a reason to say what he's saying...this is incredibly confusing...

If the surveyor report says it's a one-bed and the report goes to the solicitor, and the solicitor tells the lender, will the lender believe the surveyor? Presumably they will have someone come out to 'revalue' the house? Or perhaps the original valuation (provided to the lender - I do not have a copy) will have already defined it as a two-bed? Do I just go ahead as if this isn't happening and hope for the best?

retsinelg

AdrianC said:

Most rooms in most houses don't meet CURRENT regs. Even places built a couple of years ago are unlikely to meet CURRENT regs, because those regs change constantly...

A room that's been converted 20yrs ago? It is what it is. Even if it never had sign-off back then, there's not a sausage anybody can do to stop you putting a bed in there.

The house is the exact same size and shape as it was when you viewed it. That is all there is to it. There is no official register anywhere enumerating the number of rooms that you are allowed to put beds in.

It's not so much whether it can be used as a bedroom (I will use it as a bedroom - it doesn't bother me personally), it's whether the lender will devalue the house based on the lack of regs.

I'm not sure this can be considered "converted". The room has always existed - it has an old fireplace in it (now removed) so clearly has been used as a living space since it was built in the 1880s!

davidmcn

Stenwold said:

knowing your home insurance may not be valid if anything were to happen.

This is another common myth (and makes even less sense where there haven't been any unauthorised alterations).

[Deleted User]

Is the surveyor aware the room was there when the house was built?  It sounds to me that he is applying current regulations for a loft conversion to a room that was purpose built 150 years ago.  I would query this with him and ask him to amend his report with this in mind. If he doesn't any upstairs bedroom in any house he surveyed would fall foul of the same rules.  They don't. There are plenty of terraced houses with bedrooms that have a staircase that goes directly into the lounge.  Is he going to disallow all of those bedrooms?

retsinelg

deannatrois said:

Is the surveyor aware the room was there when the house was built?  It sounds to me that he is applying current regulations for a loft conversion to a room that was purpose built 150 years ago.  I would query this with him and ask him to amend his report with this in mind. If he doesn't any upstairs bedroom in any house he surveyed would fall foul of the same rules.  They don't. There are plenty of terraced houses with bedrooms that have a staircase that goes directly into the lounge.  Is he going to disallow all of those bedrooms?

Thank you. It had occured to me that the entire upstairs falls foul but assumed I'd misunderstood. I'll query this with him.

greatcrested

The foundations of my house (built 1851) are, as was typicalback then, very shallow. They do not meet current building regulations standards for foundations.

Does that mean my entire house is unmortgageable/ unsaleable unless I demolish and re-build it with foundations compliant with current standards....?

retsinelg

greatcrested said:

The foundations of my house (built 1851) are, as was typicalback then, very shallow. They do not meet current building regulations standards for foundations.

Does that mean my entire house is unmortgageable/ unsaleable unless I demolish and re-build it with foundations compliant with current standards....?

I'm going to query this whole thing with the surveyor. It's not making sense at the moment. It just occured to me after I wrote these messages that the house I grew up in had two rooms in the "attic" that were also original to the structure, so this must be fairly common in late-Victorian terraces. I'll ask the surveyor which "conversion" work he think does not meet regulation.