Building regs completion / regularisation - what are my options?

Jeepers_Creepers

Obtained from the website of a 'leading UK full service law firm'; "A seller does however have a duty to answer all enquiries in relation to the property honestly and accurately", and "As a buyer, you are entitled to claim damages if there is a significant difference between the description or value of the property and how it actually is."

Based on that, in the part of the Seller's Information Pack where there are questions over known breaches of PP and building control, could the seller be asked for details on the most essential issues here - type of lintels used, level and type of insulation, etc - the important stuff? If the sellers built this extension, they'll have all the info at their fingertips. You tell your solicitor that - once they have completed that section of the SIP - you are happy to proceed with the purchase and intend to obtain regularisation afterwards so as not to hold up proceedings. You also ask your solicitor to make it clear to the vendor's solicitor that you will take action should the regularisation process reveals a bunch of fibs in the SIP.

Ok, it might be fantasy thinking this sort of approach is possible, but  - if it is - it would surely focus the seller's mind to give frank and honest details?

One side of this issue is the 'legal' bit, and the other is whether the extension is actually perfectly acceptable and perfectly liveable in even if it doesn't quite meet the required standards. What's it like, what_now_? Does it appear well built and finished? 

snowcat75

Jeepers_Creepers said:

Obtained from the website of a 'leading UK full service law firm'; "A seller does however have a duty to answer all enquiries in relation to the property honestly and accurately", and "As a buyer, you are entitled to claim damages if there is a significant difference between the description or value of the property and how it actually is."

Based on that, in the part of the Seller's Information Pack where there are questions over known breaches of PP and building control, could the seller be asked for details on the most essential issues here - type of lintels used, level and type of insulation, etc - the important stuff? If the sellers built this extension, they'll have all the info at their fingertips. You tell your solicitor that - once they have completed that section of the SIP - you are happy to proceed with the purchase and intend to obtain regularisation afterwards so as not to hold up proceedings. You also ask your solicitor to make it clear to the vendor's solicitor that you will take action should the regularisation process reveals a bunch of fibs in the SIP.

Ok, it might be fantasy thinking this sort of approach is possible, but  - if it is - it would surely focus the seller's mind to give frank and honest details?

One side of this issue is the 'legal' bit, and the other is whether the extension is actually perfectly acceptable and perfectly liveable in even if it doesn't quite meet the required standards. What's it like, what_now_? Does it appear well built and finished? 

I believe the problem is the quality of the work is not the issue, and building regs or not (and iv seen some howlers that have managed to completion certs) after a decade any problems would now be very obvious. 

The issue is BC and now they have a bone, they could either send someone out who  kicks the tyres and says yep, or as in the case with one of our local BC inspectors, spend the next 6 months looking for, finding,  and enforcing rectifications. last place I built I had the two extremes one who would spend an hour chatting about cars then just look from a distance or ask for a couple of pics to be sent to him, Or Mr measure who would make you pull half a celling out if a noggin was 30thou out.

Anything that isn't part of the original dwelling house could be open season for the LA 
If the sol advisers the client to continue buying there could be a whole world of issues from BC coming. I really cant see any resolve other than to withdraw from the sale. 

This is why both sol will strongly advise you not to contact the council, as there are legal ways of sorting the issue but not once the LA are involved.  

Just to add if it was the sols who did let this slip to the LA I think they could themselves be negligent and certainly in breach of confidentiality. I would be inclined to go to the SRA.

AdrianC

snowcat75 said:

The issue is BC and now they have a bone, they could either send someone out who  kicks the tyres and says yep, or as in the case with one of our local BC inspectors, spend the next 6 months looking for, finding,  and enforcing rectifications

They can look for and find as much as they want... They can't enforce a sausage after this long.

snowcat75

AdrianC said:

snowcat75 said:

The issue is BC and now they have a bone, they could either send someone out who  kicks the tyres and says yep, or as in the case with one of our local BC inspectors, spend the next 6 months looking for, finding,  and enforcing rectifications

They can look for and find as much as they want... They can't enforce a sausage after this long.

True they cant enforce, but they can "make" you if you want a regulisation letter.

It does seam to me that "someone" has cocked up here and approached the LA..... I would really hope it wasn't a solicitor, but on past track records there can be a level of stupidity applied by some.

The irony of it all is if no regs or PP were ever applied for then no one would have a scooby when any alterations were done, Vendor could have shrugged there shoulders and stated by one of the previous owners and no one would have blinked an eye. 

what_now_

Thanks for your responses, at the moment im not sure who involved the LA but its obviously going to be the sticking point here, Ill make contact with my sols today now i,m in a better picture but its not looking very positive. If i find it was our solicitor who did this I will certainly be levelling a complaint although its not going to get me my house. Im gutted, we've waited do long just for it all to be stopped by a silly mistake. Thanks all

snowcat75

what_now_ said:

Thanks for your responses, at the moment im not sure who involved the LA but its obviously going to be the sticking point here, Ill make contact with my sols today now i,m in a better picture but its not looking very positive. If i find it was our solicitor who did this I will certainly be levelling a complaint although its not going to get me my house. Im gutted, we've waited do long just for it all to be stopped by a silly mistake. Thanks all

Unfortunately it wont help much with the house, but the SRA wont be impressed, My parents back in the 90s were awarded £20k in damages over a !!!!!! up which luckily had no implications in the end but could of. I have the feeling though no conveyancing sol would be stupid enough to inform BC without consent..... I would say far more likely the owners panicked about it coming up and rather than consult there sol (who would have almost certainly told them not to worry about it because of the time period) they started the process with the LA and then told the sol. 

AdrianC

The LA having been informed is only a sticking point in preventing an indemnity policy being sold.

Since indemnity policies are pretty damn useless anyway, merely paying out the legal costs if the LA try to do what they can't do because of the time elapsed, that's irrelevant.

Wanting some kind of regularisation is a totally different matter. And, yes, it's a question of you or your lender WANTING it. Nobody else requires it.

Jeepers_Creepers

what_now_ said:

Thanks for your responses, at the moment im not sure who involved the LA but its obviously going to be the sticking point here, Ill make contact with my sols today now i,m in a better picture but its not looking very positive. If i find it was our solicitor who did this I will certainly be levelling a complaint although its not going to get me my house. Im gutted, we've waited do long just for it all to be stopped by a silly mistake. Thanks all

What_now_, what does this extension look like? Is it pitched roof, tiled, etc like the rest of the house? Or is it 'budget' - flat felt roof, things like that? Ie, does your gut tell you it's been built well? (Is there even a link to it we can see?!)

If this were me and this my 'dream house' as it seemingly is for you, I would simply make a judgement on the quality of the build and proceed as normal if I felt it was ok. 

As said above, the LA cannot enforce any retrospective changes after this time - unless they feel there are serious structural/safety issues that make it unsafe. It should be pretty clear whether this is the case? 

The extension is already 13 years old; if you stay in that house for, say, another 10, the significance of that extension not having had a competition cert becomes even less material. 

Your call, but I think I know what I would do if I really felt this was my dream home. Whether you wish to try and negotiate a small discount for the 'risk' involved, or to allow a contingency for getting it up to 'standard' is up to you.

what_now_

Jeepers_Creepers said:

what_now_ said:

Thanks for your responses, at the moment im not sure who involved the LA but its obviously going to be the sticking point here, Ill make contact with my sols today now i,m in a better picture but its not looking very positive. If i find it was our solicitor who did this I will certainly be levelling a complaint although its not going to get me my house. Im gutted, we've waited do long just for it all to be stopped by a silly mistake. Thanks all

What_now_, what does this extension look like? Is it pitched roof, tiled, etc like the rest of the house? Or is it 'budget' - flat felt roof, things like that? Ie, does your gut tell you it's been built well? (Is there even a link to it we can see?!)

If this were me and this my 'dream house' as it seemingly is for you, I would simply make a judgement on the quality of the build and proceed as normal if I felt it was ok. 

As said above, the LA cannot enforce any retrospective changes after this time - unless they feel there are serious structural/safety issues that make it unsafe. It should be pretty clear whether this is the case? 

The extension is already 13 years old; if you stay in that house for, say, another 10, the significance of that extension not having had a competition cert becomes even less material. 

Your call, but I think I know what I would do if I really felt this was my dream home. Whether you wish to try and negotiate a small discount for the 'risk' involved, or to allow a contingency for getting it up to 'standard' is up to you.

Hi, I didnt even know it was an extension until the solicitors informed me, its been done so sympathetically with the 1925 period features. The entire house has been re-roofed post the extension so you cant tell from a change in roof tiles, the walls are white render and blends in seamlessly with the pitch of the roof (i am no builder though).

I have this morning spoken to the sols and pushed him to proceed any way we can, at the moment that means informing our lender who may be happy to let it go or may insist on some structural report to confirm its safety which although at a cost to us would be peace of mind and that could be passed on in resale too. My solicitor wasnt happy as felt we should insist on sign off or regularisation but i think that would be the end of it for us and our chain at least if we did that.

Jeepers_Creepers

That sounds promising, and I don't think I'd have any personal concerns about buying a house like this. 

I guess the main issue you now have is that it needs a mortgage? I know very little about indemnity policies, but - regardless of how effectively they are in principle - this might be the only way to proceed, if the lender requires it.

Er, does the lender even know about this issue?