Indemnity Insurance on older work despite recent work

willoftw

davidmcn said:

willoftw said:

davidmcn said:

Perhaps there is something unusually specific in the OP's lender's requirements, but generally lenders rely on the solicitors following the standard instructions in the CML Handbook, and the relevant section says:

5.5.1 You must by making appropriate searches and enquiries take all reasonable steps (including any further enquiries to clarify any issues which may arise) to ensure:

• the property has the benefit of any necessary planning consents (including listed building consent) and building regulation approval for its construction and any subsequent change to the property and its current use; and
• there is no evidence of any breach of the conditions of that or any other consent or certificate affecting the property; and 
• that no matter is revealed which would preclude the property from being used as a residential property or that the property may be the subject of enforcement action.

If there is evidence of such a breach or matter but in your professional judgment there is no reasonable prospect of enforcement action and, following reasonable enquiries, you are satisfied that the title is good and marketable and you can provide an unqualified certificate of title, we will not insist on indemnity insurance and you may proceed."

(my emphasis) - I can't see any solicitor arguing there's a reasonable prospect of enforcement action after 40+ years.

Our solicitor is saying that by recently getting regulations sign off, has meant any indemnity policy cannot be taken out, and he cannot advise us or the lender to proceed forward without those regulations? Should I just argue with our solicitor? He’s saying we will have to write to the lender informing them of the situation.

Unfortunately it seems you've appointed an idiot as a solicitor. If he thinks he needs to seek instructions from the lender then I suppose it'll be simplest to let him do that.

As I alluded to above, how old is the rest of the house, and what paperwork has he seen for its original construction?

The house was build in 1968, the extension work in question was carried out in ~1972. The solicitor has seen the planning permission for this, along with all the paperwork (permission and building regs) for relevant extensions since the offending one.

Now I think about it, he's arguing that the recent building regulations sign-off (2020) has informed the local authority. But surely all the planning applications since then and council tax census in 2001 would have done the same?

davidmcn

Yes, it's all utterly absurd. In any event, an extension built in the 1970s would have had to comply with 1970s-era building regulations. Even if the council still employs anybody who can remember what those regulations were, they're not going to send somebody round to demand that you comply with them. More likely, even for a building which complied with regulations at the time, is that it's deteriorated since then - but that's something for your surveyor to look for, nothing to do with indemnity insurance.