No building regs, how nervous should I be

paradigm_2

917700 said:

When was this built?

The house? Not sure but poss 100 years.
not sure on extension 
work in question was 2017

Alan2020

Either buy it if you feel comfortable or don’t buy it. Do you really for a moment trust the building control certificate or a paid inspection. Your wife needs to be more realistic, I have had houses with sign offs, when you open them up you know what goes on. It’s like democracy, only thick illiterates believe that it works, you just need to ask you wife to watch the news, a whole country is in turmoil and you think that having a piece of paper gives you piece of mind lol

paradigm_2

Alan2020 said:

Either buy it if you feel comfortable or don’t buy it. Do you really for a moment trust the building control certificate or a paid inspection. Your wife needs to be more realistic, I have had houses with sign offs, when you open them up you know what goes on. It’s like democracy, only thick illiterates believe that it works, you just need to ask you wife to watch the news, a whole country is in turmoil and you think that having a piece of paper gives you piece of mind lol

I don’t know where to start to unpack everything you’ve said there so I’ll just say, thanks for your comments 

weeg

paradigm_2 said:

Mutton_Geoff said:

paradigm_2 said:

“As per item 6, our inspections and report will be based on super-structure (above floor level only). Since we are only able to comment on above ground works, inspect, check and comment on the supporting the top beam and the two posts, but not below floor level and how the ground receives the load, will our report be adequate for the potential buyer?”

If the outside walls are original, then the loads should be the same (ie the total house still weighs the same pushing down on the orginal foundations. This comment isn't really related to the other building control issue which is insulation under the new slab/ufh system. I'd ask to see some bills on how expensive the heating is to run.

I can't believe the vendors didn't take loads of pictures whilst their dream home was being created. I've been developing houses for decades and still have boxes of photos processed by Bonusprint. And that was the before the days of "look at me" on social media.

The pictures should be a clue to how it was all put together.

Apparently it’s a letterbox design if this helps?

Actually, yes, that is helpful. It means that the lateral stability is taken care of, as well as distributing the loads from the uprights. But, more than that, it means that whoever did it knew what they were doing.

paradigm_2

weeg said:

paradigm_2 said:

Mutton_Geoff said:

paradigm_2 said:

“As per item 6, our inspections and report will be based on super-structure (above floor level only). Since we are only able to comment on above ground works, inspect, check and comment on the supporting the top beam and the two posts, but not below floor level and how the ground receives the load, will our report be adequate for the potential buyer?”

If the outside walls are original, then the loads should be the same (ie the total house still weighs the same pushing down on the orginal foundations. This comment isn't really related to the other building control issue which is insulation under the new slab/ufh system. I'd ask to see some bills on how expensive the heating is to run.

I can't believe the vendors didn't take loads of pictures whilst their dream home was being created. I've been developing houses for decades and still have boxes of photos processed by Bonusprint. And that was the before the days of "look at me" on social media.

The pictures should be a clue to how it was all put together.

Apparently it’s a letterbox design if this helps?

Actually, yes, that is helpful. It means that the lateral stability is taken care of, as well as distributing the loads from the uprights. But, more than that, it means that whoever did it knew what they were doing.

You’re being very helpful thank you.
I appreciate you’ve got limited information but in terms of foundations/sub-structure, what would your top level understanding be of the changes required to do this? I’m comfortable trusting the SE but he’s not digging the floor up.

FreeBear

The stairwell retains walls on both sides - This protects the escape route in the event of a fire, although.... The floor plan doesn't show a door from the corridor into the living room area - You might want to look at that and perhaps consider fitting a fire resistant door for piece of mind.

The rest of it, as long as the steels are adequately sized and supported, appears to be OK on the face of it. See what the SE report has to say, and go from there.

paradigm_2

FreeBear said:

The stairwell retains walls on both sides - This protects the escape route in the event of a fire, although.... The floor plan doesn't show a door from the corridor into the living room area - You might want to look at that and perhaps consider fitting a fire resistant door for piece of mind.

The rest of it, as long as the steels are adequately sized and supported, appears to be OK on the face of it. See what the SE report has to say, and go from there.

Thank you.

It’s the “supported” bit I think which is giving us concern as the SE is not able to look directly at the foundations 

weeg

paradigm_2 said:

FreeBear said:

The stairwell retains walls on both sides - This protects the escape route in the event of a fire, although.... The floor plan doesn't show a door from the corridor into the living room area - You might want to look at that and perhaps consider fitting a fire resistant door for piece of mind.

The rest of it, as long as the steels are adequately sized and supported, appears to be OK on the face of it. See what the SE report has to say, and go from there.

Thank you.

It’s the “supported” bit I think which is giving us concern as the SE is not able to look directly at the foundations 

Working on the assumption that it was properly designed and installed, then the overall load on the original foundation is no bigger than the original load (maybe some extra roof, but no downstairs wall, so net decrease). So, as the house hasn't fallen down, we know that the original foundation was good enough. My guess is one of two things happened below floor level - steel beam on original foundation, or steel beam on existing masonry dwarf wall on original foundation. Theoretically either is fine, so long as they are sufficient and in acceptable condition.

So, if it were me, I would infer that if the above floor level is well done, there is no reason to think that the below floor is inadequate. But, your engineer won't be able to absolutely state it is ok without seeing it, so don't expect them to.
It's a risk that I, personally, would be comfortable with. But people are always surprised how unworried engineers are by most things.