Building regulations indemnity insurance - future works etc

rossmrtn

Hi Guys,

I'm a little stuck what to do, I have been progressing with a house purchase and the sale of my current property for almost 4 months now, had many surveys and checks done (building survey, electrical survey and damp investigations etc) and my solicitor has been chasing the seller to get a regularisation certification for the removal of a chimney breast done in 2012. After 9 weeks of silence I started chasing via my solicitors and the EA and the seller has come back saying he only wants to go ahead with getting indemnity insurance. 

Initially I wasn't too fussed about this as I know the building surely didn’t bring up any structural safety issues with the chimney breast removal. However I’ve learnt that indemnity for lack of building regulations means that you cannot carry out any works on the property which require planning permission or further building regulations - otherwise you make the insurance void. The problem is after doing my electrical survey id need to get some electrical works done and im also planning on getting an extension done on the property in the near future.

I am not sure whether to:

1. Accept the indemnity, knowing that I may have to break it in the future or risk of not doing the full works I plan on getting done. ( I assume electric gas works etc. from a competent persons scheme wouldn't void it?) 

2. Reject the indemnity, knowing this is probably not going to be what the seller wants to hear, so this could be the end of the road for me or delay the purchase even further and also put at risk my buyer.  

If I go for option one I'm trying to work out if this will get me into a bad situation in the future. I really love the house and its already dragged out so much and I don't want this to delay the chain too much. So yeah, I'd be interested to hear people's opinions and also the costs. 

I'll be asking my broker, solicitor, EA etc about this as well, but they are super slow to reply.

Thanks.

Section62

rossmrtn said:

my solicitor has been chasing the seller to get a regularisation certification for the removal of a chimney breast done in 2012. After 9 weeks of silence I started chasing via my solicitors and the EA and the seller has come back saying he only wants to go ahead with getting indemnity insurance.

How much of the original chimney was removed, and what parts remain? When was the house built?

Also, where within the property is it, and where would the extension be in relation to it?

rossmrtn said:

Initially I wasn't too fussed about this as I know the building surely didn’t bring up any structural safety issues with the chimney breast removal.

Was the surveyor made aware of the situation with BR?

davidmcn

In reality, building control aren't going to give two hoots about works carried out nine years ago (and they'd have extremely limited scope for doing anything about it if they did care), so whether or not you've got valid insurance covering it shouldn't really be a concern. You've got your surveyor's opinion that the works are structurally sound, which is the main thing.

rossmrtn

Section62 said:

rossmrtn said:

my solicitor has been chasing the seller to get a regularisation certification for the removal of a chimney breast done in 2012. After 9 weeks of silence I started chasing via my solicitors and the EA and the seller has come back saying he only wants to go ahead with getting indemnity insurance.

How much of the original chimney was removed, and what parts remain? When was the house built?

Also, where within the property is it, and where would the extension be in relation to it?

rossmrtn said:

Initially I wasn't too fussed about this as I know the building surely didn’t bring up any structural safety issues with the chimney breast removal.

Was the surveyor made aware of the situation with BR?

Thanks for the reply; the house is late 19th century 2 bedroom end of terrace house. The chimney breast was removed from the first floor front bedroom all the way up the stack and the roof . The chimney breast is still there in the ground floor living room and I think needs to have an air brick or ventilation added which I planned to do with my remedial works when moving in. The rear chimney breast structure is still in tact but the stack has been removed from within the attic/roof.

The surveyor wasn't aware of the BR issue at the time of his survey, as I wasn't made aware when I booked him. However I have spoken to him since and he has again confirmed he has no concerns with the front chimney breast structure, he wasn't sure about the rear as he thought it might had been removed (was hidden behind a built- in wardrobe) but have since had confirmation the whole structure is in tact.

If I were to get an extension it would be on the ground floor to the rear of the house.

rossmrtn

davidmcn said:

In reality, building control aren't going to give two hoots about works carried out nine years ago (and they'd have extremely limited scope for doing anything about it if they did care), so whether or not you've got valid insurance covering it shouldn't really be a concern. You've got your surveyor's opinion that the works are structurally sound, which is the main thing.

Thanks, that's what I thought, the work has been done for almost 10 years so wasn't sure what they could make me do. So do you think it is worth me just voiding indemnity in the future than holding back or even getting the work signed off with a regularisation certification myself in the future?

AdrianC

What does the indemnity actually cover, anyway?

Odds are that it'll cover the costs of defending a legal action from the local authority for failure to get BR sign-off, no more, no less.
The reason the policy's so cheap is because there's damn-near zero chance of it ever paying out... because the LA can't pursue failure to get sign-off after the thick end of a decade...

It won't cover the cost of rectifying shoddy work.
It won't cover the cost of investigating to see if the work was shoddy in the first place...

So... are you worried the work was shoddy?

If not, then the indemnity adds nothing. It's a comforting hug in legalistic paper form, no more.

But if so, the indemnity's no use.
You're going to want a structural engineer to investigate - and that WILL be destructive to the finish... So forget the vendor agreeing.
But if the work was shoddy, why hasn't that shown up in damn near a decade?

All that's gone is the TOP of the chimney stacks? Then there's almost certainly no real issue. The normal issue is the lower being removed (y'know, where it actually impinges on living space), leaving unsupported weight above.

Section62

rossmrtn said:

So do you think it is worth me just voiding indemnity in the future than holding back or even getting the work signed off with a regularisation certification myself in the future?

So as AdrianC says, the 'right' parts of the chimneys have been retained to reduce the risk of any immediate concerns regarding the structure.

From what you describe it sounds like their positions relative to where you want to extend won't cause a problematic interaction.

However, at an early stage in developing your extension plan I would have a discussion (with a suitably qualified professional) about safely incorporating further removal of the chimneys into the planned works.

You could get the benefit of additional living space without excessive additional cost, and when you come to sell the paperwork will all be in order in relation to the removed chimneys, without the need for any separate regularisation process or future indemnity queries.

davidmcn

AdrianC said:

What does the indemnity actually cover, anyway?

Odds are that it'll cover the costs of defending a legal action from the local authority for failure to get BR sign-off, no more, no less.
The reason the policy's so cheap is because there's damn-near zero chance of it ever paying out... because the LA can't pursue failure to get sign-off after the thick end of a decade...

It won't cover the cost of rectifying shoddy work.
It won't cover the cost of investigating to see if the work was shoddy in the first place...

It will cover the cost of any work required by building control. But that's it.

AdrianC

davidmcn said:

AdrianC said:

What does the indemnity actually cover, anyway?

Odds are that it'll cover the costs of defending a legal action from the local authority for failure to get BR sign-off, no more, no less.
The reason the policy's so cheap is because there's damn-near zero chance of it ever paying out... because the LA can't pursue failure to get sign-off after the thick end of a decade...

It won't cover the cost of rectifying shoddy work.
It won't cover the cost of investigating to see if the work was shoddy in the first place...

It will cover the cost of any work required by building control. But that's it.

Building control won't require any work, because building control can't do a sausage this far down the line.

rossmrtn

Thanks guys. 

I feel like indemnity insurance has become a box that needs to be ticked for the lenders of my mortgage and the only way I can speed up this awfully slow house purchase process. 

Glad to know that structurally it seems like I should be okay, and for the future when getting any works done I could incorporate chimney breast removal to cover my bases.