Advice sought.... Buying a house and informed of "breach of convenant" at last minute

daws0n_2

I am very near completition buying a house, building survey came back OK and price agreed many months ago. Now local authority searches are back (took 10 weeks) we are ready to exchange and I'm keen to move in.

This week, solicitor informed me of an issue regarding the 5x3m kitchen extension, which was erected by previous owners almost 20 years ago onto the back of the house. Everything is OK with regards to build regulations and certificate of completition, however they did not seek permission from local council. I've been assured that the likelihood of any problems is very slim, but as a precaution an indemnity policy has been taken out at seller's expense.

To me, seeking retrospective planning consent would be the ideal solution but looking into indemnity policies there is often a clause whereby if I were to disclose the issue then the insurance would cease to cover me?

It's a tricky situation... Breach aside, it's a decent property (1950s ex council build). My main worry is that the issue may put off future buyers should I need to sell further down the line. Is this sort of thing common?

user1977

Why are you thinking you need retrospective planning consent if it's 20 years old?

teachfast

They are trying to sell you a policy you don't need. 

Section62

teachfast said:

They are trying to sell you a policy you don't need. 

Why isn't it needed?

Ex-council and "breach of convenant" means the required consent was probably that of the council as previous owner/developer, not the council as Local Planning Authority (i.e. this isn't about planning consent).

And if the seller has already stumped up for the policy then the OP isn't being sold a policy, whether needed or not.

paulj2021

I wouldn’t worry about seeking retrospective planning permission on something that old, informing the council now could be like poking a wasps nest with a stick, who knows what could happen? Worst case they could refuse, and then where would you be? If it meets standards, the neighbours aren’t complaining and you’re happy to live in it then just live in it!

Titus_Wadd

Realistically the Planning Enforcement team where I live won't try to enforce current ongoing breaches of planning conditions and anything that's over 4 years old is off their radar entirely.  Enjoy your new home once you complete and please don't worry that there'll be knock at the door and they'll wait while you dismantle the kitchen.

Scotbot

There is a time limit for enforcement of planning breaches,  I think the maximum they can go back is 10 years. You won't be able to get retrospective permission after 20 years

daws0n_2

Thanks for the comments everyone, it's much appreciated! Very much looking forward to moving, hoping to be in by the end of the month. It was unexpected news this late into purchase, so just trying to get my head around what the breach means.

My solicitor taken out the policy, and it's being paid for by the seller so no issues there. It would be interesting to know how much it costs, in case I'd be expected to pay for one myself when selling to the property on? I intend on living there long term, so by the time I move the extension would be well over 20 years old (was built in 2005-2006).

alt80

As others say not going to be enforced now and the policy will be very little - usually in the region of c£100 for what you’re describing and usually runs in perpetuity.

user1977

£100 or so. They're normally for the benefit of all future owners/lenders, so in theory you shouldn't need to get a new one anyway unless the amount of cover needs increased.

GDB2222

Section62 said:

teachfast said:

They are trying to sell you a policy you don't need. 

Why isn't it needed?

Ex-council and "breach of convenant" means the required consent was probably that of the council as previous owner/developer, not the council as Local Planning Authority (i.e. this isn't about planning consent).

And if the seller has already stumped up for the policy then the OP isn't being sold a policy, whether needed or not.

The OP has not said whether buying freehold or leasehold. If freehold, would the right to take action for breaches still be there?  I suppose it must, or no policy would be needed.