Conveyancing error - by me

davisaj22

The house we are trying to buy has a small kitchen extension built in 1997. There is a building control notice but no completion certificate.

There are other internal modifications which also require a building control sign off and completion certificate. In both instances this was reported on the searches.

As a result of our solicitor being super slow to action these, I innocently (and for all the right reasons) fired off an email to the council asking if both certificates exist. I had a reply stating that with regard to the 'kitchen extension, the roof timbers have been inspected but the project was never finally signed off. This can be reopened for a fee of £150'.

I've been told off by my solicitor as the option of an indemnity is now out of the question to cover this by contacting the council.

However, through the conveyancing portal this afternoon I see my solicitor has written to our sellers solicitors stating that 'I've tipped the council off and they have therefore replied saying the work must be reinspected' which is not quite true. They go on to say there is no other choice but for the work to be signed off.

Apart from me being an idiot, any thoughts?

Thank you

user1977

It's quarter of a century old - there's no need for it to be signed off (it's too late for enforcement action to be taken anyway, which is all an indemnity policy would have protected against). Buyers ought to be forming their own view about whether there are any actual problems with it.

davisaj22

User1977 - that's my view - the structural survey I've had says its fine!!

eddddy

It's generally mortgage lenders who ask for building regs indemnity insurance - it's a kind of "quick and dirty" solution, just in case the council serve a Section 36 notice under the Building Act 1984 (for breach of building regs), or the council get an injunction because the building is dangerous.

But a section 36 notice can only be served within 1 year of the completion of the work.

So hopefully, if the seller and/or you can supply your solicitor with compelling evidence that the work was done over a year ago, and the building isn't dangerous, that should be good enough for the mortgage lender.


The point of indemnity insurance is that you can just spend £50 or £100 on a policy, instead of having to find compelling evidence.

GDB2222

Oh dear! It does rather look as though this purchase is not going ahead unless the seller gets BC round.  OTOH, is there any explanation why this was not signed off in the first place? If it's fully compliant and safe, it may just cost the seller £150 to get the sign off. If it's not compliant and safe, why on earth would you buy it?

The insurance that you can no longer get doesn't guarantee that the kitchen extension is safe. And, it doesn't pay for any extra building costs to make it safe. It's just a bit of paper. Which won't protect you if it is actually unsafe.

Ramouth

BRs covers more than just structural safety.  The extension may have had insufficient insulation, poor ventilation, dodgy drainage, insufficient fire proofing, steep steps etc.  All of which you and your vendor may be fine with but BC may not be.  

Or, they just forgot to get them round for the final inspection.  

saajan_12

davisaj22 said:

The house we are trying to buy has a small kitchen extension built in 1997. There is a building control notice but no completion certificate.

There are other internal modifications which also require a building control sign off and completion certificate. In both instances this was reported on the searches.

As a result of our solicitor being super slow to action these, I innocently (and for all the right reasons) fired off an email to the council asking if both certificates exist. I had a reply stating that with regard to the 'kitchen extension, the roof timbers have been inspected but the project was never finally signed off. This can be reopened for a fee of £150'.

I've been told off by my solicitor as the option of an indemnity is now out of the question to cover this by contacting the council.

However, through the conveyancing portal this afternoon I see my solicitor has written to our sellers solicitors stating that 'I've tipped the council off and they have therefore replied saying the work must be reinspected' which is not quite true. They go on to say there is no other choice but for the work to be signed off.

Apart from me being an idiot, any thoughts?

Thank you

Why exactly do you think this isn't true? 
Assuming you're getting a mortgage, it might be your lender being uncomfortable with the risk of a BR reg breach. To satisfy the lender, the options are indemnity or re-inspection.