Building Control Sign-Off and Insurance

GBaleJoe

Hello all, thanks in advance for reading through the following and hopefully offering some words of advice…

Some prerequisite assumptions/facts that should be borne in mind (i.e. no point in discussing whether these statements are true, I mean….they really are true but it won’t be helpful to go down these rabbit holes):

• The building works have been done properly with all fire-proofing of steels done correctly, etc.  
• The building control did come out, visually inspect and verbally sign-off (I was there with the builder when it happened)
• The delay in signing off BC is a combination of covid, personal drama, forgetfulness…nothing dodgy or trying to string out the approval (as you will see the lapse in time has massively disadvantaged us…)

The story:

Pre-covid we did a double-storey extension, which required some steel works. The builder that carried this out is reputable, has done numerous works in the local area and continues to operate. As part of the ongoing works and Building Control sign-off, as we progressed through the project the builder would periodically call out BC to do an on-site inspection before moving onto another part of the project, e.g. sign off the groundworks/soakaway, then fill it in // sign off the steels so that we could go ahead and plasterboard/plaster.

For a number of reasons (covid, personal family things over the past years), even though we finished the project in mid-2020 I am only now following up to submit the electrical certificate as the ‘only outstanding point’ for BC to fully sign off. To my surprise (and the builder’s) when I rang BC to check why the sign-off wasn’t granted after submitting the electrical cert, they told me that there are in fact an additional number of outstanding points regarding the steels (all to do with fire-proofing) and one point regarding insulation between first floor joists. They said they would accept photographic evidence and sign off remotely however this is where the pain begins:

• We only have one grainy photo of the required plasterboard wrapping around the steel (so don’t have anything inside the web of the steel to show the necessary protection against thermal bridging/nothing for the joist insulation etc.)
• The BC officer that absolutely 100% signed off the work on-site and has forgotten to do the paperwork (or some other equally boring explanation for why these points are still outstanding)….now no longer works with the council and is not contactable

 So without all the necessary photos I believe we are in the following situation…

• Go for a new site visit which will necessarily mean pulling down a fair amount of ceiling and making a ton of mess only to prove what we know is already there in terms of fire-proofing/insulation - the house is now decorated and I could really do without this
• Don’t bother with building control for now – the house is our ‘forever home’ and in the unlikely event we do sell in the far future I could obviously do that bit of inspection/decorating at that point (when I care less about the mess it makes) and hopefully apply for retrospective sign-off

 My questions are:

• Firstly, is my synopsis above correct or are there any other options I have open to me? Is there an appeals process with the council where they need to acknowledge the fact they’ve mislaid the sign off of these particular elements and perhaps accept only partial proof of the works (potentially alongside our builder’s written declaration that the work was carried out…would that even carry any weight?)
• If we do not get sign-off now, is there any time limit for how long we can back-date it? E.g. if I expose the ceiling and steels in 10y and go back to the council with pictures of every element, will they still have the case open and those exact four points still awaiting sign-off or will I have to start the whole approvals process from scratch?
• Given the sign-off relates to fire-proofing, is my home insurance somehow invalidated in the case of a fire? E.g. the whole house burns down (not something I’m planning anytime soon…) and the insurance company can avoid paying out for rebuild because they say, “aha! You didn’t get BC sign-off for fire-related issues….therefore your policy is null and void in the event of fire damage”.

Again, to reiterate, the delay in sign-off is a combination of covid, family drama and forgetfulness, nothing shady…not hiding anything. The works were definitely definitely done, but…who takes pictures of insulation between joists? So right now its our word against the council’s spreadsheet and of course, they control the big green button which permits sign-off. Finally, yes we could have all done things differently, our builder could have been more rigorous with pictures and getting a paper trail but like most builders he doesn’t spend a lot of time in the office and does a number of large projects each year and so is on first-name terms with all local BC and calls them out on a regular basis. To his knowledge this is the first time that something has been questioned that he already had signed off AND the person who did the sign-off has disappeared off the face of the planet….so bad luck on top of bad luck on top of (admittedly) poor organisation on our part. Lessons will be learnt and the tale can be used as a reason to take as many photos of as many boring building works as possible to avoid stress such as this down the line…

My biggest fear relates to the insurance. The inconvenience of knowing that one day I’ll probably need to pull down the ceiling to show the work is fine as long as I can kick that many years down the road. Anyone suggesting I would need to check with my insurance company….I would imagine that is a fairly obvious case of selection bias – you ring them up querying an issue with fireproofing, this presumably goes on the ‘record’ of the house and then in the next 5y we have a fire…you can only imagine the fun they would have investigating that and refusing a payment.

Thanks in advance for your thoughts. For the record I have already asked the BC to get in touch with the past officer and check his personal records of the project, but even if they do somehow manage to find him I’m not sure a 3y old sign off over the phone will be taken as proof.

Bigphil1474

OP, I'd keep the pressure on BC. If it's anything like our BC team, they've probably all worked together for years and if they get hold of him and he says he remembers visiting and signing off, then they'll likely accept that. Most inspectors keep a pocket book so he may be able to find any relevant entries. It's basically their mistake, so keep on at them. If they aren't any help, get on to your local councillor, that always puts the wind up council Departments. 
I'm not sure what would happen if that goes nowhere. Can't advise or give an opinion.

Section62

GBaleJoe said:

 

• Given the sign-off relates to fire-proofing, is my home insurance somehow invalidated in the case of a fire? E.g. the whole house burns down (not something I’m planning anytime soon…) and the insurance company can avoid paying out for rebuild because they say, “aha! You didn’t get BC sign-off for fire-related issues….therefore your policy is null and void in the event of fire damage”.

....

My biggest fear relates to the insurance. The inconvenience of knowing that one day I’ll probably need to pull down the ceiling to show the work is fine as long as I can kick that many years down the road. Anyone suggesting I would need to check with my insurance company….I would imagine that is a fairly obvious case of selection bias – you ring them up querying an issue with fireproofing, this presumably goes on the ‘record’ of the house and then in the next 5y we have a fire…you can only imagine the fun they would have investigating that and refusing a payment.

Unfortunately speaking to the insurers might be the only way of knowing for sure... otherwise it is just guesswork.

Fire protection for steel isn't to stop a fire happening, it is solely to delay the point at which heat from a fire has reduced the strength of the steel to a level where it can no longer safely carry the load.  In other words, it gives the occupants time to get out of the building, and ideally time for the fire services to arrive and bring the fire under control so that damage to the building is minimised.

Therefore in theory, the actual absence of fire protection to steelwork should only be a concern to the insurers in terms of a claim if that absence contributed to the loss/damage being greater than it would be if the steelwork was properly protected.

In theory the insurers shouldn't refuse a claim for damage which is entirely unrelated to the steel, but these days insurers reportedly look for anything to give them grounds to refuse a claim, and if that happened your only option would be legal action.

If you know the steelwork is adequately protected then the risk relates to the insurers not paying out.  In anything other than a totally catastrophic fire, there should be some forensic evidence that fire protection was in place, and a suitable expert witness could probably argue your case in court, if that need arose.

GBaleJoe said:

Lessons will be learnt and the tale can be used as a reason to take as many photos of as many boring building works as possible to avoid stress such as this down the line…

^This  x100

There are so many reasons why a homeowner should try to near-obsessively photograph details of significant building works done on their home.

bengalknights

The issue lies with Building control if you have the name of the inspector and the date/time of visit, they should update the records or try and obtain the docs that should be held on there premise somewhere.

Section62

bengalknights said:

The issue lies with Building control if you have the name of the inspector and the date/time of visit, they should update the records or try and obtain the docs that should be held on there premise somewhere.

I agree that any records should be held by the council rather than the individual (they shouldn't be taken when they leave the job), but these days the chances are the 'site' documents (if any) that existed were electronic and ceased to exist when the BCO's devices were wiped before being given to the next employee.

If the information isn't in a record (paper or electronic) attached to the property then I'd hold little hope of finding anything this long since the work was done.

GBaleJoe

Firstly, thank you all for reading and replying - greatly appreciate the sound logic. 

I think Section62's comments make a lot of sense and the scenario i'm worried about is in reality a probability of a probability etc.. (something happens in the house where we need to make a claim AND the insurance refuses AND we can't adequately expose the work to prove it is there AND/OR we can't take legal action to force them to pay out...) - all feels like a very remote tail risk once you multiply those probabilities together. 

The only thing I'm left wondering is whether there is any time limit to retrospectively getting the works signed off (so second suggestion in my novel above - we don't get sign-off now, kick it down the road and come back when we're redecorating in a few years anyway) - anyone see any issue with this strategy assuming I can't get BC to sign-off in the short term?

thanks very much 

Section62

GBaleJoe said:

The only thing I'm left wondering is whether there is any time limit to retrospectively getting the works signed off (so second suggestion in my novel above - we don't get sign-off now, kick it down the road and come back when we're redecorating in a few years anyway) - anyone see any issue with this strategy assuming I can't get BC to sign-off in the short term?

In principle there's no time limit for regularisation, but you'd probably have to make a fresh application for that, and pay a fee, and the end product would be a 'regularisation certficate', which isn't the same as a 'completion certificate'.

If you try to keep the current case open to achieve a completion certificate then I think the longer you leave it, the more problematic it will become.

For me the over riding issue would be how a future buyer might view having a 'recent' regularisation certificate, compared to a contemporary completion certificiate.  That will depend on the buyer and their solicitor, but if it were me I'd immediately be on the alert if I saw a recent signoff for work done a long time ago - I'd want to fully understand why it wasn't dealt with at the time, and why regularisation had been gone for some time past the point where enforcement action could no longer be taken.