New roof with no building regs... what do I need to get checked?

A0911

I'm a FTB buying a Victorian terrace from a BTL landlord. My solicitor has advised there are no building regulation documents or any guarantee documents relating to a replacement roof done in 2012. It was replaced using concrete interlocking tiles. I think it may have been slate before but I'm not sure. Seller is offering indemnity insurance on it.

My L3 survey pointed out some issues with it - chimney needs reflashing, coping stones aren't mechanically fixed, ridge tiles could do with re-mortaring, but the surveyor was unable to get in the loft space due to it being screwed shut when he visited.

I later had a damp and timber survey done after arranging loft access. The d&t surveyor said the timbers 'looked OK with no evidence of infestation'. Otherwise she only raised that there is no party firewall in the loft (common in these houses). In addition I can see a sign attached to one of the timbers that seems to say 'danger' but she didn't say anything about that - could that be just because it's only insulated and not boarded?

In light of there being no documentation, would it be prudent to investigate beyond this? If so, what are the key things I should get checked here?

I have a structural engineer and handyman coming next week to check out an unsupported chimney breast - would it be unusual for one of them to have a look while they're there?

Any advice is much appreciated. The stress is really getting to me.

Doozergirl

A re-roof wouldn't require building control sign off if insulation was already in place.  

Any guarantee would usually be 10 years, not insurance backed, and have run out by now anyway.  

I'm sure the danger sign would relate to the likelihood the insulation is probably only covering plasterboard and isn't safe to walk on. People don't just leave danger signs hanging around for structural issues, they fix them! 

I'm not sure there's any concerns that should have been raised here - maybe just that the tiles are possibly heavier than the old ones, but you've had a survey and it hasn't mentioned it?  

ThisIsWeird

I think only the 'damp and timber' surveyor had access to the loft space, not the original building surveyor? In which case definitely worth asking the SE if the original timbers are ok to support the presumably heavier concrete tiles. I'd have thought that would be a fairly easy call for them to make.

FreeBear

Doozergirl said:

A re-roof wouldn't require building control sign off if insulation was already in place. 

Beg to differ on that. If you strip more than 25% of a roof, then Building Control should be notified. In turn, they might require extra insulation added in the loft depending on how much is already in place. As the work was carried out in 2012, the window for enforcement has long since closed. Whilst an indemnity policy is often suggested/recommended, enforcement is extremely unlikely to happen.

Replacing slate with concrete tiles would be of concern due to the extra weight. Definitely get the SE to take a look.

Doozergirl

FreeBear said:

Doozergirl said:

A re-roof wouldn't require building control sign off if insulation was already in place. 

Beg to differ on that. If you strip more than 25% of a roof, then Building Control should be notified. In turn, they might require extra insulation added in the loft depending on how much is already in place. As the work was carried out in 2012, the window for enforcement has long since closed. Whilst an indemnity policy is often suggested/recommended, enforcement is extremely unlikely to happen.

Replacing slate with concrete tiles would be of concern due to the extra weight. Definitely get the SE to take a look.

It's 25% of the whole building envelope, not the roof.  I was just assuming that the insulation up there currently is sufficient though.  

FreeBear

Doozergirl said:

FreeBear said:

Doozergirl said:

A re-roof wouldn't require building control sign off if insulation was already in place. 

Beg to differ on that. If you strip more than 25% of a roof, then Building Control should be notified. In turn, they might require extra insulation added in the loft depending on how much is already in place. As the work was carried out in 2012, the window for enforcement has long since closed. Whilst an indemnity policy is often suggested/recommended, enforcement is extremely unlikely to happen.

Replacing slate with concrete tiles would be of concern due to the extra weight. Definitely get the SE to take a look.

It's 25% of the whole building envelope, not the roof.  I was just assuming that the insulation up there currently is sufficient though.  

https://www.planningportal.co.uk/permission/common-projects/roof/building-regulations-work-to-an-existing-roof

If you want to carry out repairs on or re-cover an existing pitched or flat roof you will not normally need to submit a building control application if: Less than 25 per cent of the total ‘building envelope’ (walls, floor, roof, windows, door, roof windows and roof-lights) is affected; andLess than 50 per cent of the roof is affected.

It then goes on to say approval will be required if the new covering weighs more than 15% of the original - Concrete tiles will almost certainly be much heavier than slates. So BC would want assurances (from a structural engineer ?) that the roof structure & walls can cope.

A0911

Thanks both, I've asked the SE to pop his head in the loft, he said he'd take a look to see if there's any deflection. The building surveyor didn't note any sagging or issues like that from his external inspection.

A0911

Added to which it's been done ten years so you'd probably see any sagging by now, right?

diystarter7

FreeBear said:

Doozergirl said:

A re-roof wouldn't require building control sign off if insulation was already in place. 

Beg to differ on that. If you strip more than 25% of a roof, then Building Control should be notified. In turn, they might require extra insulation added in the loft depending on how much is already in place. As the work was carried out in 2012, the window for enforcement has long since closed. Whilst an indemnity policy is often suggested/recommended, enforcement is extremely unlikely to happen.

Replacing slate with concrete tiles would be of concern due to the extra weight. Definitely get the SE to take a look.

Hi

Exactly agree and thought of this as I read and before posting did several checks and it is only right you contact the coucil for advice etc as otherwise you may end up with problems late on

From one of the many links on Google and I quote

Do I need to involve Building Regulations when re-roofing an existing pitched roof?

If it’s repaired to an existing roof covering, or if you are stripping and replacing less than 25% of the surface area of the roof, then the answer is no. However, if the project is replacing the roof, you don’t necessarily need to involve building regulations, although there are specifications that must be worked towards in order to prevent complications further down the line, should the owner come to sell the property. If you are unsure of the method a certain contractor has proposed, or believe your property is more complex, it would be a good idea to run the project past a local building control officer for approval. You will need to involve building regulations if:

https://www.findleyroofing.co.uk/the-standard-requirements-you-need-to-abide-by/

Doozergirl

diystarter7 said:

FreeBear said:

Doozergirl said:

A re-roof wouldn't require building control sign off if insulation was already in place. 

Beg to differ on that. If you strip more than 25% of a roof, then Building Control should be notified. In turn, they might require extra insulation added in the loft depending on how much is already in place. As the work was carried out in 2012, the window for enforcement has long since closed. Whilst an indemnity policy is often suggested/recommended, enforcement is extremely unlikely to happen.

Replacing slate with concrete tiles would be of concern due to the extra weight. Definitely get the SE to take a look.

Hi

Exactly agree and thought of this as I read and before posting did several checks and it is only right you contact the coucil for advice etc as otherwise you may end up with problems late on

From one of the many links on Google and I quote

Do I need to involve Building Regulations when re-roofing an existing pitched roof?

If it’s repaired to an existing roof covering, or if you are stripping and replacing less than 25% of the surface area of the roof, then the answer is no. However, if the project is replacing the roof, you don’t necessarily need to involve building regulations, although there are specifications that must be worked towards in order to prevent complications further down the line, should the owner come to sell the property. If you are unsure of the method a certain contractor has proposed, or believe your property is more complex, it would be a good idea to run the project past a local building control officer for approval. You will need to involve building regulations if:

https://www.findleyroofing.co.uk/the-standard-requirements-you-need-to-abide-by/

It's absolutely not right that you contact the council.  Not right at all.  It would invalidate any indemnity policy and have ramifications on the mortgage even if there's no issue with the council, which there won't be.  

The advice above is what you might do beforehand to be sure.  

The OP has done the right thing in having a survey and asking an SE to have a look at it.  

Doozergirl

A0911 said:

Added to which it's been done ten years so you'd probably see any sagging by now, right?

Potentially.  10 years isn't the longest of time but a roof will have been subjected to a lot of different forces in that amount of time, so it's certainly more positive than negative.  I wouldn't be panicking.  

*Please* don't contact the council anyone on the house buying board will tell you that it could cause you sale to collapse for no good reason.   The council cannot enforce without a court order, which they will never do for a happy looking building (18 years on this board and *never* seen a BC enforcement post) but mortgage companies are what they are and any policy will be void, leaving the mortgagor unhappy.  

You're in a situation where the paperwork doesn't matter now even if it did. Safety matters.   They're two different things and you are doing the right thing.