Supporting wall

Windofchange

From my knowledge, ‘legally’ you should have notified building control and had the work inspected. If the council discover this has happened (unlikely I guess by accident) then they could seek to enforce inspection and regularisation. For any future sale, I guess it is a question as to whether the purchasers legal team ask the question about structural changes / what rigor they put into the process. I imagine the answer to this is a lot given the sums of money involved. 

I’m looking to remove a load bearing wall in the next year to open up our dining room and it will be done by the pros despite me having done a lot of building work of significant scale previously. Just not worth it. Was it a DIY effort, or was it a friend of a friend down the pub do it on the cheap situation when you say you’re certain it’s been done right? Any reputable builder would surely have followed process and got sign off? 

eddddy

daisydoolittle101 said:

Sadly not… I guess I just want to know where I stand legally.

it has been put in “properly” and I’m confident with this. Just not been arranged professionally or signed off…

If the work was done within the last 12 months - and the council find out about it, they might take enforcement action.

If the work was done more than 12 months ago, the council can't do anything - unless they think it's dangerous. For example, if they think the beam might fall down and injure or kill somebody.


Beyond that it's up to a buyer to decide what they want to do.

• Some buyers might not be too worried about it, and go ahead without question.

• Other buyers might think "Why didn't the owners get the work signed off by building control? Is it because they got a cowboy builder to do it, who saved money by not doing it properly, and so it's going to be a problem in the future?"

And a mortgage lender might want a buyer to take out indemnity insurance.

ThisIsWeird

Daisy, any photos taken of the work at the time - ideally showing the lintel used and how supported?

doodling

Hi,

The odds are that, providing the work appears to be done to a reasonable standard, a buyer's solicitor will want you to pay for an insurance policy which covers the costs if the council decide to take enforcement action at some point in the future.

Any sensible buyer will also want an invasive inspection carried out by a structural engineer (i.e. one where plaster is removed in some locations to allow supporting steels, etc. to be seen).  Whilst solicitors like them, an indemnity policy won't stop you from being crushed if it does collapse!

daivid

It is also worth bearing in mind that home insurance could be invalidated, whilst the probability of a claim is likely to be extremely low the consequences of it being rejected would be severe.

Noneforit999

daivid said:

It is also worth bearing in mind that home insurance could be invalidated, whilst the probability of a claim is likely to be extremely low the consequences of it being rejected would be severe.

There must be thousands of houses over the UK with work done which did not get BR sign off so I don't see insurance would be invalidated. My wife inherited our house from her Granparents who died so there was no conveyancing process. Her grandad was a builder and although the extension did have PP, we have no documents of building regs for that or the central supporting wall taken down between the lounge/diner or the chimney breast removed in the lounge. All these were done in the 80s and there are no obvious cracks/issues so we decided against spending money getting someone to check stuff which has been fine for 40 years. 

People did all sorts of things without BR decades ago, loads of houses have had walls removed or other things done which should of had sign off.

I am not suggesting you shouldn't get BR for future work, obviously you should but as a buyer, the lack of BR for a wall being removed 30 years ago would not bother me at all. Generally you can clearly see a boxed in RSJ when a supporting wall has been removed. If it was done years ago and there are no obvious issues, it seems incredibly unlikely it was not supported adequately or they boxed in fresh air and just rested the upper joists on timber. 

The answer is to have a structural engineer look at it when buying but the vendors may not want carpets/boards pulled up or someone cut into the box work.

doodling

Hi,

daivid said:

It is also worth bearing in mind that home insurance could be invalidated, whilst the probability of a claim is likely to be extremely low the consequences of it being rejected would be severe.

I know of no insurers that require building regulations approval in order to provide cover.  To be blunt insurers don't care if building regulations approval has been obtained.

What insurers do care about is the risk they are carrying and with risks relating to failure of the structure that is driven by quality of workmanship (and maintenance).  If the quality of workmanship was poor then you won't be covered for anything arising as a result of that poor quality work.  Just as if you don't maintain your gutters, and that causes damp on the inside of your bedroom wall then your insurer won't pay up.

Not getting building regulations approval could be an indicator that the work is not of good quality but it is not definitive in that regard.

daivid

Noneforit999 said:

daivid said:

It is also worth bearing in mind that home insurance could be invalidated, whilst the probability of a claim is likely to be extremely low the consequences of it being rejected would be severe.

There must be thousands of houses over the UK with work done which did not get BR sign off so I don't see insurance would be invalidated. My wife inherited our house from her Granparents who died so there was no conveyancing process. Her grandad was a builder and although the extension did have PP, we have no documents of building regs for that or the central supporting wall taken down between the lounge/diner or the chimney breast removed in the lounge. All these were done in the 80s and there are no obvious cracks/issues so we decided against spending money getting someone to check stuff which has been fine for 40 years. 

People did all sorts of things without BR decades ago, loads of houses have had walls removed or other things done which should of had sign off.

I am not suggesting you shouldn't get BR for future work, obviously you should but as a buyer, the lack of BR for a wall being removed 30 years ago would not bother me at all. Generally you can clearly see a boxed in RSJ when a supporting wall has been removed. If it was done years ago and there are no obvious issues, it seems incredibly unlikely it was not supported adequately or they boxed in fresh air and just rested the upper joists on timber. 

The answer is to have a structural engineer look at it when buying but the vendors may not want carpets/boards pulled up or someone cut into the box work.

What happened prior to BR is completely irrelevant to the OPs situation, whilst they’ve not clarified when they did the works I think it is safe to assume by their enquiry that BR have not been met. I'm not suggesting a burglary claim would be rejected however a claim for structural issues may get thrown back at them. It is also likely the OP has breached the agreed terms of their home insurance (if they have it) which whilst unlikely to come to light would not help matters if it did.

daivid

doodling said:

Hi,

daivid said:

It is also worth bearing in mind that home insurance could be invalidated, whilst the probability of a claim is likely to be extremely low the consequences of it being rejected would be severe.

I know of no insurers that require building regulations approval in order to provide cover.  To be blunt insurers don't care if building regulations approval has been obtained.

What insurers do care about is the risk they are carrying and with risks relating to failure of the structure that is driven by quality of workmanship (and maintenance).  If the quality of workmanship was poor then you won't be covered for anything arising as a result of that poor quality work.  Just as if you don't maintain your gutters, and that causes damp on the inside of your bedroom wall then your insurer won't pay up.

Not getting building regulations approval could be an indicator that the work is not of good quality but it is not definitive in that regard.

That was more or less my point. A completely unrelated claim would be no issue. If there is a collapse where the beam was put in the insurance would refuse to pay out at all. If there was structural damage and the quality of work was thought to be contributory (such as fire or accidental damage) the insurance could reduce the payout. As I said before low probability of it occurring but severe consequences if it does.

I agree the BR sign off is far from definitive and I am no lawyer but I think not having it could put pressure on the homeowner to prove it was done right, having the work certified would put the pressure on the other side to prove it was not done properly (in the case of a dispute).