Buying house with unofficial loft bedroom - the final reckoning

NervyBuyer

This is a bit of a long one, reprising a couple of earlier threads but with all the info in place now.

House was advertised and priced as 2 bed with agent's listing stating final works (fire door and window) being done to satisfy building regs for the 2nd bedroom in the loft. About 6 weeks into the purchase process it finally transpired that although these works were completed after my offer was accepted, there was never any intention to actually get building control approval at all.

As I see it there are 3 potential scenarios:

1. The whole thing is a train wreck and I should steer well clear

2. The structure is safe and suitable for occasional use/a convenient storage area but cannot be counted as a bedroom. This makes what was a 2-bed house into a 1-bed, because the original second bedroom has now been converted to a bathroom.

3. Building control approval can be obtained to classify it as a legitimate bedroom

I think 2 is probably the most likely, and if so I would still like to continue on that basis so I am wondering what approach to take next to try to confirm that, and propose a corresponding new purchase price to the vendor. 

The situation is quite confusing with different 'professionals' providing conflicting information, so I'd appreciate any thoughts on my understanding of it, and where a new offer might be pitched (or if abandoning is a better plan!).

Safety

Original house build estimated around 1900, terrace.

The conversion is a proper staircase in the centre of the house, above the original, with a small gabled dormer window to the rear and ceiling/walls/floor 'finished'. The area is just the existing roof space (about 16sqm). There is power but no light or heat. 

It's of unknown age - the only thing that I am sure of is that it was in place in 2019 when the current vendor purchased (advertised as 'useful attic space' at the time, from old Rightmove listing photos). 

When I viewed it was fully furnished with hefty wooden bedroom furniture, although I'm not sure whether it was actively in use.

Apparently an architect (appears legit, has a website and is listed on the ARB) was employed to consult on the new door/window, and stated the following in a letter via solicitors. 'The stair case off the first floor landing has an outward swinging 30min fire door. The bedroom benefits from a new fire escape window with a flying mullion and fixed step below the cill. There are smoke alarms in the landing and entrance hall along with a 30 minute escape route from the 2nd bedroom to the front door.'.

The L3 survey (done after the window/door installation) states various issues that would fail building control approval (window is too small, staircases and door are not fireproof, lack of fire alarms, staircase pitch is too steep). It does not recommend a structural survey (and is very conservative on recommending further surveys for e.g. damp, drains).

Regulatory issues

There is no evidence of either building control or planning permission having been applied for (the property is in a conservation area which I think means the latter would have been necessary).

Loft conversions are very common in this type of property in this area - I would say the majority have at least a Velux window if not more substantial dormers. This is somewhere in the middle in terms of 'visual intrusion'. I doubt planning permission would have been turned down, had it been needed and applied for. I suspect a fair few are also in the 'unofficial' category - I have certainly seem them advertised as 'attic rooms' in use as bedrooms but not counted as such.

When I queried the progress of the building control application I thought was pending, my solicitor simply asked for a copy of the FENSA certificate for the new window.  Vendor's solicitor replied with 'no certificate, here's an indemnity policy in lieu.'. I replied saying this was both unsatisfactory and contrary to what I had been sold, and received the following from the vendor's solicitor: 'Architect explained that retrospective consent has not been requested as the loft conversion was carried out 20+ years ago and the Council would not provide consent for something that was done such a long time ago. The window has also been replaced with a like-for-like timber framed window so FENSA would not have been required.' 

The architect's letter stated: 'The second bedroom is 'of its day' and does not require building regulation approval'. 

These both seem dubious statements to me. Firstly, even if the window information from the solicitor was correct, surely that's reason for planning permission not being required and nothing to do with avoiding certification, which is required for all window replacements (it's was a UPVC top-opener replaced with a flying mullion anyway so neither timber nor like-for-like)? Secondly, an architect doesn't have the authority to define what does and doesn't require building control approval do they?

Overall it looks as if there's no way (without complete rework) of classing this as a bedroom. I understand the retrospective aspect, but I'm puzzled by the new work not even being done by a self-certifying tradesperson.

Finally, I'm not sure an indemnity policy is even valid (even if it were in some way useful), since the uncertified window work has only just been done.

Insurance

What are the considerations for insuring a property with an uncertified loft conversion? I have seen different information from different insurers on how to classify such a room. There doesn't seem to be much difficulty getting a policy, but the complications are likely to arise if you have to claim, which it's hard to research.

Price

The market for small properties in this area is extremely competitive and has been for the year I've been looking. Most things sell literally within hours and I have lost bidding wars and had viewings cancelled with an hour's notice the day after properties have gone on the market. This one had 4 people offering at asking price by lunchtime on the first day of viewings. I had to go 10k over asking to keep up with another 2, and 1k over that to be 'picked' (cash buyer). It suits me because I don't need a second bedroom and prefer the downstairs space this offers (I always viewed the loft as a bonus space), plus the location is great. Being originally a 2-bed it has 2 completely separate reception rooms and a separate kitchen which is larger than usual as it incorporates the old downstairs bathroom. It was on for 230. 

1-beds are not common, are very different (ground floor is typically a front door straight into an open-plan kitchen living area) and go for 150-180. 2-beds with the original layout (so smaller kitchens and bathrooms but no shonky loft) have been going for 250.  If it was on the market now it would be 'competing' with 3 smaller 2-beds a stone's throw away (1 reception room) between 210 and 220, two 2-beds with the same original layout on nearby streets which I think are overpriced at 265/270 and 3 similar 2-beds in a slightly different area for 240-270. Strangely, all these have been on the market for at least a month and nothing in this category seems to be selling at the moment. 2 have even been reduced recently. I'm pretty sure the agent would have no qualms about continuing to market as a 2-bed though, and the vendor will probably feel confident in finding another cash buyer (who isn't bothered), given the original level of interest.

I didn't add a valuation to the survey as I thought it would be taken with a pinch of salt (although it does state that without building control approval the value would be significantly altered). I definitely feel I would be overpaying now (given I went over asking), since I would only be able to market as a 1-bed which would be an awkward one to sell (it would be filtered out by both people looking for 2-beds and people with a 1-bed budget). It's definitely not a forever home so I do need to be able to sell. 

Thanks for reading!

TroubledTarts

Do you want to go out looking again or happy as it is? Only you can say to be brutally honest.

Retrospective planning and building regs can be obtained especially, as you say, lots of these properties have these types of conversions 

user1977

If the conversion is really of unknown age then why is anybody assuming that building regulations even applied to it in the first place? I presume you're not concerned about the lack of building regs approval for the rest of the house...

Section62

Architect:  "The bedroom benefits from a new fire escape window...There are smoke alarms in the landing and entrance hall along with a 30 minute escape route from the 2nd bedroom to the front door."

Surveyor:  "...window is too small, staircases and door are not fireproof, lack of fire alarms, staircase pitch is too steep"

They can't both be right.  If the surveyor is correct then making the room safe, let alone getting BC signoff, would require significant further investment and disruption.  If the arcitect is wrong, what else have they got wrong?

theartfullodger

If it's "unofficial" it ain't a bedroom - and any insurance cover for that space won't be valid.. 

NervyBuyer

user1977 said:

If the conversion is really of unknown age then why is anybody assuming that building regulations even applied to it in the first place? I presume you're not concerned about the lack of building regs approval for the rest of the house...

Because it was my understanding that regs were needed to count it as a bedroom for future saleability. If there's some sort of exemption based on age (not that age can even be proven), that would change things, but the survey claims about the recent work would still be concerning.

user1977

theartfullodger said:

If it's "unofficial" it ain't a bedroom - and any insurance cover for that space won't be valid.. 

Citation required for both of those statements...

NervyBuyer

Section62 said:

Architect:  "The bedroom benefits from a new fire escape window...There are smoke alarms in the landing and entrance hall along with a 30 minute escape route from the 2nd bedroom to the front door."

Surveyor:  "...window is too small, staircases and door are not fireproof, lack of fire alarms, staircase pitch is too steep"

They can't both be right.  If the surveyor is correct then making the room safe, let alone getting BC signoff, would require significant further investment and disruption.  If the arcitect is wrong, what else have they got wrong?

The surveyor has actually visited, gave factual evidence/figures for those claims and has no interest in helping the vendor. The architect works for the vendor and has written a few words in a letter with no supporting evidence. I'm erring on the side of the surveyor. The architect didn't have anything to do with the original conversion though.

theartfullodger

Gambler then....

Herzlos

It sounds like you're not actually intending on using it as a bedroom, so you should be fine to just regard it as a storage room. Without heat and light it'd going to be miserable anyway.

It does mean you might take a hit later if you buy it as a 2 bed and sell it as a 1 bed, but given you've been looking for so long and demand is so high, I suspect you'll be fine.

user1977

NervyBuyer said:

user1977 said:

If the conversion is really of unknown age then why is anybody assuming that building regulations even applied to it in the first place? I presume you're not concerned about the lack of building regs approval for the rest of the house...

If there's some sort of exemption based on age, that would change things

The requirements (if any) for building regulations are dictated by when the works were carried out. Is nobody able to even guess at a decade? There are usually sufficient clues as to whether something is very modern or rather elderly.