Building regs - someone help!

LISAW_2

A friend has asked me to post this knowing Im addicted to all you good people on this site.

She ( and her ex ) did work on their house about 10 years ago. They didnt get the planning or regs ( naughty I know ) but as they planned on being there forever, they dudnt think it mattered.

Now they have split and she is thinking of selling, how will this affect the sale?

Does she need to get these in place first or can she sell without as it was so long ago. I havent got a clue about this stuff, but know one of the lovely readers will be able to hep

Thanks

L x

chappers

She will be fine with the planning as that is outside a four year period and will not be enforced, I doubt building control would make any enforcement either however lenders/solicitors are getting tighter all the time and this sort of thing is becoming a problem for more and more people.
She will be able to take out some sort of indemnity against enforcement I'm sure, I would wait until it becomes aproblem first.
what is the extent of the works they had done.

LISAW_2

I thought there maybe some timeframe that she needs to be aware of. They did extensive work. bought a wreck and done it up. I have tried looking online for her but couldnt find anything and didnt want her to put it on the market, get half way through a sale and then the buyers back out or realise its illegal so to speak....

TroysMum

They will have to apply for building regs retrospectively dependant on the work they have carried out. Did they extend, make structural alterations, or just re-wire new kitchen bathroom etc?
Solicitors are very hot on this at the moment and it would be advisable to get the regs and completion certificate in place as it can be timely and will more than likely require opening up of works etc and would delay sale until things are proven. The alternative is to be prepared for a big knock down in price based on the fact that regs havent been applied for and received, but that depends if a mortgage company will let them do that!
Hope this helps.
TM

Doozergirl

Buying a wreck doesn't necessarily involve building regs although you'd hope the gas and electric contractors were qualified and affiliated to the correct body :eek: We only involve Building Control on structural issues. Most things are covered by using the correct contractors.

An indemnity policy will suffice for many things. It's only if a surveyor finds problems that you end up with real hassle.

Would it be really bad to suggest that they keep quiet about the extent of the work? Unless it's a blatant extension, they only know because you tell them in the property information forms.


TroysMum, that really is the worst case scenario. After all this time, building regs can't come after the OPs friend without a court order. Unless it's dangerous then it just won't happen. Indemnity policies seem to satisfy most lenders. It would certainly be interesting to know the extent of the work.

LISAW_2

the extent of the work was massive. almost a knock down and rebuild. She has been happily living there for years with no problems and is a good person and wouldnt sell it if she didnt think it was safe reliable. Are you saying, if you dont declare there is no way to tell??

Doozergirl

LISAW wrote: »

the extent of the work was massive. almost a knock down and rebuild. She has been happily living there for years with no problems and is a good person and wouldnt sell it if she didnt think it was safe reliable. Are you saying, if you dont declare there is no way to tell??

It really depends, but I doubt they'll be asking for Corgi certificates for a 10 year old boiler and the like. Anyone will notice something that's brand new and ask for the relevant docs but how do you know it something is 10 years old or 15? Are the documents even relevant after that amount of time? It may have been good then but they might have screwed up the electrics since then! The surveyor can flag whatever issues they feel are pertinent - depending on what has been done they may well pick up on some things.

I'm not suggesting for a secod that they flog someone a dodgy house, but I'd suggest that they deal with issues as they arise and not declare too much. There's a building regs query on the other board where someone filled in french doors and made an arch - so they actually added a bit rather than take away and the solicitors are asking questions even though it's totally irrelevant. I think many questions that get asked and indemnity policies end up being purchased even when the vendor may not have needed any regs at all!

As I said, many parts of refurb aren't subject to inspection. We do absolutely everything by the book but there's only a certain number of times that they come out.

chappers

As DG says if you can detail the extent of the works a bit better we could advise her better.
10 years ago there would have been no requirements with regards to the electrics, the gas would have had to be done by a CORGI registered plumber but there was no system in place by which you had to proveregister it.
Replacement of floor joists etc technically require building regs, but in reality a replacement of like for like is ok, even if they don't meet modern regs.
Did she do an extension or loft conversion because that would be a different matter, she would be subject to building regs and maybe planning dependant on size.

tbs624

IMO keeping quiet about it would be a poor decision.

There will be specific pre-contract questions about whether any work has been done to the house in the time your friend has owned it, what the work was, and whether all necessary consents were applied for and granted. I mentioned in a post elsewhere about the possible outcome of not being truthful on pre-contact forms - my understanding is that if anyone fails to disclose something to a buyer that should have been mentioned it could leaving them facing a subsequent legal action by the purchaser for misrepresentation and/or breach of contract possibly costing thousands of £. This would include what a court decided was the difference between the reduced value in the property (if potential buyers had known about the problem) and the actual purchase price paid, plus legal costs on both sides

A couple of example legal cases for you:
McMeekin v Long (2003) the sellers didn’t declare a dispute about parking arrangements, rubbish dumping etc and the buyer took legal action claiming damages for fraudulent misrepresentation. It cost the sellers £60,000 including legal costs
Morris v Jones (2002) Undeclared damp problems landed the seller with a bill for legal damages plus costs, for fraudulent misrepresentation

The most straightforward way is to get it declared to the appropriate Council Deptand move forward, otherwise as you have already said, it will only delay things at a later date.

Doozergirl

Those are specific problems tbs624. I'm not suggesting they don't declare problems, just that they try not to include every tiny thing they did. A boiler that doesn't work after properly after 10 years is unlikely to be able to be put down to being fiited incorrectly 10 years ago. An extension with structural issues would be showing by now. The evidence would be all around for a buyer and their surveyor to find. What is important after this amount of time is that things are safe, not necessarily that they have the correct paperwork to protect themselves from enforcement.

As I've said, it would help if we had a list so we can figure out exactly what would and what wouldn't have needed approval at the time.

And going down to the council to get retrospective building control approval is far from straightforward!

chappers

Doozergirl wrote: »

And going down to the council to get retrospective building control approval is far from straightforward!

...and very rarely results in the approval sought, especialy after 10 years.
Probably better to take out another dastardly indemnity as you probably won't get covered for indemnity once BC have declined to regularise any work.