indemnity policies!!!! i am mad!

Richard_Webster

If the extension was built in 1995 then it will be immune from any enforcement under Planning Law.

It is the Cottingham case that has caused all the trouble re Building Regulations. As far as I can work out, the logic was that because the Council could have applied for an injunction to have the work undone and reinstated to its former condition the solcitors should have checked the point and were therefore negligent. Nobody seems to have told the judge that in the real world Councils don't apply for these injunctions in respect of works to a house. I'd be interested if anybody looking at this forum knows of any case where a Council has applied for an injunction concerning Building Regulations.

Also mortgage lenders do not seem to be able to think about the matter in common sense terms. It is not worth my while writing to a lender in circumstances such as OP is in to ask if they require a policy because we might wait a month for an answer. The lender will ask its surveyor who will want to protect his back and may suggest that the Building Inspector is called in and a Regularisation Certificate applied for - the last thing either the seller or buyer will want in most cases.

So buyer's solcitors ask the seller's solcitors for a Building Regulation Policy to keep the lender happy. If the seller won't pay then the buyer has to, even if is to get the show on the road and avoid delays. As an example, a leading provider will do one for £75 for a property valued at up to £250K.