PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING
Hello Forumites! In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non-MoneySaving matters are not permitted per the Forum rules. While we understand that mentioning house prices may sometimes be relevant to a user's specific MoneySaving situation, we ask that you please avoid veering into broad, general debates about the market, the economy and politics, as these can unfortunately lead to abusive or hateful behaviour. Threads that are found to have derailed into wider discussions may be removed. Users who repeatedly disregard this may have their Forum account banned. Please also avoid posting personally identifiable information, including links to your own online property listing which may reveal your address. Thank you for your understanding.Buying house having old extension with no permission (Scotland)
Options
Comments
-
I see. Again, I'm glad this thread is being very instructive to me.
The mentioned "letter of comfort" explicitly says that the extension works appear to comply with relevant standards (wrt the time when they were performed), and concludes that therefore the authority is unlikely to take enforcement action.
However, I understand that neither planning permission nor formal building consent were applied for when the extension was built.
While that may be correct in terms of making you change the structure or construction of the extension, it may not be correct in terms of requiring you to satisfy them that the building doesn't need to be corrected. If they were aware that the extension exists and does not have the relevant building warrants, they may require you to apply for retrospective building consents. This costs money and is probably why your seller doesn't want to do it.
I think it would be reasonable to negotiate a reduction in the sale price in order to provide you with the cash so that you can apply for retrospective building consents.
Consider this: What happens if you try to sell the house in 5 years and building regulations have changed by then? Without retrospective building consent, the house is still open to the local authority requiring the new owner to bring the extension to modern standards.
The letter of comfort only assures you that *if* the local authority asked you to obtain retrospective building consents, this would not be problematic in that the extension meets current standards. But building standards are a moving target and in 5 years, this letter of comfort may no longer be correct.
I think you need to discuss this issue with your solicitor. He may simply want this sale off his desk . I am currently dealing with a solicitor who is exactly this way.
Later edit: See the text in red. This is also irrelevant - if you were required to apply for retrospective building consents, you would need to bring the extension to *current* building standards.
Further edit(!) Apologies - I didn't spot that the extension dates from 2003. You would not need to apply for retrospective building consent, but might be required to apply for a Letter of Comfort from the local authority, in which case it is much less likely that you'd be required to bring up to modern standards (although not completely out of the question). At the very least, ask for the receipts for the work, so you can establish that the extension was built in 2003. Alterations and additions pre-May 2005 are not required to apply for retrospective building consent (hence why seller is reluctant to do this).
What is the local authority for the house?(Nearly) dunroving0 -
YOUR solicitor should only be interested in your purchase of the property, he should NOT have any interest in it's sale. You need a different solicitor. I am surprised he took on the job without declaring his conflict of interests.Well, because my solicitor is involved in the sale, anyway.
Opinion from a neutral party is more significant; you just provided that, so thank you!
.0 -
I'm not sure whether that's quite what the OP meant - maybe they can clarify. We are somewhat stricter in Scotland than in England about conflicts of interest so it ought to be less likely to happen.YOUR solicitor should only be interested in your purchase of the property, he should NOT have any interest in it's sale. You need a different solicitor. I am surprised he took on the job without declaring his conflict of interests.0 -
YOUR solicitor should only be interested in your purchase of the property, he should NOT have any interest in it's sale. You need a different solicitor. I am surprised he took on the job without declaring his conflict of interests.
I probably chose poor wording: I have no reason to believe my solicitor has any improper interest in the property's sale.
I trust my solicitor.
Maybe I should just have said that I'd like to have third party opinions, just in case
0 -
OP: Google "building consent Scotland letter of comfort" for further relevant information.(Nearly) dunroving0
-
While that may be correct in terms of making you change the structure or construction of the extension, it may not be correct in terms of requiring you to satisfy them that the building doesn't need to be corrected. If they were aware that the extension exists and does not have the relevant building warrants, they may require you to apply for retrospective building consents. This costs money and is probably why your seller doesn't want to do it.
I think it would be reasonable to negotiate a reduction in the sale price in order to provide you with the cash so that you can apply for retrospective building consents.
Consider this: What happens if you try to sell the house in 5 years and building regulations have changed by then? Without retrospective building consent, the house is still open to the local authority requiring the new owner to bring the extension to modern standards.
The letter of comfort only assures you that *if* the local authority asked you to obtain retrospective building consents, this would not be problematic in that the extension meets current standards. But building standards are a moving target and in 5 years, this letter of comfort may no longer be correct.
I think you need to discuss this issue with your solicitor. He may simply want this sale off his desk . I am currently dealing with a solicitor who is exactly this way.
Later edit: See the text in red. This is also irrelevant - if you were required to apply for retrospective building consents, you would need to bring the extension to *current* building standards.
Further edit(!) Apologies - I didn't spot that the extension dates from 2003. You would not need to apply for retrospective building consent, but might be required to apply for a Letter of Comfort from the local authority, in which case it is much less likely that you'd be required to bring up to modern standards (although not completely out of the question). At the very least, ask for the receipts for the work, so you can establish that the extension was built in 2003. Alterations and additions pre-May 2005 are not required to apply for retrospective building consent (hence why seller is reluctant to do this).
Ok, I think this was the most useful reply among the several useful ones I got up to now.
I sort of feel it spells out the kind of worries I couldn't articulate in a precise way.
Including ones about my solicitor's attitude
I'll try to investigate matters more deeply along these lines.
I believe the local authority for the house is Fife Council.What is the local authority for the house?0 -
Ok, I think this was the most useful reply among the several useful ones I got up to now.
I sort of feel it spells out the kind of worries I couldn't articulate in a precise way.
Including ones about my solicitor's attitude
I'll try to investigate matters more deeply along these lines.
I believe the local authority for the house is Fife Council.
For information on Fife Council's process for inspecting buildings without consent, click here.(Nearly) dunroving0 -
Building control departments barely have enough resources to cope with their current workload, never mind trawl through minor works done 15+ years ago looking for things to enforce (even if that were possible). Nobody is going to come knocking on the door asking you to sort out the paperwork. By the time you come to sell, it will be an even more historic non-issue (and I would point out that the standard missives work on the basis that everyone can ignore alterations which are over 20 years old).0
-
Building control departments barely have enough resources to cope with their current workload, never mind trawl through minor works done 15+ years ago looking for things to enforce (even if that were possible). Nobody is going to come knocking on the door asking you to sort out the paperwork. By the time you come to sell, it will be an even more historic non-issue (and I would point out that the standard missives work on the basis that everyone can ignore alterations which are over 20 years old).
While I would normally accept this characterisation of local authority employees, one turned up on my door within 4 hours of receiving a call about my house (as per my recent thread you kindly posted on). However, I agree that in the OP's case the local authority would likely have no cause to knock on his door.
OP, here is my opinion of what has likely happened.
Seller realised the lack of building consents might impede the sale of his house (maybe because the solicitor or surveyor flagged it up).
He looked into what he would need to do and found information on the letter of comfort process.
To satisfy himself there were no issues, he paid a structural engineer to inspect the extension and write the letter (albeit this is not the traditional letter of comfort, which would come from the local authority).
He didn't want to raise any flags with the local authority, as this might open a can of worms.
Typically, local authorities try to process letters of comfort quickly, especially if a house sale is contingent on it.
OP: An important consideration if the extension and possible lack of building consents is mentioned in the survey is whether your lender will be reluctant to lend on the property. With a letter of comfort, this is less likely, but still a possibility. You might also discuss with your solicitor the possibility of asking the seller to pay for indemnity insurance.(Nearly) dunroving0 -
Building control departments barely have enough resources to cope with their current workload, never mind trawl through minor works done 15+ years ago looking for things to enforce (even if that were possible). Nobody is going to come knocking on the door asking you to sort out the paperwork.
This sounds plausible to me.
Keep in mind, however, that a future buyer could like to have, given the amount of money involved, full formal compliance with law, not merely an informal reassurance that things are practically, even though not formally, ok.
Indeed, this is what I'd like to have, as the current buyer.
This means that I'd need to assess the impact this factor will have when I'll need to resell it (and this was the main issue as specified in the original post).
And it is likely I'll have to resell the property within some years (sorry, I didn't specify this, I realise now).
I realise this kind of assessment can be difficult, however.
This is interesting. Is there any formal regulation about that 20 years rule? Or is not a rule, but just an informal practice?By the time you come to sell, it will be an even more historic non-issue (and I would point out that the standard missives work on the basis that everyone can ignore alterations which are over 20 years old).0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 343.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 250.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 449.7K Spending & Discounts
- 235.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 608.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 173.1K Life & Family
- 247.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards