Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • NickB2017
    • By NickB2017 2nd Nov 18, 5:54 PM
    • 8Posts
    • 1Thanks
    NickB2017
    Pre-1985 modification without building control approval
    • #1
    • 2nd Nov 18, 5:54 PM
    Pre-1985 modification without building control approval 2nd Nov 18 at 5:54 PM
    test test test
    Last edited by NickB2017; 15-11-2018 at 7:07 PM.
Page 1
    • davidmcn
    • By davidmcn 2nd Nov 18, 7:09 PM
    • 9,076 Posts
    • 9,671 Thanks
    davidmcn
    • #2
    • 2nd Nov 18, 7:09 PM
    • #2
    • 2nd Nov 18, 7:09 PM
    Absolutely nobody ought to be interested in looking for paperwork for things done in the 50s or 60s, and even work done in the 80s is generally going to be regarded as ancient history. The council would be struggling to find someone who can even remember what the relevant regulations were back then. If your surveyor thinks it's structurally sound (which it presumably is if it's stayed up for decades...) then I would just carry on.
    • G_M
    • By G_M 2nd Nov 18, 7:37 PM
    • 45,948 Posts
    • 55,497 Thanks
    G_M
    • #3
    • 2nd Nov 18, 7:37 PM
    • #3
    • 2nd Nov 18, 7:37 PM
    ..... estimate is 1950s-1960s. There is no evidence of building regs approval ....
    .......My solicitor is currently waiting to see if the mortgage lender is willing to proceed without indemnity insurance.

    I am trying to understand the risk of enforcement by the local authority in this specific situation.
    Zero

    From what I understand Section 36(1) of Building Act 1984 [requiring owner to pull down the works or adapt them] is not an issue as the work was completed more than 12 months ago.
    correct

    However I am unsure if Section 36(6) of Building Act 1984 [application of an injunction] could still be an issue. Oldham's local authority website [not the local authority in my case] states that 'Local Authority Building Control has no authority in work completed before this date'.
    an injunction would never be applied for, and certainly not awarded by a court, unless there was a significant proven danger to life.

    .....therefore the indemnity insurance would not be protecting against any risk?
    Correct

    If Section 36(6) can still be applied then is there any view on what the mortgage lender may request in lieu of the aforementioned indemnity insurance to be comfortable to lend?
    Originally posted by NickB2017
    Mortgage lenders can be sticklers for pointless !!!-covering. if they demand insurance, just pay the pointless 100 and get the insurance.
    or as david said:
    If your surveyor thinks it's structurally sound (which it presumably is if it's stayed up for decades...) then I would just carry on.
    Last edited by G_M; 02-11-2018 at 7:39 PM.
    • AlexMac
    • By AlexMac 2nd Nov 18, 7:45 PM
    • 2,191 Posts
    • 1,920 Thanks
    AlexMac
    • #4
    • 2nd Nov 18, 7:45 PM
    • #4
    • 2nd Nov 18, 7:45 PM
    But if "only the bottom half is removed" means chimney breasts were removed internally, but the stack there at upper levels or above the roof, you might just check that appropriate structural support was put in as the chimney breast supports the upper brick tower?

    Don't panic as I'm sure cracks or sagging would have shown by now if it had been botched, but my cousin bought a place where it had been (botched/unsupported that is).

    It cost peanuts to diagnose and fix, but at least he knew there was no chance of sharing a bed with a chimney stack when the next 1 in 100-year gale brought it down through the roof!
    • silvercar
    • By silvercar 2nd Nov 18, 8:36 PM
    • 38,161 Posts
    • 160,444 Thanks
    silvercar
    • #5
    • 2nd Nov 18, 8:36 PM
    • #5
    • 2nd Nov 18, 8:36 PM
    Building regs way back then would have allowed gallow brackets as support. Current regs would require more solid support like an RSJ.

    However long it has stood unsupported, I wouldn't stand underneath!
    • silvercar
    • By silvercar 2nd Nov 18, 8:39 PM
    • 38,161 Posts
    • 160,444 Thanks
    silvercar
    • #6
    • 2nd Nov 18, 8:39 PM
    • #6
    • 2nd Nov 18, 8:39 PM
    If Section 36(6) can still be applied then is there any view on what the mortgage lender may request in lieu of the aforementioned indemnity insurance to be comfortable to lend?
    They could require you to sort the problem out.
    • G_M
    • By G_M 2nd Nov 18, 9:30 PM
    • 45,948 Posts
    • 55,497 Thanks
    G_M
    • #7
    • 2nd Nov 18, 9:30 PM
    • #7
    • 2nd Nov 18, 9:30 PM
    ..... My intention is to get a structural engineer in to see if the top half is being properly supported. .
    Originally posted by NickB2017
    to do this he willneed to expose whatever supports may or may not be hidden behind the plasterwork.


    I doubt the current owners will be happy.....
    • stator
    • By stator 3rd Nov 18, 1:10 PM
    • 6,610 Posts
    • 4,454 Thanks
    stator
    • #8
    • 3rd Nov 18, 1:10 PM
    • #8
    • 3rd Nov 18, 1:10 PM
    Building regs are an admin matter
    The real matter is whether your house will fall down on you.
    I wouldn't buy a house with an unsupported chimney stack
    Changing the world, one sarcastic comment at a time.
    • LadyDee
    • By LadyDee 3rd Nov 18, 1:22 PM
    • 3,278 Posts
    • 3,407 Thanks
    LadyDee
    • #9
    • 3rd Nov 18, 1:22 PM
    • #9
    • 3rd Nov 18, 1:22 PM
    OP - make sure you have appropriate insurance cover in case that 1/100 year storm does bring it down - not so much inside the house as outside! Whether insurance would cover any claim in those circumstances, I wouldn't be so sure as the potential for a problem has already been raised. I'd be happier getting it taken down for absolute peace of mind.
    • davidmcn
    • By davidmcn 3rd Nov 18, 2:12 PM
    • 9,076 Posts
    • 9,671 Thanks
    davidmcn
    OP - make sure you have appropriate insurance cover in case that 1/100 year storm does bring it down - not so much inside the house as outside! Whether insurance would cover any claim in those circumstances, I wouldn't be so sure as the potential for a problem has already been raised.
    Originally posted by LadyDee
    Yes, the insurance would cover you. The insurers take on the risk of some houses being wobblier than others. That's one of the reasons they ask about age and construction method (and don't ask about whether you have paperwork for every previous alteration).
    • silvercar
    • By silvercar 3rd Nov 18, 5:00 PM
    • 38,161 Posts
    • 160,444 Thanks
    silvercar
    Thanks for the replies. My intention is to get it rectified as soon as I get into the property. But if the lender revokes the mortgage offer on the basis that both indemnity insurance and regularisation are not possible then I won't get the opportunity to do so. So I guess I'm stuck with the lender's appetite to take on the risk, unless there are other options (e.g. can the lender make it a condition of granting the mortgage?)?
    Originally posted by NickB2017
    The lender could make a retention of a few thousand pounds, releasing the money to you when you have sorted the issue.
    • davidmcn
    • By davidmcn 3rd Nov 18, 5:01 PM
    • 9,076 Posts
    • 9,671 Thanks
    davidmcn
    I can't imagine there is any lender who cares much about alterations of the vintage you're talking about. You may however have a paranoid solicitor, which is a different problem.
    • davidmcn
    • By davidmcn 4th Nov 18, 12:16 PM
    • 9,076 Posts
    • 9,671 Thanks
    davidmcn
    Lets hope you are right David. If not, I would be happy with a retention as suggested by silvercar. All I can do is wait to see what the lender says...

    As an aside, it seems that if I did get a structural engineer's report who confirmed the chimney was properly supported (in the event it is), I can use this to defend against a Section 36(6) injunction in the future.
    Originally posted by NickB2017
    Seriously, the building regulations angle is a complete red herring. 50-70 year old consents prove nothing about the current condition of the property, and don't affect building control's ability to take action if there's actually a problem. The question is purely whether it's now structurally sound or not.
    • Doozergirl
    • By Doozergirl 6th Nov 18, 6:42 PM
    • 26,039 Posts
    • 70,334 Thanks
    Doozergirl
    Did you ask your solicitor why they aren't asking for the Building Control and Planning documents from when the house was actually built?

    You are in the Twilight Zone, my friend. With so-called professionals who have no comprehension of why they ask for the things they do.
    Everything that is supposed to be in heaven is already here on earth.
    • middleclassbutpoor
    • By middleclassbutpoor 9th Nov 18, 6:55 PM
    • 392 Posts
    • 347 Thanks
    middleclassbutpoor
    Who is your lender out of curiosity?
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

2,301Posts Today

8,396Users online

Martin's Twitter