Hi, we are a fair way through the process of buying a house. We have just found out that the loft conversion, conservatory and re-roof were completed without building control approval. Initial applications were put in but the certificates were never obtained. The sellers have lied about this throughout the process, advising the loft room as a 'bedroom' and being vague about details. The work was all carried out under the previous owners about 20 years ago. The sellers have obtained an indemnity for the entire house and are arguing that this provides enough coverage. Our main concerns are the safety of the work completed and the issues we may face when selling in future, as well as the lender's response to finding this out (as it is a 2 bedroom rather than a 3 bedroom as they valued it at). Should we request that retrospective permission is sought? Will our home insurance cover any issues that we may have in relation to this? Thanks!
Building Regs Advice
- Thread starter home37285
- Start date
Sponsored Links
I'm only a DIY'er, others may have differing opinions...
There is an argument that as it has been happily standing for 20 years, it is probably fit for purpose, but that wouldn't necessarily put your mind to rest.
A regularisation certificate may involve some costly and intrusive works to find out if it was constructed correctly, to (the 20 year old) regs.
The usual limit for building control enforcement is ten years after breach, so even the offer of indemnity insurance is moot, but it keeps the solicitors happy.
There is an argument that as it has been happily standing for 20 years, it is probably fit for purpose, but that wouldn't necessarily put your mind to rest.
A regularisation certificate may involve some costly and intrusive works to find out if it was constructed correctly, to (the 20 year old) regs.
If you still want the house, I think there is a good case for renegotiating the price - what do 2 bedroom houses retail for in your area?
Thanks for your reply!
Yes we are less concerned about the control enforcement side of it as it was so long ago, but helpful to know the 10 year limit.
We feared that it may be costly for a regularisation certificate - I think our only option would be to demand that the seller pays for this but if they say no then I don't know what we would do.
We would still really like the house and they have already had a buyer drop out (presumably due to these issues) so they are keen to sell. The house has been valued at 250-260k and we agreed on 245k, 2 bedroom houses in the area are more down at 215k-230k so definitely looking at renegotiation (and may have to because of the lender). Helpful to know that someone else would be considering the same!
Yes we are less concerned about the control enforcement side of it as it was so long ago, but helpful to know the 10 year limit.
We feared that it may be costly for a regularisation certificate - I think our only option would be to demand that the seller pays for this but if they say no then I don't know what we would do.
We would still really like the house and they have already had a buyer drop out (presumably due to these issues) so they are keen to sell. The house has been valued at 250-260k and we agreed on 245k, 2 bedroom houses in the area are more down at 215k-230k so definitely looking at renegotiation (and may have to because of the lender). Helpful to know that someone else would be considering the same!
- Joined
- 7 Feb 2024
- Messages
- 25
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
I didn't think you could get a mortgage without the Building Control certs, infact the house over the road from me was up for sale at a big discount for cash buyers only, because of this very same issue ( Loft Room ). Same with home insurance, although, I was told that the current owners insurers are obliged to offer continuation of the insurance policy to the new purchaser, though other insurers won't offer a new policy.
Sponsored Links
We haven't yet told our lender but our solicitor seemed to think that the indemnity will be sufficient for them, I can definitely see why it wouldn't be though. Definitely going to have to look into insurance then, thanks.
The indemnity covers a very small portion of the risk (and very unlikely portion too, hence why it's so cheap) and primarily merely helps the sale go through rather than give any valuable protection.
The main risk is whether the work safe and structurally sound and will not need anything other than normal maintenance in the medium and long term. That is unknown, but perhaps could be assessed via a survey, but not 100%.
The other potentially high risk, is how the work - which will always be unauthorised and unlawful, will be treated by insurers if a claim situation arises - and the claim can be for an unrelated reason. Loft conversions have significant fire safety implications, so taking the worst case and a fire occurs, how will the building perform, and how will the occupants be protected? The premium you pay assumes any building work is compliant with specific standards, if not you may be underinsured at best and uninsured at worst.
And then when you come to sell, you are in the same position trying to convince some nervous buyer that they should buy your house with its unauthorised work and not someone else's house.
The main risk is whether the work safe and structurally sound and will not need anything other than normal maintenance in the medium and long term. That is unknown, but perhaps could be assessed via a survey, but not 100%.
The other potentially high risk, is how the work - which will always be unauthorised and unlawful, will be treated by insurers if a claim situation arises - and the claim can be for an unrelated reason. Loft conversions have significant fire safety implications, so taking the worst case and a fire occurs, how will the building perform, and how will the occupants be protected? The premium you pay assumes any building work is compliant with specific standards, if not you may be underinsured at best and uninsured at worst.
And then when you come to sell, you are in the same position trying to convince some nervous buyer that they should buy your house with its unauthorised work and not someone else's house.
So if I'm reading this correctly Building Regulations applications were submitted for the work?
Were they Full Plans Applications or Building Notice applications? If it was full plans and the plans were approved then at least they had a set of approved drawings to follow. If it was a Building Notice I would be surprised if someone went to the trouble to make the application and then didn't bother to get any site inspections.
What "certificates" are missing? Is it the Completion Certificate?
Is it a case that the work progressed and was fully inspected at all the necessary stages but due to a minor glitch the owner/builder never got around to getting the completion certificate? This is quite common.
If the work is 20 years old chances are there isn't too much to worry about. The site inspection records should be available for public viewing (probably archived on microfiche after 20 years) but any contact with the local council could invalidate the indemnity policy. Although the indemnity policy is worthless, the council is not going to take enforcement action after 20 years so I think I would ask to see the old Building Regulations application file and check to see if any site inspections were made and how many.
DIYnot Local
Staff member
If you need to find a tradesperson to get your job done, please try our local search below, or if you are doing it yourself you can find suppliers local to you.
Select the supplier or trade you require, enter your location to begin your search.
Are you a trade or supplier? You can create your listing free at DIYnot Local
Similar threads
