Building Regs passed....but hard to believe.

[steshaw74]

Has anyone had experience of challenging Building Regs Completion?

I bought a house (repossession) last year which, planning records would indicate, had a loft conversion done in 1995. Before going ahead with the purchase I asked the local (Bromley) Building Control dept to advise whether a Building Regs certificate was issued for the conversion as the vendor did not have any apperwork.

Building Control confirmed that completion was given and (for £40) sent me an email to confirm.

I'm now at the point where I am looking to have the conversion updated internally - replace wood cladding with plasterboard and skim, increase size of ensuite, add storage cupboards etc.

The few builders that have come to quote have all expressed amazement that the conversion passed building regs - however, that is only based on a quick visual scan and no intrusive inspection.

I must admit that I am in agreement with them based on the current state of it.

So, before i go ahead and ask a builder to begin work, I am keen to understand where I stand with Building Control if the builders do find alarming problems that suggest it shouldn't have passed Regs in the first place.

Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks

 

[DevilDamo]

Did you not have a survey carried out, which would have brought up the issues you mentioned? Regardless, a completion certificate was issued, which you have confirmation about and so at the time of the completion inspection, the works satisfied the building regulations.

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

The few builders that have come to quote have all expressed amazement that the conversion passed building regs - however, that is only based on a quick visual scan and no intrusive inspection.

I must admit that I am in agreement with them based on the current state of it.

As we are not psychic you will have to elaborate!

 

[steshaw74]

The few builders that have come to quote have all expressed amazement that the conversion passed building regs - however, that is only based on a quick visual scan and no intrusive inspection.

I must admit that I am in agreement with them based on the current state of it.

As we are not psychic you will have to elaborate!

Appreciate you reading and replying, however, what I am hoping to achieve from my post was advice whether Building Control can be held responsible for passing work that is clearly substandard?

I wouldn't be foolish enough to prickle folks on here easily agitated by common forum faux pas', such as being lite on details or pictures!

Re Survey: yes, a full survey was carried out, however, it was full of the usual caveats such as (actual extract) "The loft conversion itself would have given rise probably to removal of internal struts and timber members which would have supported the original timber roof. On removal of these struts therefore the frame generally would have been weakened, although on construction of the loft conversion it may have been that the design included measures to re-support the areas required as appropriate. However, no assurances can be given from the survey and although there is no evidence to suggest any major sagging to the rafters or similar, we can give no assurances that proper cross members or purlins have been introduced or provided particularly where much of the original roof remains to the front of the conversion. There is a vertical column structure adjoining the chimney breasts, which may indicate some further support, although again no assurances can be given since no destructive inspections or calculations were carried out on the survey."

Thanks in advance

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

[what I am hoping to achieve from my post was advice whether Building Control can be held responsible for passing work that is clearly substandard?

Your Homebuyers survey (which frankly is probably not worth the paper it is printed on) does not seem to condemn your roof, it just states that as it is hidden behind plasterboard the structure cannot be viewed and therefore cannot be assessed! Most homebuyer surveyors are not qualified to assess structure anyway.

Or have I miss-understood?

 

[jeds]

No chance. If you bring an action in tort the time limit is 6 years. If you could get it classed as a simple contract (which you couldn't because you weren't party to it) the time limit is also 6 years. Even considering an extension due to fraud or concealment the time limit only extends by 3years. So you long stop for any claim was 9 years.

 

[steshaw74]

No chance. If you bring an action in tort the time limit is 6 years. If you could get it classed as a simple contract (which you couldn't because you weren't party to it) the time limit is also 6 years. Even considering an extension due to fraud or concealment the time limit only extends by 3years. So you long stop for any claim was 9 years.

Many thanks for that, Jeds. I need to get the work done at some point in 2010 and will post here with experiences if I think it will benefit others.
Cheers

 

[mattylad]

Am I reading the OP right?

£40 and all you got was an email?

I would at very least expect it in a letter for that.

 

[DevilDamo]

Am I reading the OP right?

£40 and all you got was an email?

I would at very least expect it in a letter for that.

Maybe it was a letter attached to the email

 

[steshaw74]

Am I reading the OP right?

£40 and all you got was an email?

I would at very least expect it in a letter for that.

Yes, Matty, I only received an email.
Planning dept offered to send a letter but I was sarisfied with just the email.

 

[DevilDamo]

Hold on a mo... £40 for an email? Surely, you could have obtained a copy of the actual completion certificate for about half that... at the max.!!!

You just mentioned planning... although you're talking about building regulations. Don't confuse them because even though an email from a BCO may be sufficient, an email from a planning officer wouldn't be.

 

[garyo]

what I am hoping to achieve from my post was advice whether Building Control can be held responsible for passing work that is clearly substandard?

Building reg's isn't the same as quality control - you can easily build something that'll conform to regs but be poor quality workmanship.

Can you give us more detail on what aspect of the work was sub standard?

Gary

 

[cyclonebri1]

The OP clearly has to state what he, or his builders think is wrong with the conversion. Only if there is something tangiable and it is taken to the authorities can he/she be sure the future expense is not being flushed away

 

[steshaw74]

Garyo/Cyclone,
Thanks for taking the time to respond. Maybe I didn't make it clear in my initial post but the reason for the post was just to find out if anyone had experience of challenging Building Regs years down the line, to which Jeds cleared things up. I'm not ready (yet) to ask for assistance from folks on here regarding the actual workmanship. But that time will come.......soon!!!
Thanks again

 

[cyclonebri1]

Garyo/Cyclone,
Thanks for taking the time to respond. Maybe I didn't make it clear in my initial post but the reason for the post was just to find out if anyone had experience of challenging Building Regs years down the line, to which Jeds cleared things up. I'm not ready (yet) to ask for assistance from folks on here regarding the actual workmanship. But that time will come.......soon!!!
Thanks again

Reading it again you simply have a disclaimer from the homepack outfit that they were not able to inspect the superstructure of the roof.

However what should have been provided to them was a completion cert by the local authorities stating the work was done to building reg standard.
These thing are very important docs and should have been passed on to you. You need to contact the LA and confirm if a completion cert was issued, and get a copy if possible.

I have done 2 such conversions, one from scratch and one to rectify a dangerous conversion that had been done without control. The dodgy one was obvious to anyone