I want to sell a house that has been used as two flats for the past 11 years. The local council tax dept rated it as two flats 11 years ago. However, the house has never been properly separated into two properties that can be sold separately with sepaate deeds. That's what I want to do now. It seems like a complicated process, with building work that needs doing to comply with building regs (extra soundproofing, separating the services, and changing the deeds, not to menton the planning permission application. Can anyone recommend where to get advice on the whole procedure? Is there a decent book on the subject, for example?
I *could* just pay a contractor to do everything from start to finish, but it's my usual practice, regarding work on my house, to do as much of the work myself, thereby saving as much money as possible.
The matters you need to address fall under several headings:
Technically, if it has been used as flats for 11 years then there is no legal obligation for you to do anything (much) even though the work would not satisfy current Building Regulations. It may of course be the case that you would need to do certain works for the flats to be mortgageable.
Planning-wise you don't need planning permission, rather you will need to obtain a certificate of lawful use. As the Council have being rating it as two flats for 11 years this should be a formality but you would be best advised to engage someone who knows about planning law.
Legally you would need to get a solicitor to prepare leases for the flats, and to do this he would need accurate lease plans showing who has what.
Lastly do check out whether the two flats will be worth more than one house - it's not always the case. Some authorities (like mine) will resist reverse conversions though.
I recently did this myself (converting it into two houses, rather than flats) but don't know of any specific source to point you at, other than uk.d-i-y! I for one will certainly do my best to answer any specific queries here if you want to post them.
Tony, Thanks very much for the input. I was under the impression that "established use" was 12 years according to the local (Poole, Dorset) planning dept. regs. I would really be in a mess if I applied for the Certificate of Lawful Use and they immediately ordered me to convert it back to a 3-bed house and I couldn't appeal because I hadn't had 12 full years' established use...
That IS encouraging!
It might make sense to use the same solicitor who I choose to do the lease-preparing work, yes?
Would that require the services of a qualified architect - or would any competent technical drawing person be adequate? Any idea what an architect would charge? Do the drawings have to be approved by anyone?
I looked into that. Two flats are worth about 35% more than the place would be worth if I converted it back to a 3-bed house.
Reverse-conversions? What do you mean exactly?
Today, I asked the opinions of two or three local estate agents about my plan. There seems to be a concensus that dividing the place into two individually saleable flats would be viable and profitable.
None of them seemed very genned-up on planning department practices, but they told me that the planning Dept is more relaxed about it's rulings on what and what can't be converted, but I was also told that the building regs are stricter then they used to be - so hopefully you are right when you say that not much, if any, building work will need doing. I think some work will be essential though, like dividing the water, gas, central heating and electric cirquits into two and adding consumer units for the second flat. Added sound insulation between floors might be worth having too. I wonder how I can get more info on what the Mortgage companies would require in order to lend on such flats...
David, Thanks for the offer. The main issues I need to clarify are exactly what modifications I ned to do to the house to satisfy and building regulations that might apply and also any mortgage lenders who may be asked by prospective buyers of the flats to lend the purchase money on the property.
Tony Bryer said some interesting and encouraging things in his reply, and I'd appreciate your comments, if any, on them. Do they reflect what you had to do when you did your conversion?
I'm wondring if different councils in different towns vary in their rulings, guidelines and prcedures, with regard to conversions such as this. I think building regs are the same throughout the UK aren't they?
Taking a place that is currently in x converted flats and turning it back into one house
That's where you need local knowledge. Lots of big Victorian houses round here have been converted into 3+ flats. The combined value of the flats is now less than what the building would be worth as a single family house (Victorian mansions having come back into fashion) but our Council (L.B.Richmond) will not generally allow reverse conversions on the grounds that it reduces the supply of lower cost accommodation. Of course it helps create a shortage of large high cost accommodation, so those who own such properties benefit!
Let me re-type the above, since on reading it, it is badly worded...
The main issues I need to clarify are exactly what modifications I need to do to the building in order to satisfy any building regulations that might apply (or any building inspectors who take a visit) and also any modifications or improvements that I ought to do to make the two flats easily mortgageable, since I want to sell the flats as quickly as possible after the work is complete.
"Jake" wrote | I'm wondring if different councils in different towns vary | in their rulings, guidelines and prcedures, with regard to | conversions such as this. I think building regs are the same | throughout the UK aren't they?
Separate for England-and-Wales, and Scotland.
One other point is your target sales market. If it is buy-to-let and the flats are big enough to be let as Houses of Multiple Occupancy, eg student lets, then it would be wise to bring the houses up to HMO compliance standard (which is additional to Building Regs, and does vary between authorities although there are Benchmark Standards which most LAs adopt with minor modifications) to appeal to that market.
I certainly wouldn't disagree with anything Tony said (you certainly got the right guy to respond to your post there!). I can chip in with my own experience which might be of use to you. The big difference between my project and yours is that your building is apparently already split up and in use as two dwellings whereas mine wasn't, therefore I have had to jump through all the hoops and try to bring an Edwardian property up to 21st century building standards. "Material change of use" is the stock phrase which cooked my goose, and which meant that I had to fit modern 'means of escape' windows, sound insulation etc. Once you start talking to the authorities it will be key that you emphasise the fact that the flats are already separate, have been so for ages, and that you are seeking to regularise the situation.
Regarding planning permission - again, as the dwellings have been separate for more than the qualifiying period (5 or 6 years, during which time to complaints have been received by the council?) you just need to apply for the certificate of lawfulness.
How 'separate' are your flats at the moment? I would have thought if they are separately rated and are used as two separate dwellings then you shouldn't have any trouble. However you mention 'separating the services'? Is it conceivable they could view it as a single HMO (Home of Multiple Occupation) for which completely different rules apply and would be a whole new ballgame? Apart from satisfying any regulations, what physically needs to be done to completely separate the two properties so you can sell them?
Concerning 'services'... from my experience, if you need to get new electrical/water/gas supplies laid on, then that's one of your first tasks - it is one (three?) of the most bureaucratic processes I have ever encountered - took just over 3 months to get completed!
Regs are the same everywhere except for Scotland which does its own thing; however what does differ is local interpretation, which can vary not only between authorities but (in my experience!) between BCOs working in the same department (don't get me started...)
Regarding the legal side (deeds etc) - I haven't actually done that yet, as my properties are being let so it's not necessary, but I did consult my solicitor about it and she said it was a straightforward process which she could action when required.
In terms of prospective purchasers' mortgage applications... if building control are planning are both happy with the situation and you have the relevant paperwork, then I would have thought that should be enough to satisfy them; however that doesn't stop a surveyor making comments like, oh, 'soundproofing/fire-spreading prevention between the properties appear not to be up to current standards' if you got away with not upgrading these, and that could cost you a buyer.
I'm surprised if it's only 5 or 6 years; I thought "established Use" eas 12 years. Perhaps it's changed. Thankfully, no-one has complained about the usage since it started 11 o 12 years ago.
In order to sell the two flats separately, the physical mods I think are essential are: The upstairs flat would need an electricity consumer unit with its own meter, (at the moment, I just have coin meters in each flat, which are fed from the one original consumer unit on the ground floor.)
Also a gas consumer unit+meter would need to be installed since I need to install a separate boiler in one of the flats, so that its central heating will be self-contained. At the moment, the central heating for the building is all one cirquit, running off one boiler in my flat.
I'm not sure about water mains requirements. Possibly the existing water mains cirquit is fine since it's not metered, with perhaps the addition of a mains water on/off tap for the upstairs flat. Comments welcome on that one.
I'd also need to build a wall blocking off the back end of the hallway. That would cut off all access between the two flats, and make the whole ground floor a single flat. Until now, I have only been letting 2/3 of the ground floor as a studio flat, so that dividing wall has not been necessary. The Council Tax Dept. doesn't know about that. They classed the building as two flats (Ground Floor Flat and First Floor Flat) some 11 or 12 years ago.
Local estate agents seemed to think that each flat would need its own off-road parking space. The GF Flat already has one, and the FF Flat can use the house's yard which is next to the road which could be turned into one. That's an easy job except that it might well require an alteration to the curb stones on the edge of the pavement which are curently 5" high. Does anyone know what that might cost?
That's unfortunate. How much did they charge (a) for the gas consumer unit installation, and (b) the electric one? (And any paperwork)?
When I apply for the Certificate of Legal Use, do you think they will send a building inspector (or any other inspector) around? If so I need to make sure the place is going to satisfy them before they come. Comments appreciated...
I reckon so. So I need to make the decision whether to pay out to do the work before selling or not. I suppose I could leave it to the buyer - if he or his lender requires it. I'll have to chew that one over.
My main worry at the moment is that I could start pouring money into this project and hit some beurocratic snag forcing me to undo all the work and lose the money invested. The worst scenario woyld be if the council made me turn the place back into a 3-bed single dwelling - which is much harder to sell than two small flats - especially this one, since it doesn't have a garden, just a back yard.
Another isea I had was to maybe sell the place to a developer, at a price level wich would allow him a profit after he did all the work and sold the two flats. That way, I'd make less profit, but he'd be taking all the risk.
Tony a local solicitor has shone a new light on my situation. He suggested that instead of applying for a Certificate of Lawful Use, [which could stir up a hornet's nest of issues such as visits and problematic rulings from buildings inspectors or even an (unlikely) refusal of planning permission], I take out indemnity insurance against any such future problems from such inspectors. I've never heard of tis approach before. He did confirm that it was unlikely that there would be much problem from the planning dept., because of the established use which I can prove, but there was some risk involved. (Of course, he may have suggested the indemnity insurance route because he'll get a commisssion on the insurance, I don't know!) I asked him how I could sell the place without a Certificate of Lawful use. He said "Easy; you show the buyer the indemnity insurance document instead".
Comments on the above would be appeciated. I really need to find out what I really need to do to make sure the flats will be easily mortgageable too. Contact mortgage companies, perhaps?
Another method of selling the two flats separately, would, as I understand it, be to sell the flats as "shared freehold". Anyone got and advice on the advisability or practicality of that route? If not, which newsgroup would likely provide the best advice on this?
"Jake" wrote | Local estate agents seemed to think that each flat would need | its own off-road parking space. The GF Flat already has one, | and the FF Flat can use the house's yard which is next to the | road which could be turned into one. That's an easy job except | that it might well require an alteration to the curb stones on | the edge of the pavement which are curently 5" high. Does | anyone know what that might cost?
You would need to get council permission for any new vehicular access across the pavement. This is subject to conditions like sight lines, and depending on the classification of road there can be the requirement for turning space so that cars are not reversed onto a main road.
Then the kerb will need to be dropped. This must be done by the council, or you could ask their permission to use another contractor, but it would have to be a contractor registered for Street Works with the necessary insurances. (Permission is required because you do not have statutory authority to drop the kerb, unlike the utility cos who have statutory right to dig up and reinstate road provided they follow the rules and use registered contractors.)
Some councils (eg York) allow exemption from car parking requirements for city centre properties if the property has a lockable cycle store.
| ... So I need to make the decision whether to pay out to do | the work before selling or not. I suppose I could leave it | to the buyer - if he or his lender requires it. I'll have | to chew that one over.
If you are aiming at first time buyers then do the work. They will run away from anything difficult. The property will have to be finished to 'show', so it's too late then to start alterations.
Now this sounds very much like what my solicitor said, too! I didn't mention it before as I couldn't recall the details (it wasn't directly relevant to my situation). I think it would have cost me of the order of a couple of hundred quid (ie comparable to the cost of actually applying for planning permission/building regs certfication!). It was only valid for 'old' works of more than X years standing; ie you can't just go ahead and do your building work without involving officialdom, and then cover yourself with one of these policies. So this would protect you against problems as things are now, not if you do some more work on the quiet in an attempt to bring your property 'into line'
I think this will be your area of difficulty. If you show this to Building Control, they might decide that regardless of the fact that the two units have been separately council-taxed, it's actually still one dwelling. You do NOT want to go there, trust me. Of course, if you contacted Building Control in a few weeks time, and they saw a wall which had been in place for years, that would be a different story... ;-)
This is definitely your trump card...!
Paperwork per se isn't too bad, it's the endless phonecalls trying to ascertain which company is responsible for all the aspects of the jobs concerned, and then waiting for weeks for something to happen. You get passed from company A, to B, to C, back to A, to D... with the inevitable 40 minutes of Greensleeves each time. Quite unbelievable. Gas wasn't too bad; electric was the worst. Although water is pretty bad in that you have to dig your own hole inside the house (that's not included in their costs!) to their specs, which can be virtually impossible to achieve....
My bills, payable in advance to each of the three utility companies were as follows:
Gas - 208 GBP Electric - 734 GBP Water - 1058 GBP
These were all for totally straightforward installations; ie just bringing the stuff in from supplies already buried in the pavement 1m away outside.
From what you say above, I reckon you'll be faced with all three of these, because in each case to achieve independent supplies to both properties, these will need to be provided direct from the mains outside, not split off the single supply entering the building (if I've understood the scenario correctly).
Yes, I've been thinking about that! Thanks for the comments...
I was quite surprised today when I asked a local conveyancing solicitor about this issue. He seemed top think that separate mains services (gas, water, electric) are neither a legal requirement, nor an issue with mortgage companies. He merely thought that it would be 'preferable' for prospective buyers, and that it might not be necessare to have separate supplies installed. I wonder if he's got a point there. But I can't quite see how the owners of the 2 flats could get separate gas+electric bills unless they each had separate services
- unless the freeholder (me) pays the bills for the two flats and then charges them each for usage according to additional meters I have installed in each flat... Feasable, I suppose....
David, Again, thanks for the helpful info. I can see the need for a separate electric supply for each flat and a separate gas supply too because each householder is billed according to his/her meter readings. However, with water, the water board just sends a bill to each address, for a set amount, and since the water is not metered, I can't see the need for a separate water supply. Can you explain why you differ on this? I was envisaging splitting the water inlet already inside the house - with one feed going to each flat, each with its own stop-c*ck. Anyone se any problem with this idea?
From what you said in another post, it looks like I ought to get the separate services laid on *before* I approach the council for a certificate of lawful use as two flats, otherwise they might class it as a single dwelling, regardless of the council tax billing me as two separate flats, correct? Perhaps I can still come unstuck, if they find out the gas and electric suplies have only just been installed. It's amking me wonder if I should take the indemnity route rather than the council approval route.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.