Buying a house - loft conversion

[Christian McArdle]

Indeed, I didn't bother with planning permission for my loft conversion and that has a full width dormer to the rear and takes the house to three storeys.

Christian.

[Guy King]

The message from " [e-mail]" contains these words:

Very little and never in that order, if it's like most insurance.

[Owain]

Hadn't thought of building *two* houses on it, but even better!

And can sometimes be more appealing to planners because an extra dwelling is created.

Owain

[Christian McArdle]

All the rage round here. A friend has just conspired with a neighbour so that they could use a little land separating their bungalows as a driveway to four two storey houses built in their previously huge gardens, splitting the proceeds. They didn't even have to move or demolish their own homes.

Christian.

[Rob Summers]

Proably very rarely pays out because it is so ridiculously cheap. But will cover you for any works necessary to bring the specified works up to current standards up to a given amount of cover.

But if you think you might need to get it (either through the vendor buying it or yourself) then be careful about approaching the council about whether or not regs approval has been sought etc as that may prevent the insurance being obtained. You should probably seek advice from your solicitor about whether or not you should approach the council.

Rob

[geoffr]

The only risk it covers you for is if you suffer a loss as a result of the Council taking enforcement action against you for breach of building regs. However, the chances of this happening is virtually nil if the conversion was done at least a year ago. As far as I am aware there has not been a single case of a Local Authority bringing an action against an owner of a private residential property for breach of building regs.

Its important to note that the policy will not cover you if the work was simply inadequate.

Thats the reason why the policies are so cheap as the insurance company is insuring a risk that will never happen!

I personally wouldn't bother with a policy unless your lender requires one as they sometimes do under the miss-taken belief that they do provide some benefit.

[Guy King]

The message from "geoffr" contains these words:

We had a bloke round here have to pull down his extension.

[Frank Erskine]

Ooerr missus.

[geoffr]

Could this have been for breach of planning and not for breach of building regs, or if it was for breach of building regs, was it within a year of it being constructed?

Geoff

[Guy King]

The message from "geoffr" contains these words:

Both, IIRC. It was a ramshakle disaster and dangerous to the neighbours.

[Lobster]

This is public information - get yourself down to the local council offices and you should be able to look it up yourself there and then (both planning and building regs). IIRC actual details of the building regs may not be available for public scrutiny but planning certainly is; and the title of any building regs application will tell you whether they applied ot not.

David

[Tony Bryer]

As far as Planning is concerned, a trip to the offices may not be necessary. For all the unkind things I have said about LBRuT Planning this week they have got their act together web-wise and virtually all recent planning applications (including officer's reports, scans of letters from neighbours etc) are online.

[Hugo Nebula]

On Sun, 05 Nov 2006 18:28:34 +0000, a particular chimpanzee named Owain randomly hit the keyboard and produced:

A Regularisation certificate can be issued if the work complies with the requirements that were in force at the time the work was originally carried out.

[Hugo Nebula]

On 6 Nov 2006 01:20:58 -0800, a particular chimpanzee named " [e-mail]" randomly hit the keyboard and produced:

AIUI, they will not pay out if you or anyone else acting for you have informed the Council of any unauthorised works, for instance by submitting a Regularisation application. As the Council have no continuing powers, there's no way they'd know what had been done unless someone told them.

They only cover the cost of complying with any notice issued by the Council, not the cost of any repair work if the construction turns out to be faulty.

They can only be taken out more than 12 months after the work has been carried out, and as has been pointed out, generally enforcement action to rectify the breach in the Regulations can't be taken more than 12 months after the work has been completed.

There are other inequities with them, I'm sure, such as why is it the buyer generally takes them out when it's usually the seller's fault that an application was never made.

It would be interesting to know if one of these policies has _ever_ paid out, and in what circumstances.

In short, their value is slightly less than the value of the paper it's printed on.

[Hugo Nebula]

On Sat, 11 Nov 2006 20:44:47 GMT, a particular chimpanzee named Tony Bryer randomly hit the keyboard and produced:

A lot of Councils' planning apps are. I think they have to be to comply with the 'e-Government' guidelines and they may miss out on some funding if they're not, so I wouldn't go and attach too noble a motive to your Council.

A quick virtual trip around my local area (Gtr Manchester) shows that they all have on-line access to all publicly available planning documents.

[Lobster]

Yes my council's are, but only as far back as 2005 - don't suppose any of them are doing it retrospectively are they though? Would have thought that would be a huge amount of work with limited need.

It'certainly very good though: the other day I had a letter from the planning dept regarding a neighbour's proposed development; rather than trog into town to look at the application as hard copy in the offices, I found everything from home within a few mouse clicks. (My only complaint would be that the relevant URL I had to type in was about 2 lines long - haven't they heard of tinyurl.com?!!)

David