Lack of Building Reg Approval

[alongney]

I'm currently in the process of buying a two-bed maisonette in a 1900s converted terrace house.

The maisonette is on the first floor and the loft of the house (the loft being used for the master bedroom and ensuite) and we have been provided with a copy of the planning permission from 1971 authorising the conversion of the house into "one self contained flat and one self contained maisonette" .

We've also been provided with planning permission for the enlargement of a dormer window at the front of the house (in the loft) and the formation of a new one to the rear (where the ensuite is).

However, in both cases we have not been provided with copies of the building regulation approvals.

Our survey states that the flat probably doesn't comply with current building regulations and our solicitor has advised that we request further information regarding the status of the original loft conversion.

The conversion works took place sometime around 1971 and therefore clearly fall outside of the 1985 limit for obtaining regularisation.

The sellers who have been in the house for the last 5 years do not have copies of any building regulation approvals.

In all likelihood, we're not going to see building regulation approval for the conversion and we're clearly not going to be able to get the works regularised - so what do we do?

It seems to me that we only have 2 options:

1. to walk away; or

1. obtain some form of indemnity insurance (at the seller's cost) re the lack of building reg approval.

I'm really not inclined to walk away if I can help it, which leaves me with seeking indemnity insurance.

As the conversion was done at least 30 years ago, I would have thought that if there were any real problems, they would have come to light by now. Indeed, other than flagging that the property "probably doesn't comply" with current building regs, the survey states that there are no obvious structural problems.

Therefore, the only risks seem to be (a) that the council come in and tell us to make the property building reg compliant, and (b) we have difficulties selling on in the future.

What are the chances that the council will come in and ask us to make the flat compliant? And if they did do that, would the indemnity policy cover us?

Could we sell the property with the benefit of an indemnity policy in the future?

Any tips on how to deal with this, and/or whether this is likely to affect a future sale would be much appreciated.

Thanks

[Phil Anthropist]

Is there such a thing as indemnity insurance re the lack of building reg approval ?

It isn't normally possible to transfer insurance cover to another person in the case of other types of insurance such as life and property. Assuming indemnity insurance re the lack of building reg approval exists, can it be transferred to the next owner ?

[DJC]

Building regulations are not retrospective, you don't have to update to the latest standards unless you are doing new work. If the work dosn't conform to what the regs would have been in 1971 it is too late for anyone to pursue the matter. So, I can't see what you are worrying about. A case of an stupid jobsworth surveyor I suspect.

[Richard Faulkner]

In message , [e-mail] writes

Isnt there a period beyond which the council, (or whoever), can force you to comply with building regs? Hopefully someone else will know.

They bought it 5 years ago, and you obviously want it now. This suggests that it is fairly saleable, whatever the building regs situation.

Or at your own cost? Assuming you can get it, I dont think it will cost much, ( a few hundred pounds?). In fact, I probably wouldnt mention it to the sellers, as they may get it and add value to the property in so doing. ISTR a solicitor suggesting that building regs indemnity was fairly easy to obtain, and ISTR she mentioned Norwich Union)

Building Regs. tend to deal with safety, (and comfort more recently), issues, and they change all the time, so it wont be as safe as it should be... probably in terms of escaping in the case of fire, or avoiding a fall down a staircase, or through a window, and it may not be as comfortable as it could be in terms of soundproofing and accessibility.

See above - and the indemnity should remove the selling difficulties.

Slim to nil?

I think that is what it is for, amongst other things/

[Richard Faulkner]

Restrictive covenant indemnities seem to transfer OK, so I would guess these would.

[Grunff]

Indemnity from what? After 12 months, the building control department have no power whatsoever over any work carried out without building regs.

Zero.

Some anally retentive solicitors may insist upon it (we've just had to do this with our house), and in that case you'll just have to fork out £150-£200.

Ignore the issue. If you want the house, buy it.

[Andy Hall]

Notwithstanding all of that, which probably does take care of the bureaucracy, maybe it would be an idea to get it surveyed anyway from the safety perspective. I'm not thinking so much of fire access issues which I believe are relatively recent compared with 70s, but whether it is safe from the perspective of having an adequate floor support etc.

The OP could decide to add firedoors and escapes etc. and that would probably not be that expensive. Ripping out an entire conversion, if it was bodged, and re-doing it is another thing.

[Richard Faulkner]

Do you happen to know the time limit, and where it can be seen documented officially?

Agreed

[jim_in_sussex]

there's plenty of fairly recent postings on this group on this subject (try googling for building regulations, regularisation etc): basically IIRC the council has 6 months to prosecute (few known of) or 12 months to force rectification. after that it's all too late: just enjoy living in it. However be aware that non-compliance with planning regs has different time scales: SFAIUI in this area council normally takes no action after 5 years.

you don't have to update to

yes but noting non-compliance with current standards in house survey reports to building socs is (SFAIUI) not an unknown ploy to generate work for local builders.

unless you are doing new work. If the work dosn't

and perhaps a solicitor seeing more issues and paperwork he can charge for?

remember all the local surveyors, solicitors, architects, builders, and uncle tom cobley are all feeding from the same trough - after giving each other a peculiar handshake. If they can generate work for one another they will do with scarcely a qualm at making you spend.

[John Rumm]

In short stop worrying, if you want it, then buy it.

After all this time I susspect even lack of PP would have no teeth. Lack of building regs certainly won't

Most property in the country does not comply with *current* building regs. There is no reason why it should or any need to change it either (unless you are doing other notifiable work now).

And hence by implication have been there for 35 years without any major structural issues....

nothing!

Why? no point.

You could, but unless you have a laywer being a PITA you may as well save the money and hassle.

I think you have answered your own question then ;-)

They have no power to do that.

Not much.... if a buyer got jittery you could always offer to purchase the indemnity for them - in the total cost of moving it is a drop in hte ocean.

Absolutely none.

Not really relevant given the above.

Possibly...

[chris French]

Yeah, the issue of BR and indemnities came up when selling our house.

The buyers solicitor queried the lack of BR approval for the 30 + yo car port, and suggested we purchase an indemnity policy. We pointed out to ours that 1. it was exempt from BR, 2 it was well past any date when action could be taken.

but there seems to be no clue with them as to what the DR rules are re enforcemnt - ours would have happily had us going along with them if we hadn't pointed out the lack of need for it.

[Ed Sirett]

roval.

I'm not surprised the insurance is 'easy to obtain' the risk is very very low for the insurer. Structural collapse even if remotely possible would likely be instigated by an external (storm, fire, flood) which is already covered by the buildings insurance.

[Fred]

You forget that solicitors and conveyancers get commission for these policies.

[Mike Clarke]

We got 250,000 GBP building reg. consent indemnity cover for 79 quid (from Liberty Legal Indemnities) about 2 years ago. As others have said it probably wasn't needed but as a small fraction of the house purchase cost it was probably worthwhile for peace of mind.

[meow2222]

I dont think you're actually purchasing anything, just a policy that seems to have no way of ever paying out, presuming the unapproved work isnt new.

NT

[Richard Faulkner]

I would look at it like a damp proof course with 30 year guarantee - fairly pointless in the first place, and no way of ever being repaired under guarantee.

However, when you come to sell, the buyers surveyor should feel less need to cover his/her arse. In fact, the building reg. indemnity is probably better than the Damp proof guarantee in this respect.