Retrospective planning on loft conversion

A friend bought a house a few years ago which came with a loft conversion which was apparently done in the early 1970's without planning permission. It was advertised as a two bedroom property with storage space in the loft when she bought the house. I'm assuming this was how they got around the building regulations. In the meantime she has put in fitted wardrobes and completely refurbished the loft room.

She now wishes to sell the property and has put it on the market as a three bedroom house. A buyer appeared very quickly and has had a survey done. The surveyor raised the question of the loft extension - did it have planning permission and building regs approval?

My friend asked the local council if planning permission was ever applied for and the answer was no. She then asked what she could do to legalise the extension. The council advised her that, as the extension was done before

1985, building regulations would not apply. However, she was told she would have to fill out a form to establish if planning permission was required for the extension - which was built 40 years ago! One of the questions on this form is - does the extension exceed 40 cubic metres or 50 cubic metres? According to my measurements, the room is only 26 cubic metres. I'm not sure if this measurement has any major significance or not. Also, there is a fixed staircase built from the first to the second floor, where the bedroom is located. In any event, this extension has lasted for 40 + years with no apparent problems.

Assuming that the council decides that planning permission is/was required, what are the next steps in this procedure and what are the likely outcomes?

Reply to
Wesley
Loading thread data ...

IANAL but it would be almost certainly legit after all that time... I

*think* PP (or lack of) times out after either 7 or 12 years, can't remember which.
Reply to
Tim Watts

She needs to make an application for a certificate of lawful development. Assuming she can prove the work was done when you say then it should be largely a formality albeit with a lot of paperwork and an application fee to pay. If she talks to the local planners they will give her the forms and tell her what needs to be done. She will almost certainly have to make a statutory declaration that is a statement sworn under oath that the facts are accurate. Nothing too difficult but it is time consuming and costs money.

Peter Crosland

Reply to
Peter Crosland

Thanks for the replies.

So, a Certificate of Lawful Development will legitimise the extension but will this be enough to satisfy a mortgage lender?

Reply to
Wesley

Wesley,

Also, if the the extension "does the extension exceed 40 cubic metres or 50 cubic metres" then it may well be DEEMED TO SATISFY under the building regs/planning procedures - meaning that it will not need approval under those procedures - and given the fact that you say that the "the room is only 26 cubic metres", then that falls well within the Deemed to Satisfy rules.

As it's many years since I delved into the intricacies of the Building Regs etc [IIRC the copy I have is the 1966 version], I would advise that you have a quiet chat with your local planning/buildin reg departments as it may prove quite fruitful and less expensive than you thought.

Cash

Reply to
Cash

+1.

Be absolutely frank. They cant handle it. Understand what they tell you and do whatever is needed.

Reply to
The Natural Philosopher

Less than that... enforcement action must be taken within 4 years IIRC.

Reply to
John Rumm

This does not seem to be something to get worried about. Chances are they could simply answer the purchaser's solicitor's questions with the unadulterated truth, and you may well find that the new buyer will be happy to accept things as they are (after all, the current owner did).

There may be a formal method of regularising the work, but its likely to be nothing more than a form filling exercise (and a paying the council some money exercise! (couple of hundred at a guess))

Reply to
John Rumm

I agree. It largely depends on how picky the buyer's solicitor is. He will advise his client of the need for a COL to cover his liability. The buyer will need to consider what might happen if and when he comes sell the property when the same question will be asked again.

Peter Crosland

Reply to
Peter Crosland

Never quite understood that (whatever the lead time is - it does vary according to stuff like whether there's been 'material change of use' etc...

... I mean, suppose someone does a totally awful, completely unsafe loft conversion, under the radar - is the fact that it manages to stay standing and that somehow the roof hasn't actually collapsed 4 years later enough to mean that Building Control can't touch it?

David

Reply to
Lobster

In message , Wesley writes

It is not clear if this would make the property 3 storey.

There may be a *gotcha* in meeting the fire regulations which, I assume, would not be time limited.

Things like escape routes or fireproof stairwells. An expert will be along shortly.

regards

Reply to
Tim Lamb

I think so, yes.

BUT there are other avenues: Elfin Safety may declare buildings 'uninhabitable' and insurance may be refused.

There was some case where an old boy had lived in a cottage without mains water or drainage, and eventually the farmer dammed his stream..he wanted the council to run a pipe to upstream of the dam,. but they declared the whole property uninhabitable instead.

Reply to
The Natural Philosopher

Planning is NOT retrospective nor is building control.

If it has existed long enough, its OK.

Reply to
The Natural Philosopher

Hold on, is it a loft _conversion_ or a loft _extension_? You start by calling it one thing, and then calling it another.

Any buyer would be throwing their money away if they don't get a structural survey to assure their lender that the roof isn't going to fall flat.

JGH

Reply to
jgharston

But elapse of time does not stop the fire brigade declaring it uninhabitable as a bedroom for absence of safe escape routes.

Would you let your child sleep in such a room?

tim

Reply to
tim....

No, but I would encourage some other peoples kids to do it :-)

Reply to
The Natural Philosopher

Building control and planning are different things. The enforcement window for building regs violations are even shorter than for PP generally - usually no more than 2 years IIRC. There may be an exception for where there is a public risk from the low quality of work. Perhaps Hugo could clarify?

PP timing starts from when the work becomes "visible" - hence people who build houses in barns etc and then take the barn down a few years later can still get caught, since the clock will run from the uncovering.

Reply to
John Rumm

Don't think I referred to it as either did I? Assuming the space is habitable - which is sounds like it is, then its a loft conversion - there is a change of use implied.

I think that may be a little over cautious given the amount of time that has passed since the work was completed. It has obviously survived a good few hurricanes and heavy snow falls in its time. Also the age would suggest that the original roof was probably made using traditional joinery rather than prefab trusses. So it would generally harder to compromise the whole structure quite as easily.

However the buyer may well use the non official nature of the conversion to claim a reduction in price and argue that in reality they ought not pay more than they would for the unconverted property with more accessible storage space. The state of the market at the time of sale will dictate how likely they are to get away with that!

Reply to
John Rumm

We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the drugs began to take hold. I remember "tim...." saying something like:

Fuck, yeah. If the little bastard's not nimble enough to skedaddle out of the rooflight, he deserves to fry.

Reply to
Grimly Curmudgeon

You didn't, the OP did:

Sorry, GoogleGroups playing up, and Thunderbird Newsclient didn't quote as I expected it to. Currently can't see anything earlier than Saturday.

JGH

Reply to
J.G.Harston

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.