No planning permission, problem?

D

danika05

Registered User
Messages
31
Can anyone clarify a planning permission issue for me?

I am buying a second hand house which has had some alterations done to it. There is one small change which does not have planning permission, (and it definately should have it.) The sellers contend that as it is there over seven years, there is no problem. Our solicitor feels otherwise. Our solicitor says that the fact that it is there over seven years helps, but doesn't solve the problem. I haven't been able to grasp exactly what our solicitor think is still an issue - can anyone enlighten me?
 
The vendor needs to apply to the local authority for retention of the illegal alteration(s) and pay all relevant costs.

Only when this is granted and documented by the planning authority as approved / compliant will your solicitor allow the sale to proceed.

The fact that the changes are more than seven years old may help with the process but it is not a guarantee of a satisfactory outcome.
 
Problem - yes

Presume you are borrowing to buy. Your lender requires your solicitor to certify that the title to the property is in order. This includes planning. If there has been a development to the property that requires planning permission, and none was obtained, then your solicitor cannot certify the title as ok.

The 7 year rule the vendor is referring to - this means that the local authority cannot enforce that the development be reversed (eg knock down an extension) but this does not mean there is permission for it to remain. So if for example the extension is damaged by fire - you do not have permission to re-build it.
Your solicitor can explain the problem to your lender ("qualify title") and your lender will decide whether to go ahead or not. If they do, there may be a condition that you obtain retention permission.

In addition, if you decide to sell in the future, any purchaser is faced with the same problem - so you are in effect inheriting/buying someone else's problem.
 
Danika, This is a common problem. Think of all the front porches that are built above the exempted size without planning permission, the amount of driveways formed etc, and you will see how big the issue is. The truth is that it is a grey area that even most councils will not answer you on, as they would end up having to issue enforcement orders to 10% of the households in the country. For many people in this position they have to make one simple decision. Am I willing to inherit this problem that may be a stumbling block for me to sell or refurbish in the future? If it is a velux window to the side, and it is not directly overlooking anybody, it is highly unlikely to cause a legal overlooking issue. If you make this issue black and white, then you have to get the vendor to apply for planning retention and you will have to wait, or you will have to get an architect to give you a letter stating that it is exempted from planning, which is unliekly. On the other hand, if you get the vendor to knock a few bob off the price, and your solicitor is willing to carry through with the sale, the result is generally better, albeit that you are inheriting the same issue.

If the alteration was any bigger or built within the last 7 years, though, I would certainly consider the black and white approach.
 
I wouldn't be too worried about a Velux type window. If the window is on the rear return of the property and it's being used to provide natural light to an attic storage area, most local authorities will issue you a letter of exemption stating it is a "non-material change" to the overall scheme (there is no actual exemption for a rooflight). €80 fee. Job done.

You need to clarify of the Velux is for light to storage only. A lot of people say it's for an attic but it's really for an attic conversion (bedroom) which requires planning permisison. I got an exemption for the insertion of 3 Veluxs on the rear return of my roof on the basis it's for natural lighting to the attic.
 
That information is not entirely correct. You do need planning for Velux windows or any element to the side or the front of a house that alters the appearance. (There are some exemptions in the code) Technically the view is that once you can see it when looking in elevation from the front of the house, even a little sticking up on the side, it requires planning. If it is on a rear return that is not visible, it is technically to the rear of the house. It would be incorrect to get an exemption on any other basis, as it would be setting an undesireable precident.

You do not always require planning permission for an attic conversion once it falls below a set area once taken into consideration with all other add ons, and the concept I mentioned above regarding affecting the front elevation follows suit.
 
Tank said:
You do not always require planning permission for an attic conversion once it falls below a set area once taken into consideration with all other add ons, and the concept I mentioned above regarding affecting the front elevation follows suit.
Click to expand...

danika05 said:
Our solicitor feels otherwise. Our solicitor says that the fact that it is there over seven years helps, but doesn't solve the problem.
Click to expand...

Fact seems to be that the window is not exempt. OP can clarify. In any event, as a purchaser he is still in difficulties with his lender. If they are not happy they won't lend and in a time when even 80% mortgages are hard to come by, banks are more prone to turn down even the slightest irregularity.

Time to mention Building Regulations? Even if a development is exempt from planning permission, it may not comply with B. regulations - OP is it just a velux wondow in the attic - or is it a conversion of an attic room into a habitable room?
 
The urgency should be on the vendor to sort all matters out in order to obtain a sale in the present climate. I would suggest OP take legal advice, ensure retention of the attic conversion is obtained if required before proceeding with the purchase. It's all to do with peace of mind at the end of the day.
 
It may seem like a trivial matter but your Solicitor is looking after you and their interests in giving you his opinion .If you buy(without seller getting permission) and decide to sell the house in ten years and the next vendor will get the same advice and may want you to get retention permission.It's your Solicitors obligation to inform you of issues outstanding on the property so you have no comeback against them for wrong advice.
 
I know this is an old thread but I'm curious about this "most local authorities will issue you a letter of exemption stating it is a "non-material change" to the overall scheme "
I'm currently in the process of purchasing second hand property and there's some v minor planning issues. Under current market can't see the seller going for retention (which could take months), so one option was to qualify the title .

Is there an option to have LA provide an exemption? How would this be followed up? I'm worried that lender may not agree to loan if there's anything minor showing up ...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top