Buying house that has huge amount of unauthorised development - risky?

A

Aladdin

Registered User
Messages
109
Sale agreed on a second hand house and while it needs some upgrading, the surveyor pointed out that a lot of elements in the house seemed very adhoc and advised us to check planning info. Turns out pretty much anything the current owners did to improve the house over the years - multiple extensions/lean-to/attic conversions etc were unauthorised. Yet they did get retention for a lot of it a year or so ago, presumably getting it in order before putting the house on sale.

My question is, while they did get retention that doesn't necessarily mean the work has been done correctly and according to building regs? The house is habitable and all seems fine to the naked eye, but there are a few issues that the surveyor is unhappy with, missing roof supports/trusses etc.
Worried now that if someone couldn't be bothered going through the necessary planning process that they're inclined to cut corners in every way, and don't want to end up inheriting problems down the line.
Is there any way to tell whether or not these add-ons are kosher or could well end up being problematic? Or am I better off running a mile...
 
Last edited:
A cert of compliance from an engineer would be nice, but what would it be complying with? In any case I doubt you'll get one.
If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, ..........!
 
Aladdin said:
Is there any way to tell whether or not these add-ons are kosher or could well end up being problematic? Or am I better off running a mile...
Click to expand...
Do you not trust your surveyor or something?
At least they've seen the place unlike anyone here...
 
It's a general question; the surveyor says he can only establish that the work was done adhoc, not whether it was done according to building regs, and I'm wondering if there is a way to find that out.
 
There are 3 issues

1. Planning
2. Building regulations
3. Build quality

1. Planning
Aladdin said:
they did get retention for a lot of it a
Click to expand...

Either there is planning permission or there isn't. You need to know which.

2. Building Regulations

It does not meet building regulations. I can tell you that from here. Building regulations change all the time. Work only needs to conform to the regulations in place at the time. You buy an old house, you get a house built to old standards.

3. Build Quality

In practical terms all you can do is look at the finishes, and ask yourself if you are happy with that. For hidden items, well if it is there a few years and hasn't fallen down yet it is probably ok.

Aladdin said:
there are a few issues that the surveyor is unhappy with, missing roof supports/trusses etc.
Click to expand...
It is easy for the surveyor to be unhappy, and it is his responsibility to tell you of these issues. But so what if there are some missing roof supports. What is the significance of that. If the roof has been standing for a few years probably nothing.

You could get a structural survey done, but there is a significant cost to that. And most likely all it will tell you is that it is less that perfect, they always say that, but not significantly unsound. I know 'cause it is still standing.

If you are uneasy. Walk away.
 
Reactions: jim
Thanks @cremeegg that's really helpful. I'm mostly just thinking ahead about any potential issues down the line when I try to sell it on myself. I've no problem knocking a few lean-tos or adding supports to attic conversion etc, I just want to be sure what I'm getting into and retention tells me very little about build quality other than previous owner was the type to cut corners! Should I be asking the vendor for build compliance info/certification or some such?
 
If retention is in place for everything done, and there are no "unauthorised" modifications outside of the normal exception process for extensions you are fine.
However, its not true to say that anything else would be judged by the regulations of the day - if you apply for retention for a piece of work done in 1997 in 2022, you will be judged on the guidelines and regulations of 2022, not 1997. And if it was unacceptable in 1997 (which is possibly a reason why it was done without PP in the first place) then it will certainly not be waved on now.

Fire certs would also be an issue - you would need to have a fire cert for works carried out after 1990. Otherwise insurance would be invalidated in the event of a fire.

So yes, a lender might refuse to lend, insurer might refuse cover, and a good solicitor will almost certainly refuse to sign off on such a sale.
 
Reactions: Leo
All of this needs a conversation with your solicitor first and foremost, who can get a planning search done and look for outstanding issues.
 
Everything can be sorted in the end - just depends how much money you're prepared to spend.
 
DannyBoyD said:
Everything can be sorted in the end - just depends how much money you're prepared to spend.
Click to expand...
I'd disagree with that, having tried to buy an apartment that didn't have proper PP. Retention wasn't an option because it was then judged against the standards of today, not that of when it was built. Its potentially easier with houses, but some kinds of outrageous breaches of PP requirements simply won't move with anything less than demolishing the unauthorised development.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register