Need a Detailed Planning Search - Recommendations?

T

Teknon

Registered User
Messages
93
I am buying a house that had some alterations to it, namely a front porch and rear door. While I expect that planning permission was not needed, my solicitor has strongly recommended that I get a Detailed Planning Search done to ensure there are not orders outstanding.

I have got a quote from one surveyor/engineer for €300, it seems very expensive. Can anyone recommend someone to do it for me, I would need a Certificate to say there are no planning enforements on the property.

Thanks

TK
 
Can you explain why, as a purchaser, you should do this? Are you clear in your head as to what is going on in the purchase process and the relative obligations and responsibilities of purchaser and vendor?

It would be the norm that a vendor would provide an Architect's/Engineer's Cert/Opinion on compliance or exemption of any works done.

A planning search can be done by a Law Searcher - that will show applications for planning permission. It should also show any enforcement issues.

I think you should go back to your solicitor and ask them why the vendor is not dealing with the issue.

mf
 
Hi MF1

There was a search done by DLS but my solicitor still thinks I should get an engineer to do a more detailed search.

The vendor is refusing to get this done as they have provided the DLS search.

Tk
 
Is DLS a law searcher? If so, the search won't show developments - just applications for planning permission.

Unless there is a compelling reason otherwise, my view would be to tell the Vendors to deal with their own responsibilities and take on the expense of satisfying a purchaser on planning issues.

mf
 

With respect to you and your solicitor TK, that is not what you need.

Firstly on the matter of costs:

The engineers quotation was low for a charge-out rate and doesn't reflect the amount of work or legal liability such reports accrue.

Are some people thinking this money goes straight the back pocket of building professionals?
A proper report, including inspection on site, researching the planning file and reading the planning acts and building regulations could take three days.
That's €100 a day, approximating to €500 a week/€25000 a year assuming two weeks holidays and constant workflow.
Out of this you have to pay Professional Indemnity Insurance, light/heating/phones, rates, rent, printing costs, car insurance, petrol, VAT, tax - and make enough to live on what's left.
Could you run a business and raise a family on €25000 a year?
You could do one or the other perhaps, but not both.

On that sobering thought...

Secondly, in relation to you getting this information yourself; -

Caveat emptor suggests that you should have the house properly inspected by a competent building professional.

In my opinion, your first port of call should be an architect.
Architects are all rounders and will advise you on the houses potential for extension and changes as well.
For example there could be planning restrictions on the house, or rights of way for public services through the site, or any number of things
Engineers are generally only competent to address structural, drainage and services matters and the latter usually requires and M&E Consultant.
Detailed structural and services concerns arising can then be addressed by bringing in an engineer if necessary raise these - and any other concerns arising - and address the matters therein.

Thirdly, and assuming there are no other issues arising and solely in relation to the matter raised above the vendor could be asked to supply; -

  • an Architect's Opinion of Exemption with Planning for the door and front porch
  • a separate Opinion of Compliance with Planning Permission
  • a separate Opinion of Compliance with Building Regulations.
Alternatively a Section 5 Declaration should be sought from the Vendor to settle your solicitor's concerns.
This should cost you nothing - you are free to walk away if they don't get either and still have concerns.
The Vendors agents should apply for thsi to the local authority addressing all matters you might raise.

But if you fail to have the house properly inspected by your agent and fail to ask for certification from the vendor to cover all possible problem areas - you might have no leg to stand on if problems arise later.

ONQ.

[broken link removed]

All advice on AAM is remote from the situation and cannot be relied upon as a defence or support - in and of itself - should legal action be taken.
Competent legal and building professionals should be asked to advise in Real Life with rights to inspect and issue reports on the matters at hand.
 
An engineer, surveyor, planner or experienced technician/draftsman would be just as competent as a qualified architect. Legally, certificates of compliance aren't worth the paper they are written on when it comes to planning enforcement. It's always surprising what gets signed off by professionals, they don't seem to worry too much about their indemnity insurance.

Unlike in the UK where when an unauthorised structure/use is there for a good few years (4-10 years) it becomes lawful, in Ireland it remains unlawful but prosecution is generally statute-barred (after 7 years).

Also local authorities are required to keep all warning letters or enforcement notices on a Planning Register which can be inspected by members of the public (under section 7 (r) (t) of the Planning and Development Act 2000). This is often a little known or used provision but can be checked to see if there was ever any enforcement taken in relation to the house previously.

If you want a legal document to confirm everything is above board, you should apply for a section 5 declaration from the relevant local authority, but you would need building drawings for this, which are expensive.

Have a look at the Schedule 2, Part 1 Classes 1-8 (Development within the Curtilage of a House) which describes the kinds of small extensions and alterations you can do to a house without planning permission under the Planning and Development Regulations 2001: http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2001/en/si/0600.html
If you take you measure up bits of the house like the porch and take your time reading the regulations, you might be able to satisfy yourself. There are caveats though, but you and your solicitor might be able to get your heads around it.
 
Lots of caveats apply so be careful, for example in a Conservation Area these exemptions would go out the window.... This post does not constitute professional advice but an informal pointer. Building Regulations are relevant but separate to planning regulations.


(1.) In relation to alterations to a rear door: Under section 4(1)(h) of the Planning and Development Act 2000, alterations that do not materially affect the external appearance of the structure so as to render the appearance inconsistent with the character of the structure or the neighbouring structures are exempt


(2.)This is the exemption relating to front porches under the regulations on the link above

CLASS 7


The construction or erection of a porch outside any external door of a house.
1. Any such structure shall be situated not less than 2 metres from any road.
2. The floor area of any such structure shall not exceed 2 square metres.
3. The height of any such structure shall not exceed, in the case of a structure with a tiled or slated pitched roof, 4 metres or, in any other case, 3 metres.
 
TheRed said:
An engineer, surveyor, planner or experienced technician/draftsman would be just as competent as a qualified architect.
Click to expand...
I cannot agree.
Architects are qualified to comment on design and on all matters in relation to buildings.
Draughtspersons are trained to draw, technicians are trained to provide technical information, engineers are specialists in civil, structural, drainage and services works, and even in these terms, they are usually experienced in terms of commercial or commercial-scale and not single residential buildings - for example they may do the estate drainage in a housign estate but not the drainage of each site.

Architectural Technologists OTOH, depending on their experience and knowledge of the legal environment, may be acceptable, but there may be issues with their certificates.

Legally, certificates of compliance aren't worth the paper they are written on when it comes to planning enforcement.
Click to expand...
You appear to be mailigning the issuers, whoever does it, and I cannot accept that.
The Opinions offer comfort to the beneficiary who can then sue the issuer for negligence should it be proven that such is the case.
It's always surprising what gets signed off by professionals, they don't seem to worry too much about their indemnity insurance.
Click to expand...
Professional Archtiects do, but your post above suggest you rate certs from professionals with less general competence - you get what you pay for I suppose.
Unlike in the UK where when an unauthorised structure/use is there for a good few years (4-10 years) it becomes lawful, in Ireland it remains unlawful but prosecution is generally statute-barred (after 7 years).
Click to expand...
Unless enforcement by way of the issuing of a warning letter has already begun.
Or you could ring up the enforcement officer, but again, why bother when the Vendor should be the one offering assurances...

And who would they be able to sue if they "got their heads around it" and got it wrong? The object of the exercise is that the Purchaser should obtain competent professional advice or have such offered to them by the Vendor.


ONQ.

[broken link removed]

All advice on AAM is remote from the situation and cannot be relied upon as a defence or support - in and of itself - should legal action be taken.
Competent legal and building professionals should be asked to advise in Real Life with rights to inspect and issue reports on the matters at hand.
 
ONQ

I discussed three options in descending order of expense and reliability.

1. copperfasten legal document s.5 declaration

2. made poster aware that in prosecutorial situation cert of compliance is meaningless. Poster should be aware of that he/she would not be able to rely on this in court and it is only for peace of mind. I would hate if a householder of limited means went to this expense, that there'd be a problem down the road and that they would find their only recourse was an expensive civil case against the professional.

3. DIY. Made poster aware that there are caveats but am in favour of people educating themselves about their exempted development rights. Generally, they are not complex and they can always call into their local council and get free advice.
 
TheRed said:
ONQ

I discussed three options in descending order of expense and reliability.

1. copperfasten legal document s.5 declaration
Click to expand...
It won't do so unless its been carefully put together to cover all the matters raised.
Its quite possible to get a Section 5 that doesn't cover the necessary issues.
Worse its quite possible to word it so that it looks like it does cover things, but doesn't.
An Opinion does what it says on the can.
A set of Opinions - Planning and Building Regulations - are what is normally required by solicitors to support a conveyance.
This set offers an assurance that the building will not become subject to enforcement action under the Planning or Building Control Acts.
I agree that in terms of offering an assurance in relation to the built work it can be limited, and it is usually usually subject to visual inspection only, but a good set of Schedule A assurances helps round out its authority.

A Report may also be subject to visual inspection save where noted.
However a Report tends to be far more in depth and specific and can include opening up works and tests of the building.

Addressing loss due to negligence in either the Opinion or the Report requires taking a Civil Action, but not demanding the Opinions or not commissioning a report means there may be no one to sue - the builder/developer may have flown the coop for example.
It is cold comfort to suggest that because it costs money to press a civil suit, it isn't worth getting an opinion.
On the contrary, caveat emptor applies and people are entitled to rely on Opinions when making a purchase and to commission reports for their peace of mind.

Any claim for professional negligence will be based on these Opinions/ reports and that's assuming the report was defective.

More often than not when I am called to inspect I discover defects in the building, both patent and latent which may be used to good advantage by the client.
I am an expert witness of more than ten years standing in the profession.
If you try to go after a builder for defects without a report by someone like me, you may not succeed in court.
And no, I don't just offer testimony - a photographic record of the defects is normally included in a booklet to the client whose solicitor or barrister may request more in depth work.
3. DIY. Made poster aware that there are caveats but am in favour of people educating themselves about their exempted development rights. Generally, they are not complex and they can always call into their local council and get free advice.
Click to expand...
Its important for people with a technical bent to realise that not everyone is so inclined - what they may take for granted, namely their own abilities to read drawings, understand technical language and interpret planning, building control and other branches of law - can sometimes be beyond the reach of the layperson.

For example, you don't just say things like "lots of caveats apply" - take the time to make people aware of the limitations of your advice, and don't be afraid to call if if you feel they have misunderstood you.

My sig file is available [apart from the web address!] for inclusion in your post if you feel you want to cover yourself when offering professional advice. Perhaps you could improve it.

ONQ.

[broken link removed]

All advice on AAM is remote from the situation and cannot be relied upon as a defence or support - in and of itself - should legal action be taken.
Competent legal and building professionals should be asked to advise in Real Life with rights to inspect and issue reports on the matters at hand.
 
Thanks to you both for the very comprehensive replies.

ONQ, I was in no way suggesting that I was being ripped off, I was just investigating what options were available to me in satisfying this requirement. I have already got a comprehensive engineers report on the building itself for defects etc But I did not stipulate the inclusion of a detailed planning search and now I think I should heed 'Caveat Emtor' and ensure there are no outstanding enforements so if I decide to sell in the future there would be nothing to delay the process.
 
Hi Teknon,

You should heed caveat emptor, but...
Its up to the Vendor to supply Opinions of Compliance and a Building Energy Rating [BER] Certificate, not you.
Its up to you you to have the place properly inspected and this doesn't stop at structure and drainage.
Notwithstanding TheRed's comment on Opinions, they are simply not a comprehensive an assurance as an Architects Report.
Matters such fire sealing, insulation, interstitial ventilation and radon gas extracts are things which can be overlooked in structural reports.

I hope it goes well for you in the end and you might let us know how you get on.

ONQ.

[broken link removed]

All advice on AAM is remote from the situation and cannot be relied upon as a defence or support - in and of itself - should legal action be taken.
Competent legal and building professionals should be asked to advise in Real Life with rights to inspect and issue reports on the matters at hand.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register