planning requirement for reinstatement after fire ?

A query that hopefully some might be able to offer an opinion or advise on. Our house burned down during late September and approx half is completely burned out with roof gone and some walls fractured and holed and others in various stages of collapse remainder of house is very badly smoke etc damaged. After initial issues with insurer they finally agreed to provide indemnity but then proceded to argue re a scope of works. At our own cost we employed an architect to appraise the building and he advised that parts would require demolition due to their unsoundness. He also advised that as a result planning may be required (Co Kildare)

This was notified to insurer who inspected with their own engineer who agreed that some walls needed demolition and rebuilding however he queried the foundation requirements as outlined by our architect and requested inspection pits be dug. He also doubted that planning would be required and that one might be able to try a section 5 for exemption. Pits were dug showing very old and unusable foundations and this was notified to insurer.

In order to ensure all aspects were covered properly I discussed with a planning consultant and he felt it may not be a runner for exemption and advised that the best route to obtain definitive answer was to discuss with Co Council.

We duly contacted Kildare CC who I must saw have been very helpful and requested their opinion on whether planning is required to rebuild the house as it was. They advised that planning is required and that there are no exemptions that allow re instatement .

Our Loss Assessors to my surprise and the Insurance Companies Loss Adjuster seem to have their own opinon and think we should just agree a figure and proceed to build and adopt the option of build away and maybe the council wont notice and if they do we can deal with them then.

I have to say I dont like that idea as it has many unknowns and implications and I feel that they are just attempting to avoid some additional costs .

Can anyone offer an opinion or advise please as ive noticed some engineers and architects stating on sites that planning is required.

Many Thanks in advance

Hi Roncor, welcome to AAM. I have edited your thread title to better reflect your issue, this will assist you get a better response.

My advice, get everything in writing. Are the insurance company willing to state their position in writing? What will they say if you show them the council's position in writing?

Thanks Leo,

I have given our loss assessors copies of letters both to and from Kildare CC .

I simply find it unbelievable that an Insurer or its agents would expect us to knowingly break planning requirements while they will insist on us complying with all their requirements and attempted initially to find a way around providing cover by attempting to say that we were not complying with all policy conditions which thankfully they had to back down on as their assertions were spurious.

I would be concerned of implications from KCC considering we are quite aware of the requirements.

Sorry if this is a dumb question, but do the insurance company really care about whether you rebuild or not?

I'd have thought their responsibility is to pay you for the agreed reinstatement value, and then it's up to you what you do with it. You can use it to rebuild, or to buy a new house, or blow it on the Grand National.

I've no direct experience, so I'm just speaking in theory, based on experiences with other types of insurance, but is that not how it works? I can't see why an insurance company would get involved in a planning issue.

It would be a criminal offence to build something without Permission that requires Permission.
What the Insurers are suggesting you to do is illegal.

You should make a bigger issue of that at the least.