Pre 63 permission

We have a house built in 1880. Out the back when we bought it there was an extension that was built pre 63. It did not need planning permission because of this. The extension itself was sub standard and we knocked it down and rebuilt it. The rebuilt extension is actually smaller than the old one so no planning permission was needed for this either. Here's the problem. We are now selling our house and the buyers want to an architects certificate of exemption from planning permission. Becasue the extension was built pre 63 it did not need documentation and it isn't on the deeds. But because there is no documentation, there is no proof that the original structure was built pre 63. How does this work?

I suspect you know the answer yourself.

There was a re-63 extension. You knocked it down. There is now an extension that is not pre-63. Your purchasers need to be satisfied, in relation to this development, that
a. No planning permission was needed.
b. When the works were done.
c. If the works were done in compliance with Building Regs/Building Bye Laws - much will depend on where the property is located and when the works were done.

You need a qualified architect/engineer to inspect and confirm the position in an Opinion/Certificate. And if it turns out that you needed planning permission, you are into an application for retention.

mf

Sigh. I was hoping for a "ah sure it'll be grand". But your'e right, I kind of knew the answer already. We have a guy coming out in the morning.
Fingers crossed so.
Stressful buying and selling houses isn't it?
Thanks for you prompt reply.

Bear in mind that even if exempt from planning, it must comply with Building Regs if done since 1992. Make sure you get both aspects certified - it is commonplace, but not particularly necessary, for it to be done as two separate certificates (I think simply because many architects\engineers have a standard template for an 'exempted development' certificate which they have been using since before the Building Regs were passed)