Surveyor did not identify need for certificate of building compliance - any comeback?

P

pbyrne

Registered User
Messages
103
Hi,

Can anybody tell me what the situation would be in terms of chasing a surveyor who did not identify a major problem with a house during their inspection/report. The house is purchased and the deal done but we have now uncovered what should have been a very basic problem for him to identify.

In our situation the attic had been converted as a DIY job - so no structural steel or anything like that. We only found out recently that we should have requested and obtained a certificate of building compliance for the conversion to indicate that it was done to the building regulations.

The surveyor at the time made absolutely no mention of this problem and I would have thought it would be on their checklist. Of course the surveyor asked we sign a waiver which basically said - you are on your own if you have problems afterwards!

We are considering legal advice but would be interested to hear from anybody who may have been in a similar situation.


pbyrne
 
Re: Surveyor did not identify need for certificate of building compliance - any comeb

While it does seem a little bit slack on the part of the surveyor, issues like this should be covered in the conveyancing process. The standard contract would oblige the vendor (if the work was done since 1992) to provide evidence of compliance with Building Regulations. If they did not do so, and if their contract did not specifically exclude doing so, they are in contractual breach. My own view is that best practice would be for your own solicitor to ask you if the house was in its original 'as built' state or if there appeared to be additions or alterations. However, the industry norm is that the burden rests with the Vendor, by way of quite sweeping warranties in the standard contract. The buyer's solicitor is only put on notice if the warranties are diluted or abridged by way of special conditions in the contract.

So - bottom line: if this was pre 1992, tough (unless in a city where building bye laws applied - whole separate story then). If it is since 1992, Vendors are in breach of contract unless they have a contractual term (i.e. a special condition) limiting their warranties and resultant liability. If they limited their warrnaties and your solicitor did not draw your attention to this at the consultation prior to signing contract, then it was a bit slack on his\her part.

This all pre-supposes, of course that the sale was on foot of the standard Law Society contract.
 
Re: Surveyor did not identify need for certificate of building compliance - any comeb

Hi MOB,

Thanks very much for the detailed reply, according to our documentation the conversion was performed in the early 1980s. City is Dublin - do you know off the top of your head whether any bye-laws would have been applicable then?

I noticed an interesting thing in the contract - it states:

"The Vendor has furnished all planning documentation in her possession and does not warrant that the said developments have been carried out in accordance with the Planning legislation
and the Purchasers will make their own enquiries and satisfy themselves in this regard. The provisions of General Condition no. 36 herein shall not apply to any of the aforesaid developments and is amended in this regard. No declaration of any nature will be provided by the Vendor in respect of planning."

So that looks to be the vendor's solicitor covering themselves.

Then the surveyor says in their waiver:

"5. We will not make any enquiries with local Planning Authorities or other statutory agencies."

So that's them covering themselves possibly

Finally - our solicitor said:

"....when purchasing a second hand dwelling the Vendor has no legal obligation to disclose any structural problems. Accordingly, you must satisfy yourselves that all structural issues relating to the property are in order"
So that's them covering themselves!!

From your comments above I can see that the vendor did not have an obligation to disclose anything to us since it was pre-1992, our own solicitor said at the time we should satisfy ourselves - and I would have said that the responsibility fell on the shoulders of the surveyor to point out that the conversion was not in compliance with regulations and might need remedial work? Especially when they go to the trouble of pointing out small things like "the ceilings in the bedrooms are cracked" - without following that up to explain that they are cracked because the floor of the attic is resting on the ceiling joists!
 
Re: Surveyor did not identify need for certificate of building compliance - any comeb

Hi All ,

This isnt a reply to the original question but i recently converted my
own attic and thought that p.p wasnt required if ther was no velux
to the front of the house,is this correct?.

Also i am happy that the conversion is structually sound and done
to the proper standards but i dont have a cert of compliance as the
job was carried out by a family friend (builder).

Will i run into difficulties if decide to sell in the future?

Any replies appreciated.
 
Re: Surveyor did not identify need for certificate of building compliance - any comeb


It's likely you will.... you should get a professional involved to ensure your attic conversion was carried out in accordance with current building regs.

Joejoe
 
Re: Surveyor did not identify need for certificate of building compliance - any comeb

Hi,

Does anybody else with knowledge in this area know whether the surveyor should have reported that the conversion was not in compliance with the regulations?

I can see from MOB's comment that the vendor was not responsible for highlighting it - it feels incorrect though that the surveyor would not mention it, surely if the building is not structurally sound they have a duty to report that to you?
 
Re: Surveyor did not identify need for certificate of building compliance - any comeb

Just a quick addendum to this - I was planning on buying attic flooring from B&Q to make it easier to get to the water tank and use the loft for storage. Its a small loft, and it won't be converted into a room or anything. Is this a bad idea then? I had assumed that screwing them into the ceiling joists was all that was needed.
 
Re: Surveyor did not identify need for certificate of building compliance - any comeb

we floored out attic. It is great for storage only thing is you do end up keeping a lot of crap in case it might come in handy some day. It is a tough job though I remember the sweat pouring off hubby as attics get very hot!! We also put in a staire folding stairs - excellent.
 
Re: Surveyor did not identify need for certificate of building compliance - any comeb

In an ideal world that should be all that's needed, but I will bet you a pound to a pinch of, eh, snuff that the ceiling joists won't be spaced properly to allow you to do that.

I had to counter-batten with 2x1's over the joists first, then attach the attic flooring to the battens. An extra bit of work, but not a big deal.

Its well worth doing, but as previous poster observed it has turned me into a squirrel.

N.B. This is not an attic conversion, its not living space, and is different to the issue raised by OP.
 
Re: Surveyor did not identify need for certificate of building compliance - any comeb


Cool - I was worried that I would run afoul of some rules when reselling.
 
Re: Surveyor did not identify need for certificate of building compliance - any comeb

joejoe said:
It's likely you will.... you should get a professional involved to ensure your attic conversion was carried out in accordance with current building regs.

Joejoe
Click to expand...
 
Re: Surveyor did not identify need for certificate of building compliance - any comeb

Hi Joejoe
Thanks for reply, when you say professional who do i need to get to
check the conversion to make sure it's sound?

Thanks
sissoko.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register