1992 Building Regs Loft Conversion

[sparer]

Hi.
I'm about to buy a 1950's bungalow that has had a large loft conversion. It doesn't have any building regs certificate and was done in 1992. Apparently, the local council can issue retrospective consent using the regs in force at that time. I think its known as 'regularisation'. Question is, what were the regs at the time and how do they differ from today.

It has a proper staircase with banisters and has a boarded floor and plasterboard walls. From what I remember from viewings, there is a ledge both sides of the loft indicating the existence of perlins running the length.

The staircase opens directly into the room with no doors but a bungalow doesn't need a protected route, right?

I have a builder looking at it with me this weekend to make sure it is structurally sound but I want to know the nuances of the regs in force at the time so that I can estimate whether it will pass an inspection unmodified. This will allow me to determine whether to get the vendors to do it or whether I can take the risk myself. Moving date is very soon so there isn't time to make changes before the move date.

Can anyone help?

Thanks in advance.

 

[maltaron]

I assume some of the regs people will correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that planning permission is defunct after 4 years and building regs after 10 years, so I would assume that your local BC will not be interested.

 

[sparer]

Thanks Maltaron,
Yes that's the advice we have although I want to avoid the same to-ing and fro-ing when I come sell the property.

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

Really? I would tell you to clear off if I was the vendor, it could be a huge can of worms you are opening and what can a builder tell you? Or are you going to make holes in the floor and the roof to find out how the structure was modified? Is he a structural engineer on the side? Regularisation is a world of pain. What do you do if you find that the structure is undersized according to an SE’s calculations yet in reality are adequate? Rip out the ceiling/floor to fit new? The list goes on ….

 

[sparer]

Freddy, a builder can look into the space in the eves and tell me if the thinks that the joists will support the floor. He could look at the perlins and tell me if they look like they are well supported. Basically, he can provide an eye that is more trained than mine. Sure he isn't a SE but he should be able to spot any glaring problems.

We stopped the vendor going to BC because we are aware that regularlisation is likely to be a big issue. They didn't understand the implications of doing that.

Do you have any advise about what I should be looking for to meet the regs in force in 1992?

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

It’s a wonder the regulations and designers exist when builders can have a quick look at something and say whether it is adequate or not.

 

[sparer]

More of a comfort than an absolute Freddy. Like I said, i'm just looking to check it's not a death trap.

Did you have any advise because you answered a question that I didn't ask.

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

It hasn’t fallen down yet has it? One could assume it won’t anytime soon. Structural requirements haven’t really changed.

 

[sparer]

Yep true Freddy. Thanks for your input.

 

[RonnyRaygun]

It doesn't really matter what the regs were on a given date if all you want to do is find out whether or not it's a death trap.

There are old properties up and down the country that were built long before building regs came in that have been standing for over 100 years. They might not pass today's regs but they aren't all death traps.

Chances are it isn't as it's been standing satisfactorily for the last twenty years. Even if the joists are undersized it's not likely to fall down. You might just have a slightly springy floor. If there is a dormer then there should probably be a ridge beam. That is important as without it the roof can spread.

Best thing you can do is get a full survey done. If the surveyor thinks there are issues worth investigating further then (s)he will recommend getting an SE in.

Structural engineers can only really comment on structural issues. There could be many other issues a surveyor might pick up that could be safety risks, such as size / angle of staircase for a start. But again, many old cottages have extremely steep, narrow staircases with no headroom and people still live in them perfectly happily.

As Freddy says, you'll be opening a huge can of worms if you go for full regularisation. It's not worth it.

 

[sparer]

So the general consensus is that because it has been standing for 15 odd years it will probably be ok. Doing anything with BC is a no-no and in any case would probably be just and expensive 'academic' exercise even if 1992 regs were applied.

I'll just stop worrying because I like the house enough for this to be a bit of a non-issue (as long as my builder/structural engineer/surveyor thinks it's ok ). I just hope any potential buyer thinks the same when I come to sell it.

Thanks for everyone's input.

 

[tony1851]

[quote="sparer";p="2715269" I just hope any potential buyer thinks the same when I come to sell it.

.[/quote]

When you come to sell, it will be even less of a problem.

It is said that legal defects in a building are the only defects that get better over time.