Home purchase - Porch, but no planning history?

[Adam11]

Hello,

I'm a first-time buyer looking to buy my first home but I've come across what might be a bit of an issue.
I've just had a level 3 survey done and the surveyor raised that he believes the porch was built after the property's construction and having since contacted my local authorities building and planning, as well as their archives, and they hold no records of planning permission requests.
In addition to this, they also hold no original layout plans for the property and the seller doesn't have them either, so there's nothing to refer to in order to prove or disprove the original building plans.
The seller has agreed to pay for building regulations indemnity insurance, although the survey has raised concerns with the foundations, stating he believes the damp proofing isn't 150mm above the surface level creating the potential of water ingress, as well as a watermark on the ceiling inside of the porch.

As mentioned, I've contacted my LA building and planning who hold no records for the property and I'm at a loss where to look from here. I'd really appreciate any advice and/or pointers on where to look, or what to do from here.

Thanks in advance.

 

[DAZB]

May be worth finding some historical maps of the area or even talking to neighbours etc who may have more knowledge.

 

[blup]

Is the porch with pd limits, in which case not a problem. If outside pd then you can ask for an ldc if it is more than 4 years old. Your surveyor should be on the ball about this, surely. Building regs you have covered with insurance. If you really like the property don't be put off, you can always knock something off the price.

Blup

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

Indemnity is a complete waste of money, especially as you've already contacted BC, anyway sounds like a load of usual unknowledgeable surveyor rubbish.

 

[Adam11]

May be worth finding some historical maps of the area or even talking to neighbours etc who may have more knowledge.

I've found pictures of the property which display the porch in clear view as far back as 2008, but I was thinking the same in a friendly introduction and slight questioning of the potential future neighbours!

Is the porch with pd limits, in which case not a problem. If outside pd then you can ask for an ldc if it is more than 4 years old. Your surveyor should be on the ball about this, surely. Building regs you have covered with insurance. If you really like the property don't be put off, you can always knock something off the price.

Blup

I'm not exactly sure when the porch was constructed, but the seller bought the house in 2016 and reports it to be in the condition and structure as when bought.
There are images on Google maps and such of the property in 2008 with the porch present, so there's direct line of site evidence of it being at least 15 years old.

Indemnity is a complete waste of money, especially as you've already contacted BC, anyway sounds like a load of usual unknowledgeable surveyor rubbish.

I haven't specified why I wanted the building plans, just that I was buying the property and was requesting access to information publicly available.
Can I ask why this would impact the indemnity?
And if possible, what a more knowledgeable answer would have been?
I'm very new to all of this, and my only information to go on is the report and what has been provided to me so far.

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

Because once you inform BC that works have been carried it the indemnity is invalid. Anyway more relevant is that the indemnity only covers your legal costs if BC happened to decide to take legal action to force you to carry out structural repairs on the porch if it turned out the porch was say about to collapse and they got wind of it but I'm not sure that's ever happened, as mentioned a complete waste of money but keeps the stupid solicitors happy and the insurers in work. It does not cover any costs whatsoever for any shoddy workmanship.

 

[Adam11]

Because once you inform BC that works have been carried it the indemnity is invalid. Anyway more relevant is that the indemnity only covers your legal costs if BC happened to decide to take legal action to force you to carry out structural repairs on the porch if it turned out the porch was say about to collapse and they got wind of it but I'm not sure that's ever happened, as mentioned a complete waste of money but keeps the stupid solicitors happy and the insurers in work. It does not cover any costs whatsoever for any shoddy workmanship.

Ah, I follow you now. I did anticipate that disclosing this may be an admission of prior conditions, and subsequently increased chance of inspection and enforcements. I haven't formalised anything to be of concern, so I'm hoping that without any specific reason behind requesting planning permissions and building plans that they wouldn't have sufficient reason to suspect anything in particular.

I was unaware that it was only legal fees which the policy covered. I thought it would have also been any remedial works required on the back of any regulatory enforcement. Thank you for that.


Does the fact I have evidence of it standing in excess of 15 years alleviate any potentials of enforcement or removals?
As mentioned above, after 4 years an LDC may be applied for and there's photographs spanning 15 years.

One additional thing that may be worth mentioning here as well is I found a post on here from 2016 which stated a porch less than 3m2 wouldn't require planning permission.
This porch is quite small, small enough to take one step inside before being in the very middle of it.
I'll contact the surveyor in the morning and ask if he took measurements.
If this is the case, hopefully it could ease any building enforcement? But the problems still remain with the damp course proofing suspicions (no invasive methods used, surveyor suspects it but isnt certain) and wet patch on the ceiling.

 

[Bosswhite]

I thought Building regs on Porch`s and conservatories had been relaxed depending on size, several years ago . no Planning permission was required , the Surveyor should be aware of this , .

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

Enforcement just won't happen, it became immune from a planning perspective 4 years after it was built, BC can similarly be discounted given when it was built although BC can intervene at any point with regards to structure but as mentioned that just doesn't happen for stuff like this, it's a theoretical problem. But as mentioned it could be small enough to have not needed planning anyway.

 

[Adam11]

I thought Building regs on Porch`s and conservatories had been relaxed depending on size, several years ago . no Planning permission was required , the Surveyor should be aware of this , .

I read very similar earlier today in a past post - Thank you however for confirming this information!

Enforcement just won't happen, it became immune from a planning perspective 4 years after it was built, BC can similarly be discounted given when it was built although BC can intervene at any point with regards to structure but as mentioned that just doesn't happen for stuff like this, it's a theoretical problem. But as mentioned it could be small enough to have not needed planning anyway.

This is very reassuring to hear. I'll very likely be conducting repairs on the porch and remedying the deficiencies (namely the potential roofing water ingress) regardless, but it's reassuring to know that there's a very improbable imminent, or future circumstance in which this becomes of consequence.


Thanks to everyone who took the time to reply - The response and information have been invaluable in helping, and putting my mind at ease.

 

[charliegolf]

Use google earth* to establish the time of build. If longer than 4 years, forget about it (if you want the house.)

*There is a history button.

 

[Millwright]

I would always say, with things such as this, decide if you want the house or not. It may seem like a big issue right now, but it really isn't. So otherwise if you like the house and the area, don't worry too much about it.

 

[johnny2007]

Never heard of a local authority to enforce anything on a 15 year old porch, or extension.
I think your only problem is the dpc too low and the possible roof leak.
Dpc too low could be due to slabs on slabs raising the outside floor, not uncommon.
Wet patch on ceiling, possibly a roof leak, not a massive problem considering it's a small porch (not difficult to access and small area).
If you like the house don't be put off by this porch.
I bought my house with an undeclared single skin extension (indemnity insurance).
It was so bad that 2 years later I knocked it down and rebuilt it under PD.

 

[Adam11]

Just to provide an update -

I spoke to the surveyor via phone call today and he was significantly more informative and explained everything thoroughly.

His concerns were as follows -

Porch -
He stated he was unaware if it was a conservation area, or if the title deeds prohibited development without permission.
- One wall has a moisture reading of 800 making it completely saturated and probable of no DPC
- He's concerned with cracking on the joint between the porch and property, that it wasn't secured properly and is separating.
- He's reporting he believes the water ingress in the ceiling is from separation from property creating gaps for rain runoff to travel down the wall of the property, and into the roof of the porch.


Internal/external walls -
- Damp in walls, with average readings in mid-high 200's
- This is primarily downstairs, leaving him to believe failing DPC without any certificates of DPC renewal.
- External vents sealed, moisture in walls, and no history of cavity wall tie replacement or maintenance - Property was built between 67-75.
- Signs of early lintel failure in some windows, with obvious lintel corrosion above the kitchen door

Unfortunately, this wasn't very well documented within the report. There were references to damp, but no direct ties to causes, as was the same with a lot of other information since provided during the phone call.

I think it's re-negotiation time, because while I like the property, it's getting to the point of a probability some, or all of the above will completely fail in the not-so-distant future.

 

[mrrusty]

External vents sealed, moisture in walls, and no history of cavity wall tie replacement or maintenance - Property was built between 67-75.

If he's referring to cavity vents, then they need opening up. They are there for a reason - to provide air circulation within the cavity to evaporate any moisture from a) the inner skin caused by condensation or b) on the outer skin caused by penetration and/or condensation.

Since when did anyone ever "maintain" cavity wall ties? how do you do that? - why would they need replacing? occasionally ties do need doing, but not very often, and there are usually obvious other signs of failure.

I'd take "no DPC" in a house built in 70's with a pinch of salt - very very unlikely. High readings could be condensation caused by the way the occupants live, or even a bit of salt contamination from coal burning. "damp meters" only measure resistance, things other than water can give positive results.

Is the cracking between porch and wall a huge crack perhaps wider at the top than bottom? or a little thin crack that could be harmless settlement of different structures? The damp in the porch might well be because a cavity tray hasn't been installed - often people take a chance because installing a tray can be a PITA.

However, it's an older house, and may well need a little remedial work. I don't know where you are, but houses round me are selling well - next door to us is a refurbished 1902 semi that has just sold at £10K over the developers asking price.

I'll make a prediction - unless your seller is desperate to sell to you, they will not negotiate and will, if you push too hard, re-market the property. Sorry to be negative, but if you expect to find a 50 year old house that an a****-covering surveyor can't find a few things to write about and doesn't need a bit of maintenance, you are going to wait a very very long time.