Rear Extension causing retention on mortgage...What is needed???

[Emily Burton]

Hi, as I am struggling to get any advice from the valuation surveyor I was hoping to get a guide here... I am purchasing a 2 bed mid terraced house built approx 1982. From the living room, there is then a small extension which is open plan to the lounge (no inner doors separate the areas) and then there is double glazed patio doors onto the garden.

The mortgage valuation survey has placed a retention on the property stating that the extension does not meet habitable requirements. The only detail provided is:

Rear extension is constructed of timber frame with external timber cladding and insulated plasterboard internally. Not thought ot be of habitable standard.

And to release the retention:

To upgrade the rear extension to comply with habitable requirements or demolish it and reinstate rear patio doors

If anyone has any ideas on what the regulations/requirements may be to upgrade I would be very grateful

 

[tony1851]

1. How does the surveyor know that it's 'not to habitable standard'? There are plenty of timber-framed domestic extensions and houses.

2. It would not need to be demolished or 'upgraded'. Just fitting external-grade doors between the lounge and extension would suffice.

That would solve any statutory requirements, but would it satisfy the mortgage company?

 

[Emily Burton]

Thank you tony1851, I was guessing it would be some sort of energy efficiency requirement needing the doors between as you have suggested. The strange thing is that the extension was already in place when it was brought by the seller and this has no issues at the time.

 

[tony1851]

If you really want the property, just confirm with the mortgage people that it's a conservatory, and fit separating doors.

In terms of any possible enforcement action by the council, forget that - it will be well out of time by now.

And don't be pursuaded to buy any useless indemnity insurance.

 

[^woody^]

A timber frame can be adequate for meeting building regulations, but it's not clear what the surveyor means by 'habitable standard'.

That is a vague term and is really meaningless in this context.

I'd argue that it's habitable under various housing regulations if it's weathertight and dry. If dry, it would be habitable under the various Housing Acts and fit to rent out under landlord and tenant law too. None of these apply in the context of a private sale, but neither does the definition of habitable. But you could say that it is habitable under the 1957 Housing Act s4 (1) for instance which lists eight criteria for fitness.

Meeting building regulations is a different matter. Yes you can put the doors back to separate the house from extension, but what does that do to the property description and value? Presumably it's being marketed, valued and lent upon as an extended property. Will the mortgage company release the full amount on an unextended property due to sealing the extension off?

Perhaps you need another response from a surveyor to comment in your favour. But would the lender accept this?

 

[Emily Burton]

It does say the following:

The remaining ££££ can be released following evidence of completion of necessary works listed by the chartered surveyor. The works to be carried out are as follows:

·To upgrade the rear extension to comply with habitable requirements or demolish it and reinstate rear patio doors.

In order for the applicant to draw down these funds they would have to contact and a re-inspection of the property would be instructed. On receipt of a suitable re-inspection report confirming the works have been completed we would release the rest of the funds

So I read this as they would be releasing the full amount on an unextended property due to sealing off...

Nowhere in the house brochure is the extension mentioned and the area has actually been included as part of the living room area.

 

[^woody^]

For ease then, get hold of some cheap doors and instal them in the opening. Just make sure they are external grade.

One potential issue with this, is that a clued up lender/surveyor will be looking for these to have been installed as a proper external installation - ie via a FENSA installer or a building regulation application. Then you need to explain why you are not demolishing the extension. Afterwards, you may choose to remove the doors.

Or explore a surveyors report stating that the extension does comply. Cost wise, this could be a much cheaper option, but it relies on the lender accepting it, or if not, you being persistent.

 

[geraldthehamster]

I'd want to know what the surveyor thinks makes it not to a habitable standard. If it's a matter of the amount of insulation in the walls or the roof, that could be quite easy to remedy. It's hard to know without a more detailed description (or photo) of the structure.

Cheers
Richard

 

[Emily Burton]

.

 

[geraldthehamster]

It's very sunny. Can't see much more than that

Cheers
Richard

 

[Nakajo]

Nice weather where you are. Love the candles. Hate the sofa.

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

Where are the candles? I can't see any candles!

 

[geraldthehamster]

I can't see any picture now

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

Here's a pic of the outside though, it's no wonder the surveyor said it was uninhabitable!

 

[Nakajo]

Hang on - that's a hair salon. I think the relevant authorities should be informed.