Is a bellcast drip essential?

[jasper80]

I had a rear extension done some time ago on a detached house and building control didn't sign it off as apparently it didn't have a bellcast drip at the bottom of the extension. The design is quite modern and in other areas, building control seem more relaxed about this for some reason.
I wonder if this details is absolutely essential? I can't seem to find the requirement pdf to explain what it is supposed to do and what it looks like. I lived in the house for almost 4 years now with no problems however I want to get the house signed off so will probably have to get it done somehow.
I don't presume this is DIY job? (I am not a builder.)
I attached the file of what the bottom of the extension looks like.
Thanks.

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

I think you will find that the actual issue is that the render breaches the dpc which theoretically should be 150mm above the ground level and that is a pretty clear breach of Building Regs. In theory you could just cut the render at dpc level and gun it off below the dpc level. but of course some exploration would be required to determine exactly where the dpc is and whatever masonry is below the dpc will at best be left looking a bit shabby having had render chipped off it and at worst will be some hideous concrete block. Or maybe you'd be lucky and it would just fall off with a little persuasion. Guess even if it was horrible it could be tidied and painted though. Is it a cavity wall? You got any photos or any other clues from when it was being built? You could DIY if you wanted, depends on your skill level ......

That said you are well beyond any timescale whereby any legal action could be taken for not complying so does it really matter?

If you are thinking of selling then some buyers may be concerned so if you really want piece of mind and sign-off you'd have to suck it up and get it sorted.

You could start with speaking with Building Control and ask if they are prepared to sign it off anyway, there are millions of properties around the country where the render breaches the dpc and they don't leak so you never know, you might get an accommodating inspector .....

You should have posted in Building BTW, I'll ask the mods to move your thread.

 

[jasper80]

Many thanks for your reply.

"You got any photos or any other clues from when it was being built?"

The actual house was built around 1930s. The extension was added between 3-4 years ago.
I attach a photo of the old bit of the house, merging into the extension. The old bit clearly has something like that. But the builder doing the extension previously told me that in all those years building rear extensions, they never had a problem doing it this way and regs never complained (this was in other areas).

"That said you are well beyond any timescale whereby any legal action could be taken for not complying so does it really matter?"

Apologies for being a total noob here (and this is perhaps more of a legal question) but could you expand on the above comment?
What happens if I just leave things as they are (we are also not thinking of selling the house within the next 20-30 years). Is this something that is illegal to not have the final sign off because of this small detail? To be honest, I was very busy in the last 3 years with travels and living abroad and it was something on my to-do list but I never got around sorting it out. My preferred way to deal with it would be to leave it but I am not quite certain if there will be repercussions. Or perhaps my mortgage provider or home insurance would boycott or something else I am not aware off.
In which case of course I'll make sure to get it sorted. In any case, I arranged for a building inspector to come around tomorrow and find out exactly what needs to be done. (Previously my builder was dealing with them but after they finished, they vanished or were too busy and I couldn't get hold of them).

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

The builder was a muppet, it’s completely bizarre that he didn’t do a render stop to match the existing! At worst he was an idiot, at best he was saving a few pounds avoiding fitting a stop and painting the plinth, it makes non sense. I would maybe question his work elsewhere on the build, was the dpc too high maybe, assuming one actually exists, no matter you are where you are.

There is a timescale (one year I recall) whereby you become immune from any legal action taken by building Control, so there is no danger of them ever getting funny.

When you come to sell, the solicitor will do a search and discover that the works were not signed off prompting the question why. A pragmatic fellow will conclude that seeing as the works were 30 years before that if there had been a problem it would have been sorted in that timescale. So why do anything about it?

No one can say if this will really cause a problem in the future, as you’ve seemingly not had a problem yet you could take the view that won’t. Assuming it’s a traditional cavity wall and there is a cavity tray and the cavity is not full of debris/mortar/coke cans/crisp packets and the render is in good condition then breaching the dpc is unlikely to be a problem, let’s say some water ingress occurs, it still has a cavity to breach. Though if there was a problem that required an insurance claim then it will be rejected if this is the cause.

That said, as your existing plinth is conveniently painted black it would not be that difficult to chop some render off (unless the render is rubbish and falls off in great chunks in which case that would probably be good to discover now anyway) and paint the masonry plinth black. But as mentioned some investigation would be required to see where the dpc is.

 

[^woody^]

In context, building regulations are only there to make sure homes are built safely.

If you know the build is OK and don't have any issues, then a completion certificate is irrelevant. Yes, it's a technical breach, but insignificant.

In the future, I certainly would not worry about a lack of completion certificate for work completed 30 years ago.

You might find that the render fails in a few years anyway, forcing a repair. I'd wait until it does if there are no problems now.

 

[jasper80]

Just had a building inspector in and apparently that detail is a 'major statutory requirement'. The weird thing, the only rising damp issues we experienced in those 4 years were right after the renovation, but only in the old part of the house where the bellcast is actually present! (this was sorted). Never had any issues with the new bits!
The builder was very good: it's just that the design of the extension is quite modern (photo of rear extension attached) and this detail wouldn't look right. (The front bit is more traditional while the back is mainly contemporary. It works). They have built many extensions like these and the regs never complained. I think our inspector is just tough.
I'm trying to work out what's the best thing to do now and whether the certificate is that important if we are not selling the house for many years. If however the insurance would not pay out because of this or if there are any other potential complications, then it's a different issue.
Shame about ruining the design though.
How many days of work would this take btw? I will try and get hold of my builders again.
thx

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

I wouldn't bother touching it.

 

[^woody^]

There is a strong argument that the DPC and render crossing it on the external leaf of a cavity wall is not an issue as it can not lead to damp on the internal room side of the wall. So your situation would not contravene Part C of the b/regs (resistance to moisture).

As for insurance, this situation would only affect your insurance if it played a material part in the "risk" or if it played a part in any claim. So I can't see how it could affect your insurance unless you try and claim for dampness - which you probably could not claim for in the first place.

Its probably 20 hours of work spread over several days. The problem would be in blending a retrospective bellcast in with the render, and getting the render removed below DPC and making it presentable

If push came to shove, I'd just disk cut a slot at DPC level and seal it with polysulphide mastic. That will do exactly the same job as any bellcast detail

 

[jasper80]

"So your situation would not contravene Part C of the b/regs (resistance to moisture)."

Thanks for the info. Do you by any chance have a link to the relevant document? I bet the building surveyor will love it, me being a smarta$$ and questioning his assessment...