Missing building reg certificate

[newcysi]

Hi, I'm a newbie so apologies up-front for a lack of general knowledge - I'm trying my best to get up to speed!

I've had an offer accepted on a house. Homebuyer survey came back with a lot of issues. Some I am taking a view on and some I'm getting looked at by contractors to quote.

The house was modestly extended prior to the current owners buying it. They, in turn, have gutted the kitchen and extension, installing a new roof to the extended part, and removing what was the original outer wall (by then internal but obviously still structural). They seem to have tried to do it all officially and well, having comisioned an architect to advise on the reinforced girders required and load calculations. They applied for building regs approval and have had inspections to to look at the removal of the structural wall, but the two problems I detect are:
1) They didn't get the final inspection done, so no certificate.
2) There are jobs which weren't on the original plan, namely the new extension roof (pitched), reconfiguration and replacement of kitchen appliance set up and installation of an additional wall leaf between the garage and extension (presumably to allow appropriate insulation, but has ended up partially covering a drain - see pic - access maintained by a low level lintel - no foundations but not load bearing).

The points under (2) above have not been inspected at all (confirmed by inspector). The sparky also didn't leave any sort of certification for the new light fittings and appliance installation.

As I say, I think they were well intentioned but haven't really seen this all the way through. Assuming they get final inspection of the wall removal approved and certificate issue, am I being overly picky if I request regularisation of the other points? I'm concerned both about remediation costs for me (probably unlikely but the works were only undertaken last summer), problems getting further work certified if existing work isn't yet and also the resale factors.

Sadly it is a separation, hence the short property ownership period. Sorry for such a long post, wanted to give the background in full. It's similar to some other posts, but timeframes are shorter than any I've found elsewhere on here. All advice greatly received.

Untitled

• newcysi
• 28 Jan 2013
• 1

Untitled

• newcysi
• 28 Jan 2013
• 1

Untitled

• newcysi
• 28 Jan 2013
• 1

 

[PrenticeBoyofDerry]

If you have spoken to building controls, what work exactly has been applied for? As this should have been applied for prior to work starting.
Was the electrical installation under this application, if not was the electrician listed as a competent person? http://www.competentperson.co.uk/
If so contact him or his scheme provider regarding commissioning and certificates.

 

[newcysi]

Building control said the plans literally only covered removal of the wall so nothing else is technically covered. He noticed that the roof was being replaced so dropped the relevant standards round to the site but was never called back after that visit to inspect anything else.

He apparently wouldn't have looked at anything like the relocation of drainage for the new sink and watercooler/freezer, or the electrical installation.

The vendors are either playing dumb or were genuinely out of the loop as they don't even know if a separate electrician was involved in the work and certainly not if he was properly qualified or not. There is apparently no electrical certification available and they reckon there is no cert for the project at all as it was "not required - the inspector was satisfied with the inspections he had done".

As I say, they either know more than they are letting on (perhaps they did have to cut corners so know it won't pass final inspection) or the builder has kept them in the dark.

 

[PrenticeBoyofDerry]

The inspector will not sign off work until complete. So once unfinished work is completed, then that work that has been applied for will be passed.
With regards to the work that has not gone through application, has the inspector informed you what does need to be notified?

I know a little more about the electric side of things, work in kitchens, bath/shower rooms and new circuits must be notified to building controls, there are two methods of doing this at the moment.
*Use of a non-competent listed person
*or use of registered competent listed person
A registered competent person can self cert their work, this must be done within a month of work being complete.
A non-registered electrician must apply to building controls prior to work starting, then build controls will inspect at first and second fix before commissioning the work.

 

[newcysi]

Thanks for your advice. The electrical points make sense to me. I have asked an electrician (NAPIT registered) to do a full house inspection this Friday. I don't think that is as good as having had the installation certified at the time, but will hopefully provide a level of comfort.

All works have been finished for around 6 months so they just never requested the inspection.

I may be jumping to invalid conclusions that there are works which should have been notified, and the inspector won't commit to anything on the phone, but he defnitely thought the roof replacement should have been notified. A lay man's review of the regulations indicates to me that relocating plumbed features and adding a wall leaf should have been notified. The surveyor also couldn't confirm that the patio windows were safety glass. I wasn't too worried about that, but have since found out that the windows themselves are subject to the regs and were not notified!

Sounds like a bit of a mess to me, but maybe I'm overly fretting.

 

[PrenticeBoyofDerry]

I would be tempted to have an arm wrestle over the property value or/and request that the vendor sets up a legal indemnity insurance policy.
That's assuming you still wish to purchase.

 

[^woody^]

It comes down to one thing ... is the work satisfactory or not?

Someone (a surveyor) can look at the work and tell you whether it is OK, or if its going to fall down in a few years. But that still means that there is no bit of paper from the council. So potentially you are in this same situation when you come to sell.

The council can get involved and the work can be regularised - ie checked against the standards it should be built to, and then altered or not as necessary. The problem with this, is that you just don't know how much (or how little) work is involved until you pay the fee and get the council to check it. Opening up is part of this, so potentially there could be some damage in any case.

As a buyer, it is a risk. Now, do you want the risk, or do you want the owner to assume the risk and get the work done - or just pull out and put it back on the market?

Do you want to take the risk, and also take a reduction in price to cover any potential work? If so how much, how do you know and work it out

Lots of variables

Generally, if you want the place, and its not falling down, then buy it. Negotiate a reduction to cover some or all the risk. Then once you are in, decide if you are going to regularise it or not

 

[newcysi]

Thanks for the replies both. It's not actually about questioning the build quality for me, I am willing to take a view on that personally. My concern is that it's not a forever house for me so resale is inevitable. I don't want to be having the same conversations from the other side of the fence when I do sell, so I think the best course of action is to get them to regularise the works on their risk before exchange. They might well not be up for it and look for another buyer. Hopefully they'll take the view that other buyers will find the same issues and its better to stick with a mortgage approved, chain free buyer. Will see how I get on tis week and let you know. Just wanted the reassurance that I'm not raising nothing points.

 

[PrenticeBoyofDerry]

It's not actually about questioning the build quality for me, I am willing to take a view on that personally. My concern is that it's not a forever house for me so resale is inevitable. I don't want to be having the same conversations from the other side of the fence when I do sell.

Well if you are thinking of selling in the near future, I would be looking at the quality of build, because that's what other future potential buyers will be looking at, regardless of the pieces of paper issued by BCs.
But at the end of the day, if you think you have offered a fair price for the property as it stands, that's up to you. It is obviously not your dream home, as your intention is to sell in the near future, so I would want some assurance or a heft deduction to complete any unforeseen work that became apparent after the survey and the original offer.

 

[luisdesign]

What you have is a house that has had some walls built up next to it. The work, as it stands, is not in accordance with the building regulations (you should assume they are not until it can be demonstrated that they are).

You do not have a house with an extension and so you certainly should not pay for a house with an extension.

I would be surprised that a mortgage lender would be willing to lend on a property that is not in accordance with the UK building standards. Do they know of the properties condition? and will you be able to insure the property without certifcation to show that it is safe?

At the end of the day though, it really does come down to how much risk you are willing to carry, and how much that risk is worth to you.

 

[rjm2k]

request that the vendor sets up a legal indemnity insurance policy.

Problem with that is the council appear to be aware of the work, which invalidates indemnity policies.

 

[newcysi]

Thanks all for the replies. I've sent an email to the vendor explaining what comfort I want (retrospective inspection etc) on the advice of another builder I've seen today. I do feel for the vendors as I think they've genuinely had the wool pulled over their eyes by their builder but not so sorry for them that im willing to inherit their issues.

And having done some research I don't think the work can be covered by indemnity as it is less than 12 months old and some of the suspect points were raised in the survey (specifically referencing the regs).

Don't want to jump to any more conclusions but its odd that the neighbours on either side of the property have planning apps for their extensions (dating back to 2003) but my property has none. Extensions look to roughly match age wise and I definitely don't think my original pre-renovated extension pre dated the portal database (goes back to 1974 for my council).