Buying a house - falls over at the last minute (Building Reg Approval)

[Moscow Mule]

How likely is it I would get the money back?

Have a look and see if you feel either lucky (punk)

Property Misdescriptions Act 1991

[NorthWestPerm2Contr]

Have a look and see if you feel either lucky (punk)

Property Misdescriptions Act 1991

If they claim to not have known it had no building regulations approval would it make any difference here? It was advertised as X + 1 when in reality it is X...

[Old Hack]

If they claim to not have known it had no building regulations approval would it make any difference here? It was advertised as X + 1 when in reality it is X...

Doesn't matter; duty of care. They know they have to properly advertise a place. If they are saying it is a 3 bedroom house, it has to be a 3 bedroom house, or they are liable.

If they said the house included a garage, in the row of garages in the back, and it didn't, it would be the same issue.

Sold as 3 bed, but no 3rd bedroom.

[NorthWestPerm2Contr]

Doesn't matter; duty of care. They know they have to properly advertise a place. If they are saying it is a 3 bedroom house, it has to be a 3 bedroom house, or they are liable.

If they said the house included a garage, in the row of garages in the back, and it didn't, it would be the same issue.

Sold as 3 bed, but no 3rd bedroom.

Cheers - I will definitely consider following this course.

[Moscow Mule]

If they claim to not have known it had no building regulations approval would it make any difference here? It was advertised as X + 1 when in reality it is X...

It's not up to the estate agent to to prove everything is kosher, only to represent what they are told by the vendor.

They only have to prove they performed due diligence in verifying the details, doing building reg search is over and above what an agent is expected to do - they would just have to take a look at the attic room and ask the pertinent questions.

Does it have a proper door and a proper staircase? If it does, there would be no reason for the agent to suspect anything was awry so would probably get away with it.

IIRC retrospective building regs only tries to apply the regs as they were at the time, you're not expected to bring it up to current code (but I may well be wrong about this so check with a professional).

If it were me, I would buy the indemnity myself and attempt to get regs approval

[DS23]

getting retrospective planning approval would probably only amount to a few grand (less if you do it rather than through an architect firm) but if the plans are rejected it will cost you a small fortune to put right and you'll be in a house minus some of the rooms it had when you bought it. whenever we've come across these kinds of properties (usually advertised as x rooms but containing more than x) we have always walked away. just not worth it.

but if this is your <swoon> dream property <swoon> then get a good local architect / conversion specialist in - they will know the planning officers and will be able to tell you if it will pass or not. if yes, take a punt. if it was me i'd be telling the sellers to get approval or drop the price by the estimated cost from the architect.

mind you... the more i think about it the less i like it. if they didn't follow the regulations (and it's not difficult) then there must be a reason. cheapskates? maybe. not approvable? possibly. dodgy build? uh huh. likely there's something fishy afoot and why should you take it?

[Old Hack]

It's not up to the estate agent to to prove everything is kosher, only to represent what they are told by the vendor.

They only have to prove they performed due diligence in verifying the details, doing building reg search is over and above what an agent is expected to do - they would just have to take a look at the attic room and ask the pertinent questions.

Absolutely not true. They are agents of the vendor, therefore, what they advertise, has to be fact. When they view a house, they have to ask if extensions have DPP, and if loft rooms are legal. If they verify this with the vendors agents, they have misrepresented the property.

I have spoken to an agent about this. They have a duty of care to represent the building as it is. If an agent sees a loft extension, he would have to ask the right questions. I was sellign a house ocne that had DPP for an extension. Before they would list the house as having DPP, they wanted to see the planning permission letter.

[Moscow Mule]

Absolutely not true. They are agents of the vendor, therefore, what they advertise, has to be fact. When they view a house, they have to ask if extensions have DPP, and if loft rooms are legal. If they verify this with the vendors agents, they have misrepresented the property.

I have spoken to an agent about this. They have a duty of care to represent the building as it is. If an agent sees a loft extension, he would have to ask the right questions. I was sellign a house ocne that had DPP for an extension. Before they would list the house as having DPP, they wanted to see the planning permission letter.

Property Misdescriptions Act 1991

Due diligence defence

[northernladuk]

It's not up to the estate agent to to prove everything is kosher, only to represent what they are told by the vendor.

They only have to prove they performed due diligence in verifying the details, doing building reg search is over and above what an agent is expected to do - they would just have to take a look at the attic room and ask the pertinent questions.

Does it have a proper door and a proper staircase? If it does, there would be no reason for the agent to suspect anything was awry so would probably get away with it.

IIRC retrospective building regs only tries to apply the regs as they were at the time, you're not expected to bring it up to current code (but I may well be wrong about this so check with a professional).

If it were me, I would buy the indemnity myself and attempt to get regs approval

I believe this is right. The reason for the long and expensive process is to get to the bottom of all this rather than it all fall on the estate agents shoulders. They don't do themselves any favours as they are devious bastards at the best of times but sometimes, just sometimes, it really isn't their fault.

How likely is it I would get the money back?

Exactly what point did you find out about this? Did it come up in the searches or the survey? I don't see how you can get this back. You paid for it and you got the service. It would be possible you would have had one even with this as you could have applied yourself so wouldn't be a very good defense to say you wouldn't have gone through with it if you had known etc.

[eek]

mind you... the more i think about it the less i like it. if they didn't follow the regulations (and it's not difficult) then there must be a reason. cheapskates? maybe. not approvable? possibly. dodgy build? uh huh. likely there's something fishy afoot and why should you take it?

+1 Personally no building regs means DIY so either brilliant well above standard or total tulip. I'd start looking elsewhere because if you don't have building regs for x everything else is probably equally well repaired.

As for getting your money back I would suggest a quiet word with the estate agent manager threatening trading standards. The property misdescription act has little you as a purchaser can do but the fine is unlimited depending how trading standards want to play it.