House not built in accordance with planning permission

D

Dunelm

Registered User
Messages
38
A friend built a house about five years ago, due to some bad advice at the time the house was built with some significant differences from the granted planning permission,

The house is at a different angle and about 5 metres away from where it is actually meant to stamd.

The house is bigger than it is meant to be (about 25sq difference)

some small changes in the arrangement of windows.

Other than that the house is as the plans state and to be honest doesn’t look that different unless you were to study the planning applicsyion and compare to the house as it stands. The house is set well back from the road and isn’t visible from any public areas.

what are the implications? Should he apply for retention? Does it make sense to wait until seven years have passed?

He knows he can’t sell it without regularising, but he is newly married and wants to transfer it into both of their names- can this happen With the house as is?
 
Dunelm said:
what are the implications? Should he apply for retention? Does it make sense to wait until seven years have passed?
Click to expand...
7 years applies to unauthorised development, for a development that doesn't comply with the permission granted it's 12 years.

Once the relevant period expires the authority no longer have the option to force you to resolve, but should you or any future owner ever look for permission for work at any time in the future, they can make it a pre-condition that you remove the unauthorised development.
 
Did the friend build with cash? Or a mortgage?

If there is a mortgage, it would have been well flagged, that he'd need formal Certification with planning and building regs.

He needs to talk to an engineer/architect now who will advise as to whether retention is necessary. As NoRegrets points out, the increased size will be a significant factor.

The seven year rule will not make the house compliant or saleable - it only means that the Local Authority can't take enforcement action.

If there is no mortgage, he can transfer the property into joint names without issue. If there is a mortgage, the issue will come up.

mf
 
Thanks for answers guys.

No mortgage involved

To be honest it doesn’t sound as bad as I would have guessed, 25metres squared - so quite a bit bigger, permission was for 185sqm and house is about 210 sqm

Encouraging that the transfer of name will be okay, how about if he leaves it in his will?
is it only when banks/mortgages become involved that these things get flagged up?
 
"is it only when banks/mortgages become involved that these things get flagged up?"

No. It could come to the attention of the Local Authority who could take enforcement action.

mf
 
Thanks, I don’t think there is any reason it would come to the attention of the local authorities at this stage.

Even though it is quite different to the plans approved I don’t think it would be obvious to the average person, so unless someone comes looking to find a fault it shouldn’t ever become an issue
 
Thanks for the responses guys

One for question - and this is just coming from me- no suggestion he is considering this, just my curiosity. But does this planning irregularity reduce the value of the house when calculating property tax?

To my mind it seems it would, as the house would definitely be worth less on the open market yet it doesn't seem at all fair that this would be the case.

I presume he isn't paying any property tax at the moment as the house is only 5 years old but that will soon change.
 
Leo said:
Once the relevant period expires the authority no longer have the option to force you to resolve, but should you or any future owner ever look for permission for work at any time in the future, they can make it a pre-condition that you remove the unauthorised development.
Click to expand...
So is the advice to wait until the 12 years expires and then just ignore it, or apply for retention to tidy things up?

When we bought our house the engineer who looked at it for me noticed a window that was not on the plans, his advice was not to mention it to the solicitor or he'd have to mention it to the bank and who knows where that would end up. I was OK with that, but conscious a future buyer might be spooked by it, so wondering if the right way to go is to apply for retention to get it all above board? Or do people tend to just leave things be.
 
From reading between the lines, it seems that this property is a 'forever' house and is therefore unlikely to come on the market in the next 20/30/40 years. Surely when it eventually comes on the market no-one is going to compare it to its original planning permission specification?? Who is to say that the extra 25 sq metres wasn't an extension built on in the intervening 30 odd years or a door or a window was moved?

As for the property tax, the owner would be WELL advised to not do anything that might draw attention to the house. Pay what the house would be worth if everything is in order. Why try save a couple of euro when, ahem, they could bring the whole house of cards down!
 
"is therefore unlikely to come on the market in the next 20/30/40 years."

Circumstances change- death, divorce etc.,

"Surely when it eventually comes on the market no-one is going to compare it to its original planning permission specification??"

It is precisely because people cannot be trusted to build in compliance with permission granted that an Architect/Engineer will have to certify compliance or not with the permission if the owner needs to sell.

"Who is to say that the extra 25 sq metres wasn't an extension built on in the intervening 30 odd years or a door or a window was moved?"

Still needs certification.

mf
 
Zenith63 said:
So is the advice to wait until the 12 years expires and then just ignore it, or apply for retention to tidy things up?

When we bought our house the engineer who looked at it for me noticed a window that was not on the plans, his advice was not to mention it to the solicitor or he'd have to mention it to the bank and who knows where that would end up. I was OK with that, but conscious a future buyer might be spooked by it, so wondering if the right way to go is to apply for retention to get it all above board? Or do people tend to just leave things be.
Click to expand...
Getting retention means you know exactly where you stand, and particularly for small issues that don't impact neighbours, chances of success are high, but can vary between authorities.

Once your solicitor is aware of a non-compliance issue, they are compelled to act to protect your interests. In most cases, that results in the vendor having to arrange for retention which puts the sale at risk.
 
Zenith63 said:
If it's beyond the 12 years, are there other outcomes than granting approval?
Click to expand...
They can decline retention, but can't force removal. The refusal would be on record that a future purchaser or their solicitor would likely see. If the current or future owner was to seek planning for any further development in the future, the LA could make it a condition that the non-compliant work was remediated to their satisfaction.
 
A house having been not built in accordance with planning permission as above is one thing, but what happens with a house built about 15 years ago in accordance with PP, but other conditions on the site were never fulfilled. For example street lights and footpaths were never put in. There were 4 houses in all with individual owners. Where do they stand does anyone know?
 
mf1 said:
"is therefore unlikely to come on the market in the next 20/30/40 years."

Circumstances change- death, divorce etc.,

"Surely when it eventually comes on the market no-one is going to compare it to its original planning permission specification??"

It is precisely because people cannot be trusted to build in compliance with permission granted that an Architect/Engineer will have to certify compliance or not with the permission if the owner needs to sell.

"Who is to say that the extra 25 sq metres wasn't an extension built on in the intervening 30 odd years or a door or a window was moved?"

Still needs certification.

mf
Click to expand...
Hate to say it but have actually seen a scenario where an architect did a survey allegedly on compliance with original planning, only to discover later on that there was issues with compliance and it was not clear how they were resolved.
 
When you’re selling or transferring a house, one document that a purchaser will require is a certificate of compliance with planning permission. Doesn’t sound like you’ll be able to get this in the event of sale.

I know from my own experience as a purchaser that where a potential planning non-compliance issue was flagged by the auctioneer, it was a turn-off unless it could easily be rectified (eg attic conversion to bedroom etc).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top