Building Regs - pre-2010 roof

[B1rdinthebush]

The property we are buying does not have any building regs for the roof. The vendor claims it was re-roofed in 2009 and thus does not need to comply with building regs that were revised in 2010.

Does anyone know any more about this? My understanding is that this was only the case if the covering was replaced like for like. However if the new covering is heavier or lighter then building regs would be required. Am I correct?

[YelloDraw]

That is not something I would bother tooooooo much about TBH. I would guess that more than 50% of new roofs are not done with building reg sign off.

[Bertucci]

Yes, 50% or more requires building regs. However, they are realistic about the fact roof members are unlikely to be replaced so take a flexible approach to meeting U values.

[YelloDraw]

No, I mean that I suspect at least half the people who get new roof do NOT get building regs sign off, and not having building regs sign off doesn't mean it has been done 'badly'. Although obvs you can't know for sure.

It was a fucking nightmare trying to get a roofer to quote to current building regs when I needed a new roof.

[B1rdinthebush]

Thanks for your replies.

To be honest, I'm not bothered about the condition of the roof - our survey has shown it to be in a good state.

We have asked for indemnity insurance as a safeguard against potential local authority action (though obviously I am aware the likelihood of that ever happening is minuscule). We'll take a view on how far we take this when we hear back from the vendor.

I just want to know which of us is right!