Accidentally reported the house we are buying to building control

[Neet90]

The house we are buying has a structure supporting/ strengthening one of the beams. We had gone back and forth through solicitors about the work and if there were building regulations. The solicitor suggested we contact the water board directly about another matter so I thought I would be proactive and contact the council about the supported beam also, particularly as due to rot other beams may need replacing once we move in and it would be useful to know what approvals we would need. I sent the council relevant information and now our solicitor has frightened me saying that I have reported them, placed their house on notice, they have informed the sellers solicitor, said there is no possibility of indemnity insurance and we could be sued, our mortgage is at risk etc etc. This was clearly foolish of me but I had no idea at the time and now it seems this is yet another thing to worry about and I'm so nervous. I've no doubt upset the sellers and may have jeopardised it all.

I don't think you have done anything wrong and you shouldn't feel bad about it.

The whole concept of indemnity insurance bothers me deeply. I am naturally keen on there being rules (when those rules are well made) and building regs are good rules. They are about ensuring that each house is structurally sound and is a health and safe environment to live in. The idea of indemnity insurance is for sellers and buyers to conspire to ignore these regs and pretend they don't matter, using insurance to protect against being accidentally found out having agreed to keep the known violations secret.

Well these violations have been found out. That is a good thing in my view. They will now be put right by the current owners who should have done this already if they were responsible and reasonable people. Let them be angry. They were trying to sell you a house that wasn't structurally sound. They got caught. They are the bad guys.

Don't buy the house. Walk away. Even if you have exchanged contracts it will be cheaper to accept the contractual penalties for pulling out than it will be to go ahead with buying a money pit like this.

I’m amazed that they might be able to sue you (albeit unlikely).

So the seller potentially didn’t get regs /work done properly but should have, you accidentally inform council, and the seller (who is in the wrong for not doing work correctly in first place) might be able to sue you? Our legal system is nuts!

Surely you should be suing them for doing dodgy works and then all your time and money for surveys etc (Ok not really but you see the point?)

I'd want to know if a house I was buying was structurally sound or not.
Surely if the council declare it unsound you would walk away from the purchase.
It would piss the sellers off but finding out you've bought an unsound house because you were not able to get proper details before buying would piss you off too I'm sure.
To be honest a house that doesn't have building regs and has had what potentially seems like dodgy work done to it, is not one I'd want to buy.

If the house is structurally unsound and the work hasn't been signed off when it should have, you haven't fucked up.
You may have spent a whole heap of money getting this far, have you thought how much more you may have to spend to put it right?

I would also prepare yourself for the vendors walking away from the sale.

I did something when looking at a business to buy. The vendor had 3 contracts that she said just rolled over year after year. I contacted the 3 councils involved to check this (it was 60% of the income). The owner was so pissed off at me that she let somebody gazump us. Thankfully, being a business, we had invested a lot of time looking into the accounts and contracts but had spent minimal money.

All ended well and I am glad the property fell through! We ended up in a much better place.

I'm curious what the OP could be sued for. What would the cause of action be?

I'm curious what the OP could be sued for. What would the cause of action be?

Absolutely nothing
She may well have cocked up the sale but there is zero risk of them suing her.
If it transpires they didn’t comply with the reqs - their fault and no grounds to sue

If they did comply and no issue - then no grounds to sue

Your solicitor is cross as you have now made her have to do her job properly as she can’t now go for the easy option of buying an indemnity policy!

You did nothing wrong, my experience of solicitors is that they are actually pretty useless where building regs and planning is concerned so I would also be doing a lot of research myself for a house I was about to invest a heck of a lot of money in to satisfy myself everything was in order. Caveat emptor and all that!

The possible cause of action escapes me also, although I am a Canadian lawyer.

Could it be some sort of intentional interference with economic relations? But I fail to see how the OP's actions were unlawful. Is there some doctrine or rule in UK real property law that requires both parties to proceed without recourse to a local authority? I can't really see how privacy law would apply either.

Could it be a breach of some sort of contract? But what contract? In Canada our real estate law is quite different and there is a binding contract after offer and acceptance. Backing out is only possible if a "subject to" provision is not satisfied. Maybe the OP is guilty of doing something that will cause a breach of contract, like negating the chance for what you call indemnity insurance?

All of this makes me grateful for our system, called the Torrens system, which guarantees clear title.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torrens_title

It seems to me that what the OP did was more ill advised than illegal.

After 4 years the LA can not enforce building regs non-compliance anyway. Assuming the work was done more than 4 years ago you just need to be satisfied that it’s sound.

We had a garage extension 9 years ago when we moved in. Internal chimney breast taken down and 3 RSJs put in supporting first floor walls. Builder got difficult at the end and it transpired they hadn’t got BRegs in the end. They went bust. However it’s been 9 years and the work was structurally sound, as evidenced by the fact it’s still standing and hasn’t moved one bit.

Don’t get hung up on building regs. See what your structural engineer or surveyor says about it.

After 4 years the LA can not enforce building regs non-compliance anyway. Assuming the work was done more than 4 years ago you just need to be satisfied that it’s sound.

Not ever heard of that. Any chance you could link to confirmation as not even a google uncovers

@LondonMischief building regs don't apply to work done before they were in place. If they did, anything built before the 80s would be unmortgageable. @Neet90 the extension may well be fine, we bought current house with extension and loft conversion - sounds swanky but means it is now a slightly bigger cottage, ha - with no indemnity insurance needed as works were completed prior to the advent of building regs. Try explaining that to social services during a H&S check though. eyeroll

The beam though, they should be able to produce a certificate. If they haven't got one, what are they doing? Surely they know that's going to slow things down. Forget their feelings. This is a transaction. They won't GAF what you're left to sort when contracts exchanged. What's done is done, and as a PP said, it strikes me that now the solicitors have to do the work they should be doing anyway. Buying property in this country is a head fart... You'll either get this one, or you won't, but you'll find something else. I dunno if this helps at all but sometimes accepting a thing is out of my hands gives me a little peace. Regardless of how it got to that point (and your intentions were good), that's where things are now. I hope it works out for you.

OP if it is any help i have just been through something similar (though handled by solicitor not me ).

It was a loft extension lacking building regs. Both solicitors had agreed an indemnity policy. The first I knew of this was when I went in to sign for exchange. I queried it and solicitor checked with senior colleagues. For any sort of resale further down the line, building control sign off was essential and indemnity policy useless as council highly likely to enforce.

Building control came out the same day they were advised by my solicitor, and we had the certificate the next day. So it can swiftly be resolved. We completed two days later.

...council highly unlikely to enforce

@BubblesBuddy
I agree, good advice.

OP. What did the original survey say about the beam? Why are you having a Structural Engineer’s Report? What are they looking at?

What? Your solicitor sounds mad! And who will sue you?

Building control will come out and see if the work has a completion certificate. If not, the sellers should put it right before the sale, or can buy an indemnity policy.

Can you confirm how long the beam has been there? I have read various lengths of time on this thread. Is it recent or not?

I think you’re having a huge hard time here. A house is the largest single purchase for anyone and it’s going to be your home so you need to feel happy and safe (be safe) there.

I’m assuming you have spent maybe a few £k max on fees surveys etc so far.
A house purchase may be a hundred times that value.

I would be concerned if I had seen a supported wooden beam in a cellar - that sounds to me like it may be supporting the floor above it and possibly more. The fact it’s propped up and possibly spliced in the middle doesn't sound great to me -of course I’m not any kind of expert but I’d be concerned and wanting assurances that I wouldn’t wake up one morning to my kitchen / lounge/whatever floor in my cellar or that it wouldn’t collapse one day with me or a member of my family stood on it. Also your solicitor isn’t a structural engineer either so I can’t see how she can give you assurances of that nature.

So if it isn’t structurally sound you could end up spending a lot of money to put it right or repairing any damage caused by a collapse. Probably much more than you have paid out in fees already.
It’s the sunken cost fallacy - you don’t have to go ahead with this purchase. You have paid those fees yes but going ahead could cost you far far more.

You can walk away from this house and you should if you have any doubts. You should definitely walk away if you know it’s going to be dangerous or cost more than you have budgeted for to make safe. There are posts on MN frequently about buyers pulling out of purchases it happens all the time for all sorts of reasons. Yes it’s a shame for the vendors and frustrating for you if you have to go back through the purchasing process but is that worse than a potentially structurally unsound house that could cost ££££ to put right.

I would engage a qualified structural engineer (not the mortgage one) to examine the structure and this beam in particular and take it from there. It may be that the vendors need to fix it before any lender will approve a mortgage.

Don’t be bullied by your solicitor. Why should you go ahead with a huge purchase if you’re not 100% happy. If there is an issue with the structure the vendors will need to resolve it - it shouldn’t be your problem.

@Collaborate I didn't necessarily think building regs we're a big deal until they started going back and forth but because i foolishly explained it all to the council the solicitor says they will have 'put it on notice' which I guess means it needs to be resolved. As you say I hope the extension is a non issue as that was ages ago and before they purchased it but I have no clue. I'm hoping it could be as simple as the council verifying the beam support doesn't need building regs or that they could approve it, if this isn't the case then goodness knows. I'm such an idiot but I can't go back on it now and worry what will unfold.

@AnneElliott I don't think an indemnity policy is an option now the council are aware. So goodness knows what will happen now. I had no clue of the issues querying it all with the council would cause.

Indemnity insurance works on a kind of "don't ask, don't tell" basis, and, as pointed out upthread, only protects against the risk of the council for instance telling you to remove recent alterations to a house done without consent, not against structural defects.

The issue is that grey area between structurally unsound and not meeting building regs for other reasons - in my case with my last house sale a loft conversion I could show had been there for at least 25 years, but where details (eg distance from top of stairs to bedroom door was 75cm not 1m) wouldn't meet current regs. This is the situation where you need a buyer to take the attitude "all buildings have flaws, I can live with this one."

Some buyers will proceed on the basis of indemnity insurance, some won't. What you've done (nothing illegal about it, nor immoral, just a bit daft) is taken this option of waiting for a buyer who'll proceed on the basis of indemnity insurance if their surveyor says the building is structurally sound away from your vendors. You've now created a paper trail whereby they cannot sell to anyone without getting remedial work done. Which I would imagine will have pissed them off spectacularly.

@twoheaped I really hope they don't walk away from the sale but they must think we are total pieces of work so I can understand their frustration towards us. I am just desperately hoping it can be resolved really soon.

@Walkingwounded well I really hope things can go that quickly. Inworry that I have not just caused bother but significant delays which could screw over our sale too.

@Milkstick I hope the extension isn't an issue due to it's age and just hope they can approve the beam support. I feel so stupid for alerting the council, I thought it was just more of a query so I had no idea.

@adagio @eurochick I'm worried I've messed up our sale and purchase let alone with the potential to be sued. I have no idea but I'm freaking out.

@BubblesBuddy the structure they built to support the beam was done last year

@BarbaraStrozzi yes I think it has been spliced and a structure built below to support it. The surveyor did mention it and we have a structural engineer visiting. I think we have screwed ourselves over by making the council fully aware so even if the engineer isn't too concerned without the building regs we are now in bother. I appreciate it's my own fault for querying all the info with the council, I thought they would just advise not enforce. We genuinely want the house and had already negotiated a discount prior to this so I think I have majorly messed up.

The whole situation is a nightmare, nationally.

I agree with PPs that indemnity insurance is a scam (wish my solicitor had been sufficiently on the ball to realise that when I bought the old house).

Using my experience as an example, I lived in a row of mid-Victorian terrances. Probably 90% of those had loft conversions. I would guess of those, about half were probably done without buildings consent, covering a period from the 80s through 90s. No paper trails, several house moves since they'd been done. Lots of buyers taking a "well there's indemnity insurance" attitude without really understanding (or not having been properly informed by their solicitors) what that actually meant.

Result - lots of people living in houses without building regs consent without understanding the full implications (and it's not just resale that's an issue, it's things like insurance; a friend of mine got caught out when she had a house fire and her house insurance argued that because it turned out - after the fact - that she was in a house without building regs consent for the loft conversion, this nullified the insurance! )

And lots of buyers starting to get wise to the complexities of the situation (or as in your case, reasonably enough trying to do some digging to make sure your own interests are protected, not realising the can of worms you're opening), unwilling to purchase or insisting retrospective building consent is sought (complex, because what might actually have met building regs at the time it was done, mid 90s say, almost certainly won't now - a major pitfall nowadays is getting enough insulation into the ceiling without dropping the ceiling height too low - many Victorian houses simply cannot be converted to meet modern building regs for this reason, not without dropping the level of the floor and losing some ceiling height from the room below, because the roof line typically can't be altered, specially not in a conservation area).

I suspect we're sitting on millions of older houses in this country which are currently in a grey area concerning resale and even the validity of the occupier's insurance.

As for what to do in your circs: if you've already negotiated a hefty discount, and now (inadvertently) pissed off the sellers because they now can't sell to anyone else if their sale falls through, can you afford to take the financial hit on getting the work done? Get some quotes from local builders who offer a design and build including building regs sign-off service?