Risk of house sale falling through due to 'no scheme to deal with contamination of the land' :(

[3kidsandus]

Help!!
We are sooo close to completing on selling our house.

We had our extension signed off in 2019 with a certificate of completion and building regs all signed off. The buyers solicitors have however noted a stipulation that was on the original planning permission that was not done!!! This apparently means we need to do a retrospective application adding this stipulation. I could cry. Trying to make stamp duty holiday (as many are!)

I've attached the planning with the stipulation as I really don't understand it. Any one ever had to do this? Who submits the plan for decontamination??

I've never seen this condition on a PP for an hour extension. Was it very large? Was the house built as a house, or has it been converted from something else? How old is the house?

Was the land ever used as a (working) garage?

It would have been down to the applicant to submit the details required. A contaminated land expert could have been employed to carry out the desk top study, and suggest any mitigation work required. This would have been submitted to the council for approval, and then the measures implemented as part of the construction.

Can you get indemnity insurance out against it for your buyers?

What was on the site beforehand that the land is contaminated?

What used to be on the land? Was it something industrial or a petrol station?

Something was there that could mean the land is contaminated, I don’t understand why it wasn’t done? It was a requirement prior to building as the land may not be suitable for residential use. If it had been done then Amy remedial action would have been factored into the build to ensure it was safe.

It will need to be done, I don’t get how it was all missed and building regs signed off. But it wasn’t. You will need to get it done. It might be fine, but you need to get it done.

@3kidsandus I work in contaminated land consultancy so deal with these planning conditions all the time. You need a desk based risk assessment carried out which then need submitting to your local authority. We charge £800 for this and it takes about 2 weeks (north west). If there is considered to be low risk there will be no further work. Depends on history of the land amongst other things. Happy to answer any more questions

I don't understand why the contamination wasn't dealt with when the original house was built. As I say, I've never seen such a condition on an extension approval for this reason.

Building Regs do not monitor the compliance of a scheme with planning conditions - different regulations.

[quote Toomuchleopard]@3kidsandus I work in contaminated land consultancy so deal with these planning conditions all the time. You need a desk based risk assessment carried out which then need submitting to your local authority. We charge £800 for this and it takes about 2 weeks (north west). If there is considered to be low risk there will be no further work. Depends on history of the land amongst other things. Happy to answer any more questions[/quote]
It’s maybe not just that though is it,,this is saying it needs site investigation and remediation strategy. And rhe bulding is already on it. Which means there was something there they think has potentially leaked into thr land which could affect anyone living there.

Yes, if it was a condition of planning permission it would have been made very clear. How did you miss it?

@Seeline

I don't understand why the contamination wasn't dealt with when the original house was built. As I say, I've never seen such a condition on an extension approval for this reason.

Building Regs do not monitor the compliance of a scheme with planning conditions - different regulations.

I’m guessing the property was originally used for another purpose.

Ie commercial turned residential and was already there. So extending it would be the issue. Not the original build.

But contamination would have been considered when PP granted for any change of use too

Was that condition for the original house rather than your extension? It's common for something like that to be required of a housing developer if there was a potentially polluting land use there previously. How old is your house?

I believe you can apply for the conditiin to be removed. But there must of been a reason for that condition, which would have been explained somewhere in the documents.

@Bluntness100 this wording appears on all contaminated land planning conditions. It doesn’t mean there is any contamination there. As the extension is already in place you can prove that there is no direct link between the soil and the people living in the house. It more complicated than this but the chances are you can deal with it by risk assessment and not needing site investigation. It also depends on whether the planning boundary includes just the extension footprint or the whole garden.

I used to work in contaminated land remediation. That's quite a serious condition for an extension. I've only seen that type of thing for industrial sites, or where there's a change of land use. Can you include the rest of the page with the informatives?

I didn't work for a local authority but it used to be that owners could be held responsible for cleaning up historical contamination from owners prior to their occupation. @Toomuchleopard might know?

Sorry OP, you might not be able to insure your way out of this one.

@Random63638 it’s all based on risk assessment. You consider the risk to people living in the house and controlled waters. If the house/garden was built on previously developed land that could be contaminative then there is a risk to the residents of the house. However if the extension has a concrete floor then there is no contact between the soil beneath and the people in the house so no risk. If the garden was part of the planning boundary then there might be contamination in the garden and remediation might be required. The risk to controlled waters is likely to be really low unless there’s an oil tank under the house which is extremely unlikely. There could be a risk from ground gases but that could be dealt with retrospectively.

The OP will definitely need a desk based assessment so I would advise to get this done ASAP.

Thank you for all your replies.

I honestly do not have a clue how we missed it either! Though I had just had number 3 and didn't really have the best architect/building team :(

Anyway we are where we are. Just need to get it sorted as soon as possible.

This house was built in 1928. But next to it about 12 years ago there was a petrol station. About 8 years ago flats were built on that land.

So I imagine it has something to do with that.

We did a 2 storey extension which we were initially going to do under permitted development but we decided to go 4.5m back instead of 4m!

The council were also stumped about why they had issued the certificate of completion though!

Thank you again everyone!

Ok, so at a guess there was evidence of the fuel leaking from the tanks and moving off the site. There may have been wells at some point with white plastic sticking about 20cm above the ground. There could have been remediation of that site where soil was dug out and water/fuel pumped from the wells. Are you a little bit down hill.of the old filling station? It's a bit complicated but downhill is a good indicator. To be fair the biggest risk was probably anyone digging at the time of construction, although fumes could also be an issue if there was a massive amount of fuel spilled quite shallow. Talk to the council and ask them how they want to proceed. Ultimately you need them to state either to say "no relevant risk" or "further investigation required".

We had a contaminated land risk flagged on our property that we are buying. It is built on an old print works and the developers never got the remediation condition discharged. The sellers paid for indemnity but this only covers us if the council ever asks to remediate the land. I’m not sure if this is an option for you especially as you have made the council aware now, so your only option may be to get the condition discharged. Is it likely to put the buyers off the purchase?

Odd condition to have on an extension, especially as the contamination seems to have been on the neighbouring site.

Personally I would look through the application documents, they should be online, to try to work out if this has been added as a mistake or not. Then I’d try to speak to the contaminated land officer at the council to argue that the condition was unreasonable and would they agree, if you applied, to remove the condition.

If this doesn’t work you’ll have to do the desk top survey and the site investigation report and pray that no contamination is found!

Very badly worded condition though - hard to discharge and a tailpiece (unless otherwise agreed ...) - which aren’t allowed anymore!

@Random63638

Ok, so at a guess there was evidence of the fuel leaking from the tanks and moving off the site. There may have been wells at some point with white plastic sticking about 20cm above the ground. There could have been remediation of that site where soil was dug out and water/fuel pumped from the wells. Are you a little bit down hill.of the old filling station? It's a bit complicated but downhill is a good indicator. To be fair the biggest risk was probably anyone digging at the time of construction, although fumes could also be an issue if there was a massive amount of fuel spilled quite shallow. Talk to the council and ask them how they want to proceed. Ultimately you need them to state either to say "no relevant risk" or "further investigation required".

Yes!! We are downhill! About 80cm I'd guesstimate!

@Orangerunner10

We had a contaminated land risk flagged on our property that we are buying. It is built on an old print works and the developers never got the remediation condition discharged. The sellers paid for indemnity but this only covers us if the council ever asks to remediate the land. I’m not sure if this is an option for you especially as you have made the council aware now, so your only option may be to get the condition discharged. Is it likely to put the buyers off the purchase?

There solicitors flagged it. And from what my solicitor says they won't get there mortgage until it's sorted?? Just a mare really. But at least I have an idea of who I might need to contact now to get it done retrospectively!

@Funnyfive

Odd condition to have on an extension, especially as the contamination seems to have been on the neighbouring site.

Personally I would look through the application documents, they should be online, to try to work out if this has been added as a mistake or not. Then I’d try to speak to the contaminated land officer at the council to argue that the condition was unreasonable and would they agree, if you applied, to remove the condition.

If this doesn’t work you’ll have to do the desk top survey and the site investigation report and pray that no contamination is found!

Very badly worded condition though - hard to discharge and a tailpiece (unless otherwise agreed ...) - which aren’t allowed anymore!

I didn't even know until now there was such a thing as a contaminated land officer!! I feel like I have a plan now. It will be a busy Monday!! Thank you!!