Can't get indemnity insurance as solicitors contacted the council!!!!

[3kidsandus]

Our planning permission is unlawful as we did not do a contamination plan. The option was to get indemnity insurance but have just found out that we can't as the buyers solicitors have contacted the council!!! I could actually cry!! So stressful.

Our extension was completed more than 4 years ago. Is the 4 year rule a myth?? Can we apply for a lawful development certificate?

I don't think so. A lawful development certificate confirms that your development was lawful - you've said that you know yours isn't.

"For peace of mind you may choose to apply for a lawful development certificate (LDC). This is not the same as planning permission but is proof that your household building work is lawful."

Oh, but having said that, perhaps:

urbanistarchitecture.co.uk/the-four-year-rule-explained-certificate-of-lawfulness-application-for-existing-use-or-development/

planninglawblog.blogspot.com/2012/03/4-year-rule.html?m=1

I’d think that was negligent of your solicitors? Have you asked them why they contacted the council?

[quote Lougle]Oh, but having said that, perhaps:

urbanistarchitecture.co.uk/the-four-year-rule-explained-certificate-of-lawfulness-application-for-existing-use-or-development/[/quote]
Yes! This is what I'd read that prompted me to ask. However, I've just found out it can take as much time to get through as a retrospective planning permission.

Did you realise you were doing wrong? Did you just not realise you needed a contamination plan?

No, had no idea at all! The architect missed it too :( we probably would never have realised if it hadn't been for trying to sell it!

@OneCalamerra

I’d think that was negligent of your solicitors? Have you asked them why they contacted the council?

It was the buyers solicitors! Not quite sure why they contacted them to be honest!

Did the buyers know that the plan was for you to get indemnity insurance? I only ask as I unintentionally did something similar a year ago- we were negotiating on a property which was 10 years old and entirely self-built by the vendor. He was annoythat it hadn't sold at a hughet price so was after more money and being difficult around answering questions we had regarding the legality of the build as he'd added to it over time. He kept insisting all was above board and had planning permission etc but wouldn't show us any evidence of this and some of the structures looked a bit questionable so we decided to enquire with the council... Who quickly confirmed that half the property had no planning permission or building regs and he'd gone rogue. We had no idea that by enquiring and drawing their attention to it that it then also meant we couldn't get indemnity insurance 🤦🏻‍♀️

@OneCalamerra

I’d think that was negligent of your solicitors? Have you asked them why they contacted the council?**

It certainly isn’t negligent. It was the buyers solicitor and they were doing the right thing chasing up the whether the works had planning permission.

@mummabubs

Did the buyers know that the plan was for you to get indemnity insurance? I only ask as I unintentionally did something similar a year ago- we were negotiating on a property which was 10 years old and entirely self-built by the vendor. He was annoythat it hadn't sold at a hughet price so was after more money and being difficult around answering questions we had regarding the legality of the build as he'd added to it over time. He kept insisting all was above board and had planning permission etc but wouldn't show us any evidence of this and some of the structures looked a bit questionable so we decided to enquire with the council... Who quickly confirmed that half the property had no planning permission or building regs and he'd gone rogue. We had no idea that by enquiring and drawing their attention to it that it then also meant we couldn't get indemnity insurance 🤦🏻‍♀️

No, they didn't to be fair! And we thought the architect/building company we used would have made sure all the conditions were met. Ah well. It is what it is. Keeping everything crossed though as buyers most likely will go back on market.

I think in this instance you would need 10 years as it's a breach of condition. Four year rule is for unauthorised development - you have PP, but haven't complied with one of the conditions.

You could apply for retrospective PP for the retention of the extension without compliance with the condition, but it would depend on how concerned the Council are about the contamination. Did you manage to speak to the contaminated land officer?

@Seeline

I think in this instance you would need 10 years as it's a breach of condition. Four year rule is for unauthorised development - you have PP, but haven't complied with one of the conditions.

You could apply for retrospective PP for the retention of the extension without compliance with the condition, but it would depend on how concerned the Council are about the contamination. Did you manage to speak to the contaminated land officer?

Yes, he's happy to discharge the condition. But would need to submit new PP in order for him to do this. Will submit on Monday hopefully!

I think that would be the quickest and most simple way to deal with it then. Hopefully shouldn't take too long.

@drpet49 - yes, as was obvious from my question I thought that it was the OP’s solicitors who contacted the council, which definitely could be negligent. We were always warned not to talk to anybody (other than the client) about potential issues until we’d considered insurance. I see in fact it was the buyers, so no of course I’m not accusing them of negligence.

I don't know the legalities but i think it's poor practice for the buyers solicitor to contact the department without allowing your solicitor to deal with it.