Stamp duty refund - lack of building regs

[LesleyAndreaJones]

Just bought a property a few months back. The vendor wanted a quick sale, and we had cash available so we indemnified searches, took-up lack of building regs insurance and bought the property....

It was a tenanted property and bought as an investment. We later found out that property didn't have building regs.

Tenant moved out. Can we claim back stamp duty refund that we pay six months ago?

If you took up lack of building regulation insurance can't you just claim any loss on that policy?

Steep duty to my mind would be a completely separate outlay and I've never heard of that being paid back under any circumstances?

Apparently it is paid back if property is deemed to unsafe/unihahabitable and I have proof of this from building inspector of local council.

Sadly you can't claim on the policy just like that. To claim, council must issue enforcement notice against you which I begged them but they won't. :(

SDLT is paid to Gov based on the circumstances of the purchaser, building regs or lack of them, should have been picked up during the purchase process.

Did you buy indemnity insurance?

If you are going along the lines of trying to prove the property uninhabitable, that may prove challenging if it was a rental until recently.

What has your solicitor advised?

I wish you all the best going forward OP.

Apparently it is paid back if property is deemed to unsafe/unihahabitable and I have proof of this from building inspector of local council.

No it's really not. Plenty of uninhabitable properties change hands and stamp duty is paid on them.

Let me guess you didn’t use a conveyancing solicitor?

It's the extra 3% stamp duty on second or buy to let homes that may be refunded if the property is so derelict as to be uninhabitable. But not meeting building regs and being uninhabitable are two different things.
Most houses, unless relatively recent new builds, don't meet current standards. But unless you are changing something (like converting a loft or replacing the windows) it doesn't have to.
How do you prove a property is uninhabitable? I don't know, but I bet there are firms just happy to help with this, for a fee.

What's the actual building regs issue to do with? My property doesn't have building regs but its too old and there have been no material changes that would require building regs so no enforcement action could be taken and I can live in it as having x bedrooms but for purposes of renting it out it would only qualify as y bedrooms, is this something similar?

I recently purchased a house at lower level stamp duty as it was completely deflect so it can’t be classed as a residential building. It had no roof, windows, stairs, kitchen, bathroom etc. it was completely uninhabitable and there was no question of that. It wasn’t completely exempt though - but I paid the commercial rate rather than residential rate.

building regs have nothing to do with stamp duty. If there were tenants until recently, it’s clearly habitable, even if that means you have to do some work to meet current standards. Lack of building regs doesn’t really mean anything though.

If the council are not willing to enforce building regs then is it really uninhabitable? I would have thought if it was a safety issue they would have enforce it.