Retention needed when selling unfinished house?

flashforward

I'm looking to buy an unfinished property (finished to second fix) That has being sitting idle in the countryside since ~2008 when its construction ended.

I have some questions around planning and retention.

The house was granted planning permission to the applicant due to the family owning a farm where the house was built, one of the conditions of permission is that the applicant or a member of the family needs to live in the house for 5 years before it can be eligible for sale.

The fact that the house has not been finished to a liveable state what happens here with the original planning conditions? No family member has lived there and none will. Would retention be needed for this aspect or the fact that the house has been sitting idle for almost 10 years make a difference?

Also the only reason the planning permission was granted was because 'local needs' were met. The fact that the house is finished to a sealed state does that mean it will no longer need to meet the original conditions? I would not qualify for 'local needs' if this condition was applied again...

Secondly - from google maps it appears the house has being built approx 10m closer to the right of the site boundary than on the approved plans, meaning the entrance to the driveway is also 10m off against the plan. How big of an issue would this be?

I am unsure to what level of retention the owner would have to look for. And also how difficult it would be to get it? Or maybe nothing is required at all due to the 10 years since PP was granted?

I'd hope the council would want to the house lived in rather than becoming overgrown and an eyesore.... maybe that's wishful thinking...

Gumbo

It depends. Has a certificate of compliance been issued?
You could argue that it has been lived in. It the seller would need proof of utilities and property tax etc

But, you would be advised to engage a planning consultant to view the granted permission and compare to what is in the ground.

flashforward

kceire wrote: »

It depends. Has a certificate of compliance been issued?
You could argue that it has been lived in. It the seller would need proof of utilities and property tax etc

But, you would be advised to engage a planning consultant to view the granted permission and compare to what is in the ground.

I doubt a cert has been issued - and it would not be possible to argue the house has been lived in, no one has ever lived in the house, no utilities, house is not wired for electricity or connected to mains.

Just interested to hear if anyone has experienced similar issues around original planning conditions not being met - this is more complicated as the house is unfinished and cannot meet the original conditions.

Catch 22 is I don't think I can pressure the seller to go to a planning consultant without having gotten somewhere in purchase process.
I don't want to go down far the bidding/mortgage/solicitor route to find out the house can't be purchased, I'd like to have a good idea that these issues can be overcome before I start pumping money into this.

Gumbo

Nasty little situation alright.
Needs retention to keep the existing works and permission to finish the works now.

Don't know how the local needs can be overcome though.

Poor Uncle Tom

flashforward wrote: »

Catch 22 is I don't think I can pressure the seller to go to a planning consultant without having gotten somewhere in purchase process.
I don't want to go down far the bidding/mortgage/solicitor route to find out the house can't be purchased, I'd like to have a good idea that these issues can be overcome before I start pumping money into this.

It's simple really, at present this is not a purchase for you and you are aware of that.

The original planning permission had a residency condition attached and if the Development Plan hasn't changed then any further planning permission is also likely to have a residency condition attached for someone who can satisfy the local needs criteria as set out in the Development Plan.

flashforward

Poor Uncle Tom wrote: »

It's simple really, at present this is not a purchase for you and you are aware of that.

The original planning permission had a residency condition attached and if the Development Plan hasn't changed then any further planning permission is also likely to have a residency condition attached for someone who can satisfy the local needs criteria as set out in the Development Plan.

Agreed.

In this case the residency condition originally set out cannot be met. (Owner can't finish the house and has no family members to finish and move in)

Could the owner not just apply for retention which covers the house being built in a different location than the plans and also the residency condition under the premise that without retention the house cannot be sold and will become a ruin and an eyesore?

Worst case is the council refuse? (or maybe absolute worst case they request the house is knocked??)
Alternatively the council lax the conditions in order to prevent the dilapidation to occur?

Poor Uncle Tom

flashforward wrote: »

Could the owner not just apply for retention which covers the house being built in a different location than the plans and also the residency condition under the premise that without retention the house cannot be sold and will become a ruin and an eyesore?

The planning permission never intended that the house would be sold.

flashforward wrote: »

Worst case is the council refuse? (or maybe absolute worst case they request the house is knocked??)
Alternatively the council lax the conditions in order to prevent the dilapidation to occur?

This isn't the LA's problem to find a solution for, however:

Solution: Find someone who satisfies the Local Housing Needs criteria and let them get the planning permissions in their names, then residency conditions won't matter.

Angry bird

Check with the local council and see how do they approach such examples.

flashforward

Angry bird wrote: »

Check with the local council and see how do they approach such examples.

I'll try this. However if I highlight such issues with the CoCo could it red flag the property? and cause hassle down the line for the owner if he has no plans to apply for retention?

Angry bird

Send an e-mail to the planning section or call to the public counter and without being site specific see can you get an answer.

Casati

Buy this property only subject to retention planning being granted, otherwise you might end up with a a property that you can't get permission to keep in the current state, and not get planning to build a new house due to the residence requirement