Converted attic non compliance

adocholiday

Hi everyone,

Clueless on this stuff so some advice would be appreciated. I'm sale agreed on a house and the contracts are with our solicitor but there's a snag. The current owners converted the attic of the house without planning permission. When I say converted I mean just put up plasterboard, a couple of Velux windows and some basic flooring with an access stairs to give them some kind of workshop space. It isn't a habitable space nor is it being sold as such.

Our solicitor sought clarification on this and the seller has come back to say that they won't provide a certificate of exemption or a compliance cert for building regs. This has now set off alarm bells for us but a friend of mine said that this is pretty common with attic conversions like this.

To be honest we don't care if the current space is compliant because we intend on doing some pretty major revamping of the house, but should we be concerned about this? What are the risks/ramifications? Really concerned about this now.

Gumbo

adocholiday wrote: »

Hi everyone,

Clueless on this stuff so some advice would be appreciated. I'm sale agreed on a house and the contracts are with our solicitor but there's a snag. The current owners converted the attic of the house without planning permission. When I say converted I mean just put up plasterboard, a couple of Velux windows and some basic flooring with an access stairs to give them some kind of workshop space. It isn't a habitable space nor is it being sold as such.

Our solicitor sought clarification on this and the seller has come back to say that they won't provide a certificate of exemption or a compliance cert for building regs. This has now set off alarm bells for us but a friend of mine said that this is pretty common with attic conversions like this.

To be honest we don't care if the current space is compliant because we intend on doing some pretty major revamping of the house, but should we be concerned about this? What are the risks/ramifications? Really concerned about this now.

You have to decide if you want it or not.
Usually the seller provides a Cert to say it’s planning exempt which the attic conversion is based on the info you supplied, but there’s also building regulations to contend with. If it can’t meet them for fire refs or similar, then people can’t get the Cert.

Usually certified for storage only which most solicitors seem to be happy with.

smelly sock

kceire wrote: »

You have to decide if you want it or not.
Usually the seller provides a Cert to say it’s planning exempt which the attic conversion is based on the info you supplied, but there’s also building regulations to contend with. If it can’t meet them for fire refs or similar, then people can’t get the Cert.

Usually certified for storage only which most solicitors seem to be happy with.

+1. I wouldnt let this put you off buying if you really want it. Not a big deal.

Gumbo

smelly sock wrote: »

+1. I wouldnt let this put you off buying if you really want it. Not a big deal.

But I would explore what’s required to make it safe, particularly from a fire safety perspective. Advanced warning of fire, containing a fire, escape so in other words, smoke detection, fire door and escapeable windows up there.

Snotty

kceire wrote: »

Cert to say it’s planning exempt which the attic conversion is based on the info you supplied.

But there is windows installed, isn't planning required for that?

adocholiday

kceire wrote: »

You have to decide if you want it or not.
Usually the seller provides a Cert to say it’s planning exempt which the attic conversion is based on the info you supplied, but there’s also building regulations to contend with. If it can’t meet them for fire refs or similar, then people can’t get the Cert.

Usually certified for storage only which most solicitors seem to be happy with.

Our own surveyor said that it wasn't fire reg compliant so we're in this with eyes wide open but we thought that if this is just a storage space then none of that matters. If we could get it certified as such, thereby avoiding the compliance and reg stuff then that'd do us but not a single party has mentioned that to us as an option.

The solicitor was concerned that the bank would withhold the mortgage on the basis of this being uncertified and unauthorised development.

Alkers

If the velux is to the rear it doesn't require planning

normanbond

Very simple solution according to our engineer as we faced something similar. Take out the stairs to the attic and replace it with a stira hatch access to the attic. Problem solved as attic is deemed only suitable for storage. Once you are domiciled in the house you can then decide if you want to reinstate the stairs for more enjoyable access.
Engineers like many other other professionals have their hands tied when it comes to compliance ....it's a matter of being paperwork compliant versus enjoyment of the space. Every year a new 'chin scratcher' comes up with a new idea (or regulation) to cover that one million to one possibility.
Yes we need regulations but really do we really need all of the stacks of regulations that are rolling out on an almost monthly basis???

Calahonda52

OP: you say it is not been sold as habitable space but has velux windows:
therefore two questions arise.
1: do the windows require planning: i.e. are they to the front?
2: does "storage" require compliance with building regs?

re this
"The solicitor was concerned that the bank would withhold the mortgage on the basis of this being uncertified and unauthorised development."
based on the two questions above, what is this in the sentence above?

adocholiday

Thanks all. The velux windows are to the rear alright so no concern there it appears. There are 2 small triangular windows set into the arch at each side of the house too but I'll have to ask if they were part of the original build. No front facing windows in the roof.

I can ask about having a stira style hatch put in. The stairs that's there is literally just a few steps put into a cut out recess. There's no handrail or anything like that (which no doubt contributes to the non-compliance!)

Gumbo

normanbond wrote: »

Very simple solution according to our engineer as we faced something similar. Take out the stairs to the attic and replace it with a stira hatch access to the attic. Problem solved as attic is deemed only suitable for storage. Once you are domiciled in the house you can then decide if you want to reinstate the stairs for more enjoyable access.
Engineers like many other other professionals have their hands tied when it comes to compliance ....it's a matter of being paperwork compliant versus enjoyment of the space. Every year a new 'chin scratcher' comes up with a new idea (or regulation) to cover that one million to one possibility.
Yes we need regulations but really do we really need all of the stacks of regulations that are rolling out on an almost monthly basis???

When you alter a 2 storey house to make it a 3 storey house, you alter the structural characteristics of the building fabric and change the dynamic in which fire spreads. You can be damn right Regulations need to be in place for situations like this.

Calahonda52

adocholiday wrote: »

Thanks all. The velux windows are to the rear alright so no concern there it appears. There are 2 small triangular windows set into the arch at each side of the house too but I'll have to ask if they were part of the original build. No front facing windows in the roof.

I can ask about having a stira style hatch put in. The stairs that's there is literally just a few steps put into a cut out recess. There's no handrail or anything like that (which no doubt contributes to the non-compliance!)

time for picture

adocholiday

I've uploaded an album with some views here. Apologies for image quality but all I had handy was a walkthrough video of the house so they're screen grabs from that. I also put in a (very rough ) representation of the exterior of the house to show the window layout. There are 3 velux windows facing front but there's another roof in front of it. Don't know if it's relevant but this is a standalone house with no neighbours so there's no risk of overlooking or anything like that.

Also I see I was wrong about the stairs they actually have a proper stairs in it's just enclosed.

BryanF

Based on photos: Planning review required and compliance with building regs. As that’s a 3 storey house.

Calahonda52

BryanF wrote: »

Based on photos: Planning review required and compliance with building regs. As that’s a 3 storey house.

Wonder what would be required if you sealed off the ope/door at the bottom of the stairs and left it as stage?

OP: please confirm it is now 3 storey and not a converted dormer: I don't see any door closers

Metric Tensor

Can you just clarify OP - Is this converted attic adding a second storey onto a bungalow or a third storey onto a two storey? There are some key differences.

On the other point that is converted to a habitable space - no way you could argue otherwise - it's even carpetted for crying out loud!!!

adocholiday

It's a bungalow with a converted upstairs. Technically a dormer now I guess. Re the carpet to be fair it's just a half done job to cover the floor they're not even pinned or properly fitted. Could be lifted by hand in 5 minutes. There is nothing in the space other than basic plasterboard on the walls. The whole lot except the stairs and a door could be restored to its original state in half a day with no effort.

Metric Tensor

kceire - who's opinion counts on such items - used to have a saying that if Granny can get there then it's habitable!

Granny would have no bother getting into that "attic".

However because it's a dormer the fire rules are a little less stringent but still must be obeyed - the stairs, head height, windows, etc. are probably still non-compliant from a building regulations point of view (planning aside). Hard to know what way to approach compliance that doesn't involve taking out the stairs.

Calahonda52

Metric Tensor wrote: »

Can you just clarify OP - Is this converted attic adding a second storey onto a bungalow or a third storey onto a two storey? There are some key differences.

On the other point that is converted to a habitable space - no way you could argue otherwise - it's even carpetted for crying out loud!!!

It's converted yes, but need not be advertised as habitable space.
I used to live in such a house and when the houses were sold the headroom issue meant they were advertised as storage.

I will try find a screen shot

Gumbo

Metric Tensor wrote: »

kceire - who's opinion counts on such items - used to have a saying that if Granny can get there then it's habitable!

Granny would have no bother getting into that "attic".

However because it's a dormer the fire rules are a little less stringent but still must be obeyed - the stairs, head height, windows, etc. are probably still non-compliant from a building regulations point of view (planning aside). Hard to know what way to approach compliance that doesn't involve taking out the stairs.

Only 2 storey as you say, so less fire regulations apply.
I think the presence of the fixed stairs means its an accessible storey, but its only a 2 storey dwelling so protected stair core etc need not apply.

TGD K may kick in for stairs, head room, but if its storage, games room etc you can apply the TGDK loft conversion criteria in my opinion.

Basically, its not habitable space, and anybody living there should be familiar with the stairs layout and thus pose lesser a risk.

adocholiday

kceire wrote: »

TGD K may kick in for stairs, head room, but if its storage, games room etc you can apply the TGDK loft conversion criteria in my opinion.

Basically, its not habitable space, and anybody living there should be familiar with the stairs layout and thus pose lesser a risk.

What exactly would make this a non-habitable space? I think this is the crux of the issue for us. Does a habitable space have a definition or is it down to the discretion of the planner or engineer signing off the regs?

Can we realistically expect that a surveyor/architect could go in there and legally sign off on this space as storage (stairs excepted for now just for argument's sake, we can look at the TGDK stuff) in its current form? And then in turn that this classification would suffice to remove any requirements for planning compliance or building regs.

If we can do that, it removes the blocker for us signing off the contracts and closing the purchase.

Gumbo

adocholiday wrote: »

What exactly would make this a non-habitable space? I think this is the crux of the issue for us. Does a habitable space have a definition or is it down to the discretion of the planner or engineer signing off the regs?

Can we realistically expect that a surveyor/architect could go in there and legally sign off on this space as storage (stairs excepted for now just for argument's sake, we can look at the TGDK stuff) in its current form? And then in turn that this classification would suffice to remove any requirements for planning compliance or building regs.

If we can do that, it removes the blocker for us signing off the contracts and closing the purchase.

Habitable Space - Room accessible by means of safe passage and in compliance with all building regulations and planning regulations for things such as daylight, ventilation, head heights, means of escape, fire detection, sound, energy .....

Calahonda52

It is more that it fails to meet the habitable requirements and therefore fails to meet the TGDs

You say it is not being sold/advertised as habitable space so then I see no issue

Metric Tensor

My issue with this is (and I'm happy to be corrected by kc and CH) is that just because it's not "sold" as habitable doesn't mean it's not being used as habitable.

(For example I can build a flat in my garden and rent it to students but when I put the house for sale call it a games room. That doesn't stop it from being a flat or used as one.)

So it comes down to the interpretation of all concerned, and most particularly building control, as to what this space is - rather than what it's referred to on the drawings.

a. If there was a bed upstairs it would be clear that it is being used as a bedroom and regardless of the vendor calling it an attic it would be clearly a non-compliant habitable space.

b. If there were full of boxes and Christmas decorations, it would clearly be a store room, used as a store.

In the OP's case it appears to have carpeted floors, fully finished second fix timberwork, plastered, door saddles, light switches, etc. If I was a building control officer (God forbid!) and I walked up that stairs I'd have serious questions as to whether it is/was/will be used as habitable space and hence that it might not be compliant.

HOWEVER, I'm not a building control officer and a contributor to this thread who expressed an opinion that it was not habitable space would have a line of thinking that would be much more aligned to that of a control officer!

Lumen

From a practical perspective it seems probable that this house is a total bastard to heat, so after the first winter of setting fire to money you'll want to gut the upstairs anyway to fix the insulation/airtightness, just to make the downstairs habitable.

Calahonda52

MT: I concur with your thinking, as i do with KC's
However, IMO,the issue here is not a BC/Planning compliance issue but a credit issue, so putting on my much maligned lender hat, what is is at issue here, IMO, is whether the OP over pays, with my loan, for a house that I may not be able to be resell without a loss because of some work done in the attic.

The attached are from my old estate.

Metric Tensor

What wonderful room names CH!

I always believed the bank's stance was that some nit picking pr!ck like me will come along and tell my client they should not purchase the house at all unless substantial remedial works are carried out to make it compliant as to buy a house that is non-compliant would be ill-advised. Therefore completely preventing the sale rather than reducing the sale price.

Of course we all know that bank sales often tend to be "caveat emptor," auctioned properties to cash buyers who take on a substantial level of risk with regards to compliance - which would make you wonder about their insistence on compliance checks in the first place.

If only a certain system that was allegedly developed to overcome such issues was put together a little differently!!!

adocholiday

Thanks everyone for your valuable input. I'm going to ask our solicitor to go back to the vendor requesting that they get a suitably qualified professional to sign off the area as a storage space, and to do any works necessary to facilitate that. Once that's done we're happy to sign the contracts. If they can't facilitate that then we may have no option but to walk away. We're not going to buy a property that doesn't have the necessary sign offs and we have to draw the line there.

Mark1916

adocholiday wrote: »

Thanks everyone for your valuable input. I'm going to ask our solicitor to go back to the vendor requesting that they get a suitably qualified professional to sign off the area as a storage space, and to do any works necessary to facilitate that. Once that's done we're happy to sign the contracts. If they can't facilitate that then we may have no option but to walk away. We're not going to buy a property that doesn't have the necessary sign offs and we have to draw the line there.

Based on prior experience I would also look to get a suitably qualified structural engineer in, you would hope that RSJ's (rolled steel joists) were used to structurally support the attic conversion and that the attic has it's own independent floor. If not the load from the conversion could be coming down on non load bearing walls which can be a bit of an issue, in these cases timber has been used as the main structural component. I would look to get this checked out for sure!

Calahonda52

Mark1916 wrote: »

Based on prior experience I would also look to get a suitably qualified structural engineer in, you would hope that RSJ's (rolled steel joists) were used to structurally support the attic conversion and that the attic has it's own independent floor. If not the load from the conversion could be coming down on non load bearing walls which can be a bit of an issue, in these cases timber has been used as the main structural component. I would look to get this checked out for sure!

Its a dormer bungalow, which came with a window in each gable end so my view is that the first floor joists were already sized for the conversion, at least that was the case in the ones I have lived in.

A quick look behind the knee wall will tell