Buying a house with unauthorised extension

oppy30

Hi all,


I have gone sale agreed for a house, and when sending the contracts the vendor has disclosed that one of the extension works is unauthorised.


I am not familiar with the legislation, so I am trying to figure out the potential consequences of proceeding with the purchase. The work has been done more than 7 years ago, so as far as I understand it's protected by actions from the local authority. On the other hand, I seem to understand that:
- the unauthorised work might cause problems if applying for planning permission for any work to the house - which would be my intention in the next future, and
- banks are likely to refuse a mortgage on the house because of it - not my problem at the moment, but might make it more difficult to re-sell the house.


Is this correct?


The extension is a large 1st floor bathroom with a window at the back of the house. The local authority is DCC. Is it particularly likely/unlikely to get retention permission, by any chance?


I'll be having a survey done in the next days and I hope the surveyor can give me more info to make a decision, but I thought I might hear from people with similar experiences.

elperello

You should take advice from your solicitor.
The normal procedure is to get the vendor to apply for and get retention permission.

oppy30

oppy30 wrote: »

The work has been done more than 7 years ago, so as far as I understand it's protected by actions from the local authority. .

Where are you getting this from?

mugsymugsy

elperello wrote: »

You should take advice from your solicitor.
The normal procedure is to get the vendor to apply for and get retention permission.

Yeah get them to solve and a good solicitor would encourage this to happen.

oppy30

Dav010 wrote: »

Where are you getting this from?

The same report provided by the vendor that highlighted the issue mentions this as a provision of the Local Government Regulations 2018. If you google for "seven years rule" you should find plenty of results.

mickdw

Ya there is a 7 year statute however all it means is that they cannot make you take it down. All other powers remain so it's far from being legit even when 7 years plus.
They don't have to grant retention permission for it. They could apply all sorts of conditions to any permission they would grant so best to get current owner to apply for permission.
Have your own surveyor check to be sure it's not exempted development.

Dolbhad

If it was built more than 7 years ago, the council can’t make you knock on down. However it doesn’t comply with planning permission and is an unauthorised development.

Your options are sellers go for retention. They will resist doing so as it will cost time and money. Second option is qualifying to the bank about the non compliance of planning. If bank says no than either you push for retention or move on.

If bank says yes you can go ahead. However day you buy is the day you sell. You’ll have the same issue again if you want to sell or re mortgage the house.

If you want to make any changes to the house that requires planning, the council could decline on the basis of the unauthorised development and will make you go about retention to put it all in order. They could also attach whatever conditions they want to the retention.

the_syco

oppy30 wrote: »

- banks are likely to refuse a mortgage on the house because of it - not my problem at the moment, but might make it more difficult to re-sell the house.

From this, I assume you're a cash buyer. Did the sale mention only cash buyers?

From the way the seller has told you about this only after they gave you the contracts, I'd wonder what they haven't told you?

oppy30

the_syco wrote: »

From this, I assume you're a cash buyer. Did the sale mention only cash buyers?

From the way the seller has told you about this only after they gave you the contracts, I'd wonder what they haven't told you?

No, the ads didn't mention that.


Surely they could have been more upfront, on the other hand I imagine that they could have as well omitted this and left my surveyor figure it out? Do they have any obligation at all to disclose this kind of issues?

antoinolachtnai

oppy30 wrote: »

No, the ads didn't mention that.


Surely they could have been more upfront, on the other hand I imagine that they could have as well omitted this and left my surveyor figure it out? Do they have any obligation at all to disclose this kind of issues?

They do not have any obligation really, beyond what they have done.

How big is this problematic extension?

looksee

I'd be very concerned about a first floor extension, it was probably just built on walls and foundations that were not intended for another floor on top

mickdw

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

They do not have any obligation really, beyond what they have done.

How big is this problematic extension?

Your Solicitor would have requested cert of compliance with planning from them.
They would be unable to get clean cert in this case. Best they would get a professional to produce with be a cert noting the area of non compliance which is likely what you got.

Chris_5339762

Refuse to sign until the vendor pays for retention permission and gets an engineers report to certify it safe once that is done. All of this will take months.


Alternatively, run, as this is a minefield.

oppy30

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

They do not have any obligation really, beyond what they have done.

How big is this problematic extension?

Won't know exactly until the survey, I'd say around 12m2.


It is on top of another extension on the ground floor. IIRC the vendor told us they were done at the same time, so I would hope they built things properly to account for the two floors.

Marcusm

oppy30 wrote: »

Won't know exactly until the survey, I'd say around 12m2.


It is on top of another extension on the ground floor. IIRC the vendor told us they were done at the same time, so I would hope they built things properly to account for the two floors.

At those sizes and to the rear, are you sure it’s not exempted development (ie less than 40 sq m in aggregate)?

Vita nova

As has been mentioned above the normal procedure would be for the seller to get retention and a certificate of compliance before proceeding with the sale.

However, you could also look for a large reduction in the price and apply for retention yourself assuming you're a cash buyer. It sounds like the ext doesn't really add to the value of the house and that you're planning your own extension, so that if the worst comes to the worst and you have to knock it down then it's not a problem. I'd imagine knocking something down, clearing up and making good the walls and ground is relatively cheap.
.

ted1

What size is the extension below ? And is it the width of the house or does it have any space at the sides ?

oppy30

Marcusm wrote: »

At those sizes and to the rear, are you sure it’s not exempted development (ie less than 40 sq m in aggregate)?

I am having my surveyor double-check that but I am not too hopeful, surely if there were any possibility of it being exempt the vendors wouldn't have raised this issue themselves.

ted1 wrote: »

What size is the extension below ? And is it the width of the house or does it have any space at the sides ?

The one below is the width of the house, not sure about the size but probably around 40m2 (should be below as they say that one is exempt). The 1st floor one is around half the house's width, attached to one of the sides.

Gumbo

oppy30 wrote: »

I am having my surveyor double-check that but I am not too hopeful, surely if there were any possibility of it being exempt the vendors wouldn't have raised this issue themselves.




The one below is the width of the house, not sure about the size but probably around 40m2 (should be below as they say that one is exempt). The 1st floor one is around half the house's width, attached to one of the sides.

You cannot enjoy the exemptions while there are unauthorised works on the property.

ebayissues

Did you proceed with the houe purchase?

oppy30

We got our survey done. It turned out that the extension was unauthorised, *and* there were a few more minor unauthorised additions to the property, *and* the attic conversion was not habitable (even though it had been included in the bedrooms count in the property ad).

Our surveyor told us that the unauthorised additions were reasonably likely to get retention, and we thought we could live with the attic being non-habitable, so we asked for a few €Ks off the price and were willing to take the risk. The vendor refused, so we walked away.

oppy30

oppy30 wrote: »

We got our survey done. It turned out that the extension was unauthorised, *and* there were a few more minor unauthorised additions to the property, *and* the attic conversion was not habitable (even though it had been included in the bedrooms count in the property ad).

Our surveyor told us that the unauthorised additions were reasonably likely to get retention, and we thought we could live with the attic being non-habitable, so we asked for a few €Ks off the price and were willing to take the risk. The vendor refused, so we walked away.

Fair play. So many people get so involved emotionally in a property that they can't bring themselves to walk away once they've committed, despite how many red flags get raised.


Unless you were looking for massive money off the price, it seems a bit mad that they didn't just offer to knock a small bit off to get the sale over the line and forget about the house and move on.


(Unless you were looking for massive money off, obviously, in which case they may have just felt insulted). Hopefully they'll go in for retention now and try and sell it properly. Although i wonder, if the Council refuse retention, is that them in major hassle then, as they can't even sell it with the promise of potential retention (maybe that's why they don't want to go for retention?)

oppy30

I asked for the amount they claimed was needed for retention (reasonable, but a bit on the low side given the quotes we got) plus 3K for the attic not being habitable. Doesn't sound like something over which I'd get offended (especially over a total bill of several €100Ks), but who knows. He was willing to concede only the amount for retention, and demanded that some outstanding solicitor's queries be dropped in order to close quickly. Didn't sound worth the risk.



I think he believes that he'll find someone not as picky or diligent and get more (the house is back on sale today). I am sure he will, only it's not going to be me.

Mitch Buchannon

oppy30 wrote: »

I think he believes that he'll find someone not as picky or diligent and get more (the house is back on sale today). I am sure he will, only it's not going to be me.

Any chance of a link to the property for sale ?

Claw Hammer

If people are thick enough to carry out unauthorised extensions they are thick enough to hold out for silly money.
In carrying out works on the house there would have been no professional input and the quality of the work itself may not be of the best since they wouldn't have been to concerned with regulations or standards.

ebayissues

D.D is really required tbh. The agent should have raised this with the sellers and even mentioned it on the advert.



Can you pm a link for the property?

oppy30

I'd rather not say which specific property it is. Suffice to say it's a house in North Dublin.