Certificate of Compliance required for Residential Period Property?

Rothmans

Hi All.

I have a bit of a technical question in relation to the Building Regs.

A friend of mine has recently gone sale agreed on a Period Property built c. 1890. It is a three storey property.

The house has not had any extensions whatsoever, either prior or subsequent to 01/10/1964. Nor has there been a change of use in the property. It is a residential property.


His surveyor is stating that a Certificate of Compliance with the Building Regulations is required in relation to the property to proceed with the sale. However, the sellers have engaged an architect to look into the issue. He has come back saying that as the property was constructed before 1st October 1964, there is no requirement for compliance with Planning Regs or Building Regs.

My friend's surveyor has come back and stated that the Building Regs apply regardless of the age.

However, the earliest Building Regs in Ireland that I can find are those of SI 306/1991. These Regs commenced on 01/06/92, and these Regulations specifically state that they do no apply to buildings/works commenced before the 01/06/92. Subsequent building Regs contain the same proviso.

I can't help but feels that my friend's surveyor has gotten this one wrong.
I bought a property of a similar age myself in the same area only a few years ago, and there were absolutely no issues whatsoever. (Although I engaged a Surveyor that specialised in Period Buildings - I have advised my friend to do likewise).

If his Surveyor was correct in his assertion, surely no Period properties would ever change hands as they weren't built to current Building standards?

How can a Certificate of Compliance be furnished or required in respect of a Property that doesn't actually come within the scope of the Building Regs?

Do any users here have any insights on this issue?

Gumbo

The vendor can simply provide a cert to say the property is as it was built originally. If no modifications or alterations have taken place then no compliance issues arise. This property is even too old for Bye Law approval which is what the standards were before the Building Regulations were introduced in 1992.

Sounds like your friend engaged an over eager surveyor.

Rothmans

Gumbo wrote: »

The vendor can simply provide a cert to say the property is as it was built originally. If no modifications or alterations have taken place then no compliance issues arise. This property is even too old for Bye Law approval which is what the standards were before the Building Regulations were introduced in 1992.

Sounds like your friend engaged an over eager surveyor.

Thanks. That's exactly what I thought. So a new surveyor is probably the most appropriate course of action then?

Mellor

Gross incompetence from the surveyor.
That’s extremely basic stuff to get wrong. As you can see for yourself, it took you no time to turn up the 1991 regs and the text that states they don’t apply retroactively.
The architect on the other side is also confusing planning permission (1964) with building regs. But not your friends issue.

I’d be strongly considering a new surveyor with a bit of experience.
I’d also be tempted to write a letter stating it was in in accordance with all regs in force at the time if commencement of construction.

Metric Tensor

As Mellor said it does comply with every single one of the building regulations that was in place at the time it was built!

It sounds like someone has a "list" that they are working to and isn't fully aware of what Building Regulations or indeed Bye-laws are/were.

Rothmans

Many thanks folks. They contacted the fella who surveyed my own house and he found no issues, so things are running smoothly now. Fingers crossed there'll be no more hiccups.