Engineer/architect signing off

bofo

Well folks!
(We’re at the stage of pouring our concrete for footings today)
I was talking to the architect about signing off the plans at the various stages of inspection and suggested that this service may not be required if we are not looking to get a mortgage for the construction… He recons there may be a loop-hole in the process since the signing-off process is primarily for the benefit of the banks and the subsequent release of money. He has however reminded me about its implications for insurance and selling on the property.
What I’m hoping to get in this post is a bit of clarification from ‘those in the know’:
Is there a possibility of not getting the house signed off at the moment but seek it retrospectively in the future
or
is the signing off process mandatory and needed by the council/planning control?
Thanks for any advice.

Brendan (Co Monaghan)

archtech

generally speaking it it not mandatory for a property to be signed off for the purpose of satisfying the planning authority. sometimes there may be a condition relating to a specific item in the planning conditions.

as regards signing off retrospectively, it is easy enough to have done in the case of planning permission, however with building regulations it is more difficult and few professionals will do it, if they haven't inspected the house during construction.

its much easier have these things done at the time of construction rather than at a later date, when you for example are trying to close the sale of the house and discover that it needs retention permission and this leads to a delay or possible falling through of the sale.

Your bank will most properly require an opinion of compliance with planning permission and building regulations anyway to release the final money due on the property.

Supertech

Brendan, for your own peace of mind, and to avoid any potetial problems in the future, I'd suggest you get the construction of the house supervised in some fashion now. If not, you will be left open to all sorts of risks if you decide to sell in the future. At the very least, you should have a standard stage payment supervision done to head off any major problems during the build. A cert can be issued retrospectively, but it will be full of qualifications and cop-out clauses, and basically not worth the paper it's written on in the eyes of some solicitors / purchasers. While the certification system is driven by the banks / legal profession, it offers you as the Client protection aswell, and certain aspects of the development may require provision of certifciation to the Local Authority also. These would be noted in the conditions of your planning permission.

sinnerboy

archtech wrote: »

as regards signing off retrospectively, ....., however with building regulations it is more difficult and few professionals will do it, if they haven't inspected the house during construction. .

RIAI advise to members is - don't do it

muffler

As others have rightly said there is no obligation to have the works supervised/signed off on once you dont have a mortgage but for peace of mind during the construction and to prevent difficulties in the future should you decide to sell or indeed even mortgage the property it is strongly recommended that you have the works supervised from start to finish and then get all the relevant certs from your engineer/architect.

Look on it this way. Will you be taking out building and contents insurance to protect your investment once the house is complete? Im sure you will. The same goes for protecting it at construction stage.

Slig

At the minute there are a couple looking to get retrospective certs of compliance done on a house they built without supervision. The solicitor has requested them and nobody will do it. their house will therefor not be sold. Its like driving a car without insurance (except as stated above the certs are not compulsory).

sinnerboy

Law Society obliges solicitors to SEEK certs of compliance . Usually ( not always ) compliance with planning can be obtained retrospectively . Compliance with building regs - rarely .

Vendors can DECLARE no certs or only partial certs will be provided and the sale can proceed ...... IF purchasers financiers agree ........

In this scenario the vendors position is weak but not impossible . In more recent buoyant times many sales proceeded on this basis . In current climate ...vendors position very weak indeed

ircoha

Spend the money now and get a clean sign-off.
Any future certification will cost the same and be worth very little as the certifier wont be able to state that all hidden construction is in order.

As SB has noted the problem usually arises in a sale situation and is
often used as an method to try drive down the price.

Case in point:
Sister in law selling house with a number of extensions that had been added on. all had planning but no building certs.
Purchaser signed up, paid deposit, and then his solicitor started the process of seeking certs for all the extensions.
One in particular was seeking a cert re the fireproofing of a steel joist that had been added instead of a supporting wall.
She said no cert, he said: okay he would pay 100k less, out of 800k

We refused to budge on the cert and we sold to underbidder at 810!

RKQ

I agree with all the above.
Get the construction supervised / inspected during construction and have it certified.
I wouldn't touch a property without full certificates of compliance. Its not compulsory but I would be suspicious of a property without full certificates. I've seen some awful work by real cowboys! Avoid the nightmare....

An Architect, Technician or Engineer may spot a potential problem on site, which could be rectified during construction, before its too late.

Peace of mind alone is worth it and just better construction details / quality of workmanship etc. Everyone works better when they know "someone" will be out to check it before they are paid.

bofo

Folks - some fantastic advice there. It's all very much appreciated. Thank you all for the time and pointers. Top class!!!

All the best for the time being

Brendan