Buying a house probably requiring rentention planning

Archaeoliz

I'm not sure if this is best placed here or in Construction and Planning but as it's to do with purchase I thought this was the right place?

We've put in a low ball bid on a house which was built in about 1990ish. It's a dormer bungalow. In 2008 planning permission was granted to build a granny annexe. The annexe was built in 2009. I've got hold of copies of the plans from the CC website and the annexe built is not the one granted permission for.

The one granted permission had an extra dormer window in the roof and two extra windows on the ground floor side elevation which weren't put in. Also there were patio doors permitted at the back but a small window and a normal door were put in instead. The internal layout is also significantly different with a bathroom downstairs rather than up (it has the small window).

In order to buy the place does it need retention planning permission? What would be the pitfalls of this? Is it something we should wait for as a condition of sale? We would like to do some work to it. Nothing dramatic but we might need planning too (plans not solid enough to know yet, as we've only just started the bidding process!).

Any advice appreciated!

Gumbo

It may not need retention permission of the extension is already in substantial compliance with the granted planning already.

Internal layout is largely irrelevant. It doesn't matter where you place internal rooms aslong as building regulations are adhered to.

Windows and that to the rear may be exempt and may not have an impact on it.

What would trouble me is the lack of external structures that have not been completed such as the dormer windows etc

Has the vendor got a certificate of compliance with building and planning regulations?

If so you can question the omitted items, if it doesn't then the vendor needs to bring the extension into compliance or apply for retention permission.

Is there internal access from the main house to the granny flat?

Archaeoliz

kceire wrote: »

It may not need retention permission of the extension is already in substantial compliance with the granted planning already.

Internal layout is largely irrelevant. It doesn't matter where you place internal rooms aslong as building regulations are adhered to.

Windows and that to the rear may be exempt and may not have an impact on it.

What would trouble me is the lack of external structures that have not been completed such as the dormer windows etc

Has the vendor got a certificate of compliance with building and planning regulations?

If so you can question the omitted items, if it doesn't then the vendor needs to bring the extension into compliance or apply for retention permission.

Is there internal access from the main house to the granny flat?

That's excellent information - thanks!

I've asked the EA what the situation is and am waiting for a reply so I'm jumping the gun slightly but trying to find out what I should be looking for. At the moment I don't know if it's got compliance or not, just that what's there isn't the same as permission.

Good to hear that the internal layout shouldn't be a problem (building regs dependent).

The plans show internal access from the main house but what was built doesn't have it. It's currently completely separate. Will that have an impact too?

Archaeoliz

Finally heard from the Estate Agent today saying that "He doesn’t have a cert of compliance but has said he would go about getting one." She's spoken to an Engineer who reportedly said "he doesn’t think the lack of windows would cause a problem and the fact that there is minus a dormer window wouldn’t cause an issue as its less than what was planned." but then she goes on to say "He hasn’t seen the house so obviously cannot commit."

We've told her to get back to us when he's got the cert and we'll go from there.

Nice house, reckon we'll keep looking while he figures it out given the place has been for sale (on and off according to daftdrop) since 2012, and went sale agreed last year but didn't complete. EA sidestepped the question of why it didn't complete.

I reckon there's a problem lurking there... don't know what but I smell something off.