What are the consequences of not notifying Building Control about
notifiable work?

Plumber friend of mine is putting in a unvented system (he has the
qualification to do this) and asked me if I knew what the would happen
if he didn't put the building notice in.

Cheers

Martin
--
Martin Carroll

Martin Carroll wrote:
What are the consequences of not notifying Building Control about
notifiable work?

Plumber friend of mine is putting in a unvented system (he has the
qualification to do this) and asked me if I knew what the would happen
if he didn't put the building notice in.

If the property owner tries to sell the property (s)he will be asked for
proof that the work has been authorised. If the owner cannot produce the
documentation then they will have to pay to get it inspected and approved.
It is much easier and cheaper to get it done according to the rules.

Peter Crosland

"Peter Crosland" wrote in message
...
Martin Carroll wrote:
What are the consequences of not notifying Building Control about
notifiable work?

Plumber friend of mine is putting in a unvented system (he has the
qualification to do this) and asked me if I knew what the would happen
if he didn't put the building notice in.

If the property owner tries to sell the property (s)he will be asked for
proof that the work has been authorised. If the owner cannot produce the
documentation then they will have to pay to get it inspected and approved.
It is much easier and cheaper to get it done according to the rules.

Peter Crosland


I cannot understand why he would not notify it. Unless its not being fitted
properly.

Rgds
Steve
(also unvented registered)

On Thu, 6 Dec 2007 20:48:21 -0000, Peter Crosland wrote:
Martin Carroll wrote:
What are the consequences of not notifying Building Control about
notifiable work?

Plumber friend of mine is putting in a unvented system (he has the
qualification to do this) and asked me if I knew what the would happen
if he didn't put the building notice in.

If the property owner tries to sell the property (s)he will be asked for
proof that the work has been authorised. If the owner cannot produce the
documentation then they will have to pay to get it inspected and approved.
It is much easier and cheaper to get it done according to the rules.

Isn't it up to the potential buyer to decide whether to just go ahead
anyway?
Obviously their solicitor will huff and puff and say you've _got_ to
provide the paperwork, but can't the buyer just ignore that.

--
.................................................. .........................
.. never trust a man who, when left alone ...... Pete Lynch .
.. in a room with a tea cosy ...... Marlow, England .
.. doesn't try it on (Billy Connolly) .....................................

Stephen Dawson wrote:
"Peter Crosland" wrote in message
...
Martin Carroll wrote:
What are the consequences of not notifying Building Control about
notifiable work?


I cannot understand why he would not notify it. Unless its not being fitted
properly.

To save the building notice fee presumably.

David

On Thu, 06 Dec 2007 22:58:21 +0000, Peter Lynch wrote:

On Thu, 6 Dec 2007 20:48:21 -0000, Peter Crosland wrote:
Martin Carroll wrote:
What are the consequences of not notifying Building Control about
notifiable work?

Plumber friend of mine is putting in a unvented system (he has the
qualification to do this) and asked me if I knew what the would happen
if he didn't put the building notice in.

If the property owner tries to sell the property (s)he will be asked
for proof that the work has been authorised. If the owner cannot
produce the documentation then they will have to pay to get it
inspected and approved. It is much easier and cheaper to get it done
according to the rules.

Isn't it up to the potential buyer to decide whether to just go ahead
anyway?
Obviously their solicitor will huff and puff and say you've _got_ to
provide the paperwork, but can't the buyer just ignore that.

That maybe so, but there will be many buyers who will take the solicitor
more seriously than is warranted.

The cost to someone who is qualified to put a building notice in quite
small (£2.50 for me), so why i this guy not doing it? Is it that he
really isn't qualified?


--
Ed Sirett - Property maintainer and registered gas fitter.
The FAQ for uk.diy is at http://www.diyfaq.org.uk
Gas fitting FAQ http://www.makewrite.demon.co.uk/GasFitting.html
Sealed CH FAQ http://www.makewrite.demon.co.uk/SealedCH.html
Choosing a Boiler FAQ http://www.makewrite.demon.co.uk/BoilerChoice.html

Peter Lynch wrote:
On Thu, 6 Dec 2007 20:48:21 -0000, Peter Crosland wrote:
Martin Carroll wrote:
What are the consequences of not notifying Building Control about
notifiable work?

Plumber friend of mine is putting in a unvented system (he has the
qualification to do this) and asked me if I knew what the would
happen if he didn't put the building notice in.

If the property owner tries to sell the property (s)he will be asked
for proof that the work has been authorised. If the owner cannot
produce the documentation then they will have to pay to get it
inspected and approved. It is much easier and cheaper to get it done
according to the rules.

Isn't it up to the potential buyer to decide whether to just go ahead
anyway?
Obviously their solicitor will huff and puff and say you've _got_ to
provide the paperwork, but can't the buyer just ignore that.

In theory yes but it would be stupid to do so.

Peter Crosland

On 2007-12-06 22:58:21 +0000, Peter Lynch said:

On Thu, 6 Dec 2007 20:48:21 -0000, Peter Crosland wrote:
Martin Carroll wrote:
What are the consequences of not notifying Building Control about
notifiable work?

Plumber friend of mine is putting in a unvented system (he has the
qualification to do this) and asked me if I knew what the would happen
if he didn't put the building notice in.

If the property owner tries to sell the property (s)he will be asked for
proof that the work has been authorised. If the owner cannot produce the
documentation then they will have to pay to get it inspected and approved.
It is much easier and cheaper to get it done according to the rules.

Isn't it up to the potential buyer to decide whether to just go ahead
anyway?
Obviously their solicitor will huff and puff and say you've _got_ to
provide the paperwork, but can't the buyer just ignore that.

If they choose, but then that wouldn't justify an army of latter-day
Deryck Guylers advising on these things.

Ed Sirett wrote:
On Thu, 06 Dec 2007 22:58:21 +0000, Peter Lynch wrote:

On Thu, 6 Dec 2007 20:48:21 -0000, Peter Crosland wrote:
Martin Carroll wrote:
What are the consequences of not notifying Building Control about
notifiable work?

Plumber friend of mine is putting in a unvented system (he has the
qualification to do this) and asked me if I knew what the would
happen if he didn't put the building notice in.

If the property owner tries to sell the property (s)he will be asked
for proof that the work has been authorised. If the owner cannot
produce the documentation then they will have to pay to get it
inspected and approved. It is much easier and cheaper to get it done
according to the rules.

Isn't it up to the potential buyer to decide whether to just go ahead
anyway?
Obviously their solicitor will huff and puff and say you've _got_ to
provide the paperwork, but can't the buyer just ignore that.

That maybe so, but there will be many buyers who will take the
solicitor more seriously than is warranted.

The cost to someone who is qualified to put a building notice in quite
small (£2.50 for me), so why i this guy not doing it? Is it that he
really isn't qualified?

More likely that its a cash job & the building notice would create a paper
trail that HMRC could follow.


--
Dave - The Medway Handyman
www.medwayhandyman.co.uk
01634 717930
07850 597257

Peter Lynch wrote:

Isn't it up to the potential buyer to decide whether to just go ahead
anyway?
Obviously their solicitor will huff and puff and say you've _got_ to
provide the paperwork, but can't the buyer just ignore that.

This all assumes that the vendor even discloses that they had any work
done. Depending on what it is, it may or may not be obvious.

--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

Martin Carroll wrote:
What are the consequences of not notifying Building Control about
notifiable work?

Plumber friend of mine is putting in a unvented system (he has the
qualification to do this) and asked me if I knew what the would happen
if he didn't put the building notice in.

Nothing. Who is to say?

What is the sound of one hand clapping?


Cheers

Martin

Peter Crosland wrote:
Martin Carroll wrote:
What are the consequences of not notifying Building Control about
notifiable work?

Plumber friend of mine is putting in a unvented system (he has the
qualification to do this) and asked me if I knew what the would happen
if he didn't put the building notice in.

If the property owner tries to sell the property (s)he will be asked for
proof that the work has been authorised. If the owner cannot produce the
documentation then they will have to pay to get it inspected and approved.
It is much easier and cheaper to get it done according to the rules.


Mumble mumble done before my time mumble mumble take out 200 quid of
contingency insurance and give it to the purchaser mumble mumble.
\
Peter Crosland

Peter Crosland wrote:
Peter Lynch wrote:
On Thu, 6 Dec 2007 20:48:21 -0000, Peter Crosland wrote:
Martin Carroll wrote:
What are the consequences of not notifying Building Control about
notifiable work?

Plumber friend of mine is putting in a unvented system (he has the
qualification to do this) and asked me if I knew what the would
happen if he didn't put the building notice in.
If the property owner tries to sell the property (s)he will be asked
for proof that the work has been authorised. If the owner cannot
produce the documentation then they will have to pay to get it
inspected and approved. It is much easier and cheaper to get it done
according to the rules.
Isn't it up to the potential buyer to decide whether to just go ahead
anyway?
Obviously their solicitor will huff and puff and say you've _got_ to
provide the paperwork, but can't the buyer just ignore that.

In theory yes but it would be stupid to do so.


Not really.

Peter Crosland

In article , Ed Sirett
writes
On Thu, 06 Dec 2007 22:58:21 +0000, Peter Lynch wrote:

On Thu, 6 Dec 2007 20:48:21 -0000, Peter Crosland wrote:
Martin Carroll wrote:
What are the consequences of not notifying Building Control about
notifiable work?

Plumber friend of mine is putting in a unvented system (he has the
qualification to do this) and asked me if I knew what the would happen
if he didn't put the building notice in.

If the property owner tries to sell the property (s)he will be asked
for proof that the work has been authorised. If the owner cannot
produce the documentation then they will have to pay to get it
inspected and approved. It is much easier and cheaper to get it done
according to the rules.

Isn't it up to the potential buyer to decide whether to just go ahead
anyway?
Obviously their solicitor will huff and puff and say you've _got_ to
provide the paperwork, but can't the buyer just ignore that.

That maybe so, but there will be many buyers who will take the solicitor
more seriously than is warranted.

The cost to someone who is qualified to put a building notice in quite
small (£2.50 for me), so why i this guy not doing it? Is it that he
really isn't qualified?



£2.50! How do you manage that? The cost would be £117.50, hence the
question in the first place.

Martin

--
Martin Carroll

John Rumm wrote:
Peter Lynch wrote:

Isn't it up to the potential buyer to decide whether to just go ahead
anyway?
Obviously their solicitor will huff and puff and say you've _got_ to
provide the paperwork, but can't the buyer just ignore that.

This all assumes that the vendor even discloses that they had any work
done. Depending on what it is, it may or may not be obvious.

Of course vendors are often economical with the truth but they will have to
give written confirmation that all necessary consnet shave been obtained.
Lying could cost them a lot if found out.

Peter Crosland

The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Peter Crosland wrote:

If the property owner tries to sell the property (s)he will be asked for
proof that the work has been authorised. If the owner cannot produce the
documentation then they will have to pay to get it inspected and approved.
It is much easier and cheaper to get it done according to the rules.


Mumble mumble done before my time mumble mumble take out 200 quid of
contingency insurance and give it to the purchaser mumble mumble.
\

A friend of mine qualified as a Demostic Installer, at some cost to
himself, but wound up with very little work.

Since I can't believe that the area he lives in has stopped having
electrical work done, it raises the question of how much work in fact
get reported/certified.

A run-down repossessed house just down the road from here has been
enjoying the attention of a gang of people who work there 18 hours a
day. None of them speak English. From the chiselling sounds there's a
lot of chasing-out being done. One wonders if these people are
following the regs; but it seems they've bought it to do up and flog
at a profit.

Has anyone any estimates for what percentage of work gets notified?

Terry Fields wrote:

A friend of mine qualified as a Demostic Installer

OOPS!

ITYKWIM.

Lobster wrote:
Stephen Dawson wrote:
"Peter Crosland" wrote in message
...
Martin Carroll wrote:
What are the consequences of not notifying Building Control about
notifiable work?


I cannot understand why he would not notify it. Unless its not being
fitted properly.

To save the building notice fee presumably.

David


I would assume that he is qualified and registered through a company he
works for but the registration will not cover him for doing a homer for a
mate. Corgi registration normally works this way I believe.

cheers

David

Ed Sirett wrote:
On Thu, 06 Dec 2007 22:58:21 +0000, Peter Lynch wrote:

On Thu, 6 Dec 2007 20:48:21 -0000, Peter Crosland wrote:
Martin Carroll wrote:
What are the consequences of not notifying Building Control about
notifiable work?

Plumber friend of mine is putting in a unvented system (he has the
qualification to do this) and asked me if I knew what the would happen
if he didn't put the building notice in.
If the property owner tries to sell the property (s)he will be asked
for proof that the work has been authorised. If the owner cannot
produce the documentation then they will have to pay to get it
inspected and approved. It is much easier and cheaper to get it done
according to the rules.
Isn't it up to the potential buyer to decide whether to just go ahead
anyway?
Obviously their solicitor will huff and puff and say you've _got_ to
provide the paperwork, but can't the buyer just ignore that.

That maybe so, but there will be many buyers who will take the solicitor
more seriously than is warranted.

The cost to someone who is qualified to put a building notice in quite
small (£2.50 for me), so why i this guy not doing it? Is it that he
really isn't qualified?



As I understand it, if you are Corgi registered through a company the
registration only covers work done for that company. Doing a homer for a
mate would therefore not be covered.

Cheers

David

Peter Crosland wrote:
John Rumm wrote:
Peter Lynch wrote:

Isn't it up to the potential buyer to decide whether to just go ahead
anyway?
Obviously their solicitor will huff and puff and say you've _got_ to
provide the paperwork, but can't the buyer just ignore that.
This all assumes that the vendor even discloses that they had any work
done. Depending on what it is, it may or may not be obvious.

Of course vendors are often economical with the truth but they will have to
give written confirmation that all necessary consnet shave been obtained.
Lying could cost them a lot if found out.

Not really - an option on most of the query forms for sellers allow "I
don't know" or "I can't remember" as acceptable responses.

More to the point there is usually no guidance at all as to what
consents one would be expected to get for various improvements. Hence
most people will legitimately answer "yes" or "I have no idea"
regardless and be none the wiser.

Unless you have a good working knowledge of building regs you are
unlikely to even be aware when and where building notices are supposed
to have been submitted. What is more this is a moving target - each year
more (often increasingly trivial) aspects become notifiable, and it
seems the general level of respect for the rules, and the level of
interest of the conveyancing solicitors declines in direct response.

For example, a query might be asked as to whether any windows have been
replaced, with a follow on note to supply copies of any guarantees that
may be in force. No mention is made of regs compliance or FENSA certs.

--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

In message , John Rumm
writes

For example, a query might be asked as to whether any windows have been
replaced, with a follow on note to supply copies of any guarantees that
may be in force. No mention is made of regs compliance or FENSA certs.

I'm 95% certain that the forms we filled almost 3 years ago in asked for
Fensa certs if they applied.

And our buyers raised a query, and we queried somethings when we bought
this house.

I agree that many things will pass unnoticed either way. and that a
buyer has the choice of not worrying about things that don't have a BR
approval etc.

But there is also the risk of holding up a sale (in our case) - or of
buyers being put off by what they see as 'dodgy' things
--
Chris French

On Dec 6, 11:30 pm, "Peter Crosland" wrote:
Peter Lynch wrote:
On Thu, 6 Dec 2007 20:48:21 -0000, Peter Crosland wrote:
Martin Carroll wrote:
What are the consequences of not notifying Building Control about
notifiable work?

Plumber friend of mine is putting in a unvented system (he has the
qualification to do this) and asked me if I knew what the would
happen if he didn't put the building notice in.

If the property owner tries to sell the property (s)he will be asked
for proof that the work has been authorised. If the owner cannot
produce the documentation then they will have to pay to get it
inspected and approved. It is much easier and cheaper to get it done
according to the rules.

Isn't it up to the potential buyer to decide whether to just go ahead
anyway?
Obviously their solicitor will huff and puff and say you've _got_ to
provide the paperwork, but can't the buyer just ignore that.

In theory yes but it would be stupid to do so.

Peter Crosland

It was eminently sensible for the buyer of the last house I sold.

MBQ

chris French wrote:
In message , John Rumm
writes

For example, a query might be asked as to whether any windows have
been replaced, with a follow on note to supply copies of any
guarantees that may be in force. No mention is made of regs compliance
or FENSA certs.

I'm 95% certain that the forms we filled almost 3 years ago in asked for
Fensa certs if they applied.

The ones I did earlier this year made no mention of them... I think
solicitors have lost interest after the initial bout of enthusiasm when
they were introduced.

And our buyers raised a query, and we queried somethings when we bought
this house.

I agree that many things will pass unnoticed either way. and that a
buyer has the choice of not worrying about things that don't have a BR
approval etc.

But there is also the risk of holding up a sale (in our case) - or of
buyers being put off by what they see as 'dodgy' things

Indeed. Much depends on the circumstances, the time elapsed, and the
work in question.


--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

On Fri, 07 Dec 2007 07:05:37 +0000, Martin Carroll wrote:

In article , Ed Sirett
writes
On Thu, 06 Dec 2007 22:58:21 +0000, Peter Lynch wrote:

On Thu, 6 Dec 2007 20:48:21 -0000, Peter Crosland wrote:
Martin Carroll wrote:
What are the consequences of not notifying Building Control about
notifiable work?

Plumber friend of mine is putting in a unvented system (he has the
qualification to do this) and asked me if I knew what the would
happen if he didn't put the building notice in.

If the property owner tries to sell the property (s)he will be asked
for proof that the work has been authorised. If the owner cannot
produce the documentation then they will have to pay to get it
inspected and approved. It is much easier and cheaper to get it done
according to the rules.

Isn't it up to the potential buyer to decide whether to just go ahead
anyway?
Obviously their solicitor will huff and puff and say you've _got_ to
provide the paperwork, but can't the buyer just ignore that.

That maybe so, but there will be many buyers who will take the solicitor
more seriously than is warranted.

The cost to someone who is qualified to put a building notice in quite
small (£2.50 for me), so why i this guy not doing it? Is it that he
really isn't qualified?



£2.50! How do you manage that? The cost would be £117.50, hence the
question in the first place.

Martin

Once you have joined one of the 'guilds' then self-certification and
notification is fairly cheap. Of course it takes a huge amount up front
to join, register and renew.


--
Ed Sirett - Property maintainer and registered gas fitter.
The FAQ for uk.diy is at http://www.diyfaq.org.uk
Gas fitting FAQ http://www.makewrite.demon.co.uk/GasFitting.html
Sealed CH FAQ http://www.makewrite.demon.co.uk/SealedCH.html
Choosing a Boiler FAQ http://www.makewrite.demon.co.uk/BoilerChoice.html

John Rumm wrote:
chris French wrote:
In message , John Rumm
writes

For example, a query might be asked as to whether any windows have
been replaced, with a follow on note to supply copies of any
guarantees that may be in force. No mention is made of regs
compliance or FENSA certs.

I'm 95% certain that the forms we filled almost 3 years ago in asked
for Fensa certs if they applied.

The ones I did earlier this year made no mention of them... I think
solicitors have lost interest after the initial bout of enthusiasm when
they were introduced.

Certainly the wording of the "Sellers Property Information Form, 4th
edn" which appears to be what most solictors seem to use, includes
questions about building regs, planning permission, and asks for FENSA
/Building regs certs for any glazing work done after April 2002.

Presumably this form isn't used by everyone though.

David

"Lobster" wrote in message
...
snip

Certainly the wording of the "Sellers Property Information Form, 4th
edn" which appears to be what most solictors seem to use, includes
questions about building regs, planning permission, and asks for FENSA
/Building regs certs for any glazing work done after April 2002.

Presumably this form isn't used by everyone though.

Most properties will soon be sold with HIPs.

The questions in the dreadfully-designed "official" Home Use forms a

9. While the current owner has owned the property, have there been any
building works to the property?

which can be answered yes/no/don't know

and

If you answered “Yes” to question 9, was any planning permission,
building control approval or listed building consent obtained for the
works?

which you can answer: Yes / Needed but not obtained / No, but
work covered by approved person scheme / No, not needed / Don’t
know

then:


If “Yes” or “No, but work covered by approved person scheme” please give
details:


But there's also an option "Undisclosed" for the whole section.

To those (well, the usual gentleman) who says "you must..." whenever
something like this crops up, I would suggest looking at buying a
property at auction. You'll be lucky to get any title guarantee, let
alone subtle stuff like whether the light shades are included.


--
Kevin Poole
**Use current month and year to reply (e.g. )***

Autolycus wrote:
"Lobster" wrote in message
...
snip

Certainly the wording of the "Sellers Property Information Form, 4th
edn" which appears to be what most solictors seem to use, includes
questions about building regs, planning permission, and asks for
FENSA /Building regs certs for any glazing work done after April
2002. Presumably this form isn't used by everyone though.

Most properties will soon be sold with HIPs.

The questions in the dreadfully-designed "official" Home Use forms
a
9. While the current owner has owned the property, have there been any
building works to the property?

which can be answered yes/no/don't know

Buy how could you answer 'don't know' if any building works had been carried
out? Ninja Stealth Builders?


--
Dave - The Medway Handyman
www.medwayhandyman.co.uk
01634 717930
07850 597257

In article ,
Lobster writes:
John Rumm wrote:
chris French wrote:
In message , John Rumm
writes

For example, a query might be asked as to whether any windows have
been replaced, with a follow on note to supply copies of any
guarantees that may be in force. No mention is made of regs
compliance or FENSA certs.

I'm 95% certain that the forms we filled almost 3 years ago in asked
for Fensa certs if they applied.

The ones I did earlier this year made no mention of them... I think
solicitors have lost interest after the initial bout of enthusiasm when
they were introduced.

Certainly the wording of the "Sellers Property Information Form, 4th
edn" which appears to be what most solictors seem to use, includes
questions about building regs, planning permission, and asks for FENSA
/Building regs certs for any glazing work done after April 2002.

Presumably this form isn't used by everyone though.

I asked someone in the office who moved 2 months ago.
He wasn't asked anything like that that he could recall.
He replaced his boiler 2 years ago, had no idea until today
that he should have told anyone about it at the time, and
nothing from his buyer's solicitor asked anything about it.
(He had installed the previous boiler 20 years before that.)

Someone else who moved around 3 years ago was only asked
about approvals for any structural changes and underground
drainage changes they'd made, and they hadn't done any
of either.

--
Andrew Gabriel
[email address is not usable -- followup in the newsgroup]

On 2007-12-07 21:53:46 +0000, "Autolycus" said:

Most properties will soon be sold with HIPs.

The questions in the dreadfully-designed "official" Home Use forms a

9. While the current owner has owned the property, have there been any
building works to the property?

which can be answered yes/no/don't know

and

If you answered €œYes€� to question 9, was any planning permission,
building control approval or listed building consent obtained for the
works?

which you can answer: Yes / Needed but not obtained / No, but
work covered by approved person scheme / No, not needed /
Dont know

then:


If €œYes€� or €œNo, but work covered by approved person scheme€� please
give details:


But there's also an option "Undisclosed" for the whole section.

To those (well, the usual gentleman) who says "you must..." whenever
something like this crops up, I would suggest looking at buying a
property at auction. You'll be lucky to get any title guarantee, let
alone subtle stuff like whether the light shades are included.

So the correct answer is to answer "Don't know" so that the whole silly
nonsense is brought into disrepute as soon as possible and the
jobsworths are out of work.

On 2007-12-07 22:44:48 +0000, "The Medway Handyman"
said:

Autolycus wrote:
"Lobster" wrote in message
...
snip

Certainly the wording of the "Sellers Property Information Form, 4th
edn" which appears to be what most solictors seem to use, includes
questions about building regs, planning permission, and asks for
FENSA /Building regs certs for any glazing work done after April
2002. Presumably this form isn't used by everyone though.

Most properties will soon be sold with HIPs.

The questions in the dreadfully-designed "official" Home Use forms
a
9. While the current owner has owned the property, have there been any
building works to the property?

which can be answered yes/no/don't know

Buy how could you answer 'don't know' if any building works had been carried
out? Ninja Stealth Builders?

Don't know is unattributable.

Analogue answers to an attempted digital question.

Lobster wrote:
John Rumm wrote:
chris French wrote:
In message , John Rumm
writes

For example, a query might be asked as to whether any windows have
been replaced, with a follow on note to supply copies of any
guarantees that may be in force. No mention is made of regs
compliance or FENSA certs.

I'm 95% certain that the forms we filled almost 3 years ago in asked
for Fensa certs if they applied.

The ones I did earlier this year made no mention of them... I think
solicitors have lost interest after the initial bout of enthusiasm
when they were introduced.

Certainly the wording of the "Sellers Property Information Form, 4th
edn" which appears to be what most solictors seem to use, includes
questions about building regs, planning permission, and asks for FENSA
/Building regs certs for any glazing work done after April 2002.

Yup I had a look at one I have here, and it includes it in a rather
convoluted way - one section about were replacement windows installed,
and if so are there any guarantee. Then another in the section on
building regs and PP - was consent obtained if needed, and then later a
bit on its own referees back to one section by number and does mention
FENSA. Oddly however I have also seen what claims to be the 4 edn of the
same document without the question.

Presumably this form isn't used by everyone though.

Its fairly widely used IIUC.

--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

The Medway Handyman wrote:
Autolycus wrote:
"Lobster" wrote in message
...
snip
Certainly the wording of the "Sellers Property Information Form, 4th
edn" which appears to be what most solictors seem to use, includes
questions about building regs, planning permission, and asks for
FENSA /Building regs certs for any glazing work done after April
2002. Presumably this form isn't used by everyone though.
Most properties will soon be sold with HIPs.

The questions in the dreadfully-designed "official" Home Use forms
a
9. While the current owner has owned the property, have there been any
building works to the property?

which can be answered yes/no/don't know

Buy how could you answer 'don't know' if any building works had been carried
out? Ninja Stealth Builders?

Would most people class a replacement window as "building work"?

--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

John Rumm wrote:
The Medway Handyman wrote:
Autolycus wrote:
"Lobster" wrote in message
...
snip
Certainly the wording of the "Sellers Property Information Form, 4th
edn" which appears to be what most solictors seem to use, includes
questions about building regs, planning permission, and asks for
FENSA /Building regs certs for any glazing work done after April
2002. Presumably this form isn't used by everyone though.
Most properties will soon be sold with HIPs.

The questions in the dreadfully-designed "official" Home Use forms
a
9. While the current owner has owned the property, have there been any
building works to the property?

which can be answered yes/no/don't know

Buy how could you answer 'don't know' if any building works had been
carried out? Ninja Stealth Builders?

Would most people class a replacement window as "building work"?

The BCO does.

The Natural Philosopher wrote:
John Rumm wrote:
The Medway Handyman wrote:
Autolycus wrote:
"Lobster" wrote in message
...
snip
Certainly the wording of the "Sellers Property Information Form, 4th
edn" which appears to be what most solictors seem to use, includes
questions about building regs, planning permission, and asks for
FENSA /Building regs certs for any glazing work done after April
2002. Presumably this form isn't used by everyone though.
Most properties will soon be sold with HIPs.

The questions in the dreadfully-designed "official" Home Use forms
a
9. While the current owner has owned the property, have there been any
building works to the property?

which can be answered yes/no/don't know

Buy how could you answer 'don't know' if any building works had been
carried out? Ninja Stealth Builders?

Would most people class a replacement window as "building work"?

The BCO does.

Quite possibly, but he is not the one filling in the form...

--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

To those (well, the usual gentleman) who says "you must..." whenever
something like this crops up, I would suggest looking at buying a
property at auction. You'll be lucky to get any title guarantee, let
alone subtle stuff like whether the light shades are included.

You are missing the point of the original question. The potential for a
botched installation to cause serious injury or even death should concern
any responsible person. The reason that solicitors ask for confirmation is
because of a case where proper enquiries were not made and as a result a
buyer ended up with a large five figure bill which the solicitor, or his
insurers, ended up paying. Sending the form back with a lot of don't know
answers is likely to raise suspicions. If you sell in a buyer's market then
it is just the sort of thing to slow down or prevent a sale. Certainly there
are a lot of trivial items which a lot of people will take a chance on but
that is very different from a those items related to safety.

As for the comment about not getting proper title when buying at auction
that is, to use a technical term complete ********.

Peter Crosland

"Peter Crosland" wrote in message
...

(in reply to my posting)

To those (well, the usual gentleman) who says "you must..." whenever
something like this crops up, I would suggest looking at buying a
property at auction. You'll be lucky to get any title guarantee, let
alone subtle stuff like whether the light shades are included.

You are missing the point of the original question.

No I'm not.


The potential for a botched installation to cause serious injury or
even death should concern any responsible person.

The correlation between not notifying building control and an
installation being dangerous is imperfect.


The reason that solicitors ask for confirmation is because of a case
where proper enquiries were not made and as a result a buyer ended up
with a large five figure bill which the solicitor, or his insurers,
ended up paying.

So they ask the question, and can then blame the buyer for accepting any
answer given.

Sending the form back with a lot of don't know answers is likely to
raise suspicions. If you sell in a buyer's market then it is just the
sort of thing to slow down or prevent a sale. Certainly there are a
lot of trivial items which a lot of people will take a chance on but
that is very different from a those items related to safety.

Well, yes. It will put off some buyers, but some buyers are easily put
off.

As for the comment about not getting proper title when buying at
auction that is, to use a technical term complete ********.

You have a surprisingly detailed knowledge of the auction at which I
bought some land less than a fortnight ago - or did you perhaps feel
that by crudely paraphrasing what I wrote you could justify your
intemperate abuse?

"Title guarantee (full/limited) : No title guarantee"

is what is written on the front page of the Contract in front of me. I
took the trouble to find out the implications of it - rather than just
deriding it as "********" - because I didn't lack the skill or knowledge
to find out. Please take a clue from the box on your way out.


--
Kevin Poole
**Use current month and year to reply (e.g. )***

Autolycus wrote:
"Peter Crosland" wrote in message
...

(in reply to my posting)

To those (well, the usual gentleman) who says "you must..." whenever
something like this crops up, I would suggest looking at buying a
property at auction. You'll be lucky to get any title guarantee,
let alone subtle stuff like whether the light shades are included.

You are missing the point of the original question.

No I'm not.


The potential for a botched installation to cause serious injury or
even death should concern any responsible person.

The correlation between not notifying building control and an
installation being dangerous is imperfect.

Like most things in this world. It does not alter the fact that doing it by
the book is wise in the litigious society we live in.

The reason that solicitors ask for confirmation is because of a case
where proper enquiries were not made and as a result a buyer ended up
with a large five figure bill which the solicitor, or his insurers,
ended up paying.

So they ask the question, and can then blame the buyer for accepting
any answer given.

Sending the form back with a lot of don't know answers is likely to
raise suspicions. If you sell in a buyer's market then it is just the
sort of thing to slow down or prevent a sale. Certainly there are a
lot of trivial items which a lot of people will take a chance on but
that is very different from a those items related to safety.

Well, yes. It will put off some buyers, but some buyers are easily
put off.


As for the comment about not getting proper title when buying at
auction that is, to use a technical term complete ********.

You have a surprisingly detailed knowledge of the auction at which I
bought some land less than a fortnight ago - or did you perhaps feel
that by crudely paraphrasing what I wrote you could justify your
intemperate abuse?

"Title guarantee (full/limited) : No title guarantee"

is what is written on the front page of the Contract in front of me. I
took the trouble to find out the implications of it - rather than
just deriding it as "********" - because I didn't lack the skill or
knowledge to find out. Please take a clue from the box on your way
out.

You are making the classic mistake of thinking that one incident means that
the experience applies to every other auction, the details of which you
would have no knowledge. Perhaps I was wrong to use the phrase I did but
your comment in the context was nevertheless complete rubbish.


Anyone buying a property without evidence of good title would be foolish to
say the least. A classic case of caveat emptor and taking steps to insure
was the right thing to do.

Peter Crosland

"Peter Crosland" wrote in message
...
Autolycus wrote:
"Peter Crosland" wrote in message
...

(in reply to my posting)

To those (well, the usual gentleman) who says "you must..."
whenever
something like this crops up, I would suggest looking at buying a
property at auction. You'll be lucky to get any title guarantee,
let alone subtle stuff like whether the light shades are included.


snip

As for the comment about not getting proper title when buying at
auction that is, to use a technical term complete ********.

You have a surprisingly detailed knowledge of the auction at which I
bought some land less than a fortnight ago - or did you perhaps feel
that by crudely paraphrasing what I wrote you could justify your
intemperate abuse?

"Title guarantee (full/limited) : No title guarantee"

is what is written on the front page of the Contract in front of me.
I took the trouble to find out the implications of it - rather than
just deriding it as "********" - because I didn't lack the skill or
knowledge to find out. Please take a clue from the box on your way
out.

You are making the classic mistake of thinking that one incident means
that the experience applies to every other auction, the details of
which you would have no knowledge.

No sir, it is you who, for reasons I cannot imagine, are failing to read
what I have written. I did not suggest it applies to every auction, but
a little research will confirm that the auction I attended was by no
means unique. Four of the seven lots at that auction were offered with
no title guarantee. The solicitor for the seller explained that it was
a technique sometimes used by the Church Commissioners when selling
land - it means, inter alia, that if the buyer's solicitor raises many
requisitions, the seller's solicitor can send him a bill for answering
them.

Perhaps I was wrong to use the phrase I did but your comment in the
context was nevertheless complete rubbish.

Still think so on mature reflection?


Anyone buying a property without evidence of good title would be
foolish to say the least. A classic case of caveat emptor and taking
steps to insure was the right thing to do.

Insurance is one way of managing risk, but there are others. I chose
one of the others, and I made sure I could distinguish between buying a
property without good title, and one without a full title guarantee.


--
Kevin Poole
**Use current month and year to reply (e.g. )***

Peter Crosland wrote:

Anyone buying a property without evidence of good title would be foolish to
say the least. A classic case of caveat emptor and taking steps to insure
was the right thing to do.

Not necessarily... if it is cheap enough as a result, and you do it
often enough, you may still turn a profit even if you do get burned from
time to time.

--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

wrote:
On 7 Dec,
DM wrote:

I would assume that he is qualified and registered through a company he
works for but the registration will not cover him for doing a homer for a
mate. Corgi registration normally works this way I believe.

I think I saw on their website sometime recently that they have set up a
class of registration to cover the homers.

Found it

http://www.trustcorgi.com/news/corgi/AdditionalCORGIRegistration.htmx

Still costs £175 though.


Interesting... It also notes that people may well be in breach of their
employment contract if they carry out such work. It is a slightly dubious
position for many people to be in, - by taking out the registration they
show there intent to carry out extra jobs. This could put them in a tight
spot with their employers, and I imagine for a lot of them the tax man as
well.

Still it gets Corgi an extra few bob , which is all they are interested in
at the end of the day as far as I can tell


cheers

David