I've had two lots of remedial work done on the house due to gross
ignorance of previous owners:

1) Re-introduce roof purlin support (all engineering calcs available)

2) Re-introduce ceiling joist support for removed archway between two
rooms (only have photos and quote available)

A property I've just sold ran into (minor) problems for similar
support work due to lack of Building Regs approval.

I'm coming up to 2 years since the work was done and as I'm getting on
a bit I don't want to leave my Executors with unnecessary hassle -
though the modern solution seems to be Indemnity insurance on sale.

So am I just raising a can of worms and incurring costs for nothing or
making life easier in due course?

--
AnthonyL

Most people just don't bother it seems. I think with the ever changing
landscape of regs these days it would be impossible to future proof any work
done.
Brian

--
----- -
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...

Blind user, so no pictures please!
"AnthonyL" wrote in message
...
I've had two lots of remedial work done on the house due to gross
ignorance of previous owners:

1) Re-introduce roof purlin support (all engineering calcs available)

2) Re-introduce ceiling joist support for removed archway between two
rooms (only have photos and quote available)

A property I've just sold ran into (minor) problems for similar
support work due to lack of Building Regs approval.

I'm coming up to 2 years since the work was done and as I'm getting on
a bit I don't want to leave my Executors with unnecessary hassle -
though the modern solution seems to be Indemnity insurance on sale.

So am I just raising a can of worms and incurring costs for nothing or
making life easier in due course?

--
AnthonyL

"Brian Gaff" wrote in message
news
Most people just don't bother it seems. I think with the ever changing
landscape of regs these days it would be impossible to future proof any
work done.
Brian

very true one minute removing a non load bearing wall in a house requires a
warrant next minute it doesn't .....the regs and building act are now a mess
.......

On Thursday, 7 December 2017 14:38:48 UTC, AnthonyL wrote:
I've had two lots of remedial work done on the house due to gross
ignorance of previous owners:
I'm coming up to 2 years since the work was done and as I'm getting on
a bit I don't want to leave my Executors with unnecessary hassle

Do your Executors *know* the work was done?

Because if they don't *know* then there's nothing to declare in response to buyer's enquiries, and you might be better just losing all the paperwork completely. Would the work be visible to a surveyor?

Owain

In article ,
AnthonyL wrote:
I've had two lots of remedial work done on the house due to gross
ignorance of previous owners:

1) Re-introduce roof purlin support (all engineering calcs available)

2) Re-introduce ceiling joist support for removed archway between two
rooms (only have photos and quote available)

A property I've just sold ran into (minor) problems for similar
support work due to lack of Building Regs approval.

I'm coming up to 2 years since the work was done and as I'm getting on
a bit I don't want to leave my Executors with unnecessary hassle -
though the modern solution seems to be Indemnity insurance on sale.

So am I just raising a can of worms and incurring costs for nothing or
making life easier in due course?

Big snag is checking any works have been done properly may mean exposing
the oily bits. Checking pad stones are the correct size. Uncasing an RSJ
to check it. And so on. Not something you'd do lightly.

--
*IF ONE SYNCHRONIZED SWIMMER DROWNS, DO THE REST DROWN TOO?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Thu, 7 Dec 2017 07:41:54 -0800 (PST),
wrote:

On Thursday, 7 December 2017 14:38:48 UTC, AnthonyL wrote:
I've had two lots of remedial work done on the house due to gross
ignorance of previous owners:
I'm coming up to 2 years since the work was done and as I'm getting on
a bit I don't want to leave my Executors with unnecessary hassle

Do your Executors *know* the work was done?

Because if they don't *know* then there's nothing to declare in response to buyer's enquiries, and you might be better just losing all the paperwork completely. Would the work be visible to a surveyor?


Well the additional work to the roof purlins is very obvious, though
it isn't "date and time" stamped.


--
AnthonyL

On Thu, 07 Dec 2017 16:06:11 +0000 (GMT), "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

In article ,
AnthonyL wrote:
I've had two lots of remedial work done on the house due to gross
ignorance of previous owners:

1) Re-introduce roof purlin support (all engineering calcs available)

2) Re-introduce ceiling joist support for removed archway between two
rooms (only have photos and quote available)

A property I've just sold ran into (minor) problems for similar
support work due to lack of Building Regs approval.

I'm coming up to 2 years since the work was done and as I'm getting on
a bit I don't want to leave my Executors with unnecessary hassle -
though the modern solution seems to be Indemnity insurance on sale.

So am I just raising a can of worms and incurring costs for nothing or
making life easier in due course?

Big snag is checking any works have been done properly may mean exposing
the oily bits. Checking pad stones are the correct size. Uncasing an RSJ
to check it. And so on. Not something you'd do lightly.


Yes that's a good point. The roof purlins is well documented and
inspectable but the ceiling support has been plastered and painted
over - though I do have photos of it being installed.

Seems as now I'm satisfied the roof and ceiling are structurally sound
it's time to misplace the paperwork.

I have moaned on here before that no-one at the time, surveyors,
builders made any mention of Building Regs at any time before during
or after the work.


--
AnthonyL

On Thursday, 7 December 2017 18:42:15 UTC, AnthonyL wrote:
Well the additional work to the roof purlins is very obvious, though
it isn't "date and time" stamped.

But it was just a repair though wasn't it?

Owain

replying to AnthonyL, Iggy wrote:
Executors don't care, they're just selling the place. Successors or
Beneficiary Habitants would find great pleasure in a solid place that's well
air-sealed and properly or overly insulated. However, the polite and cordial
glowing eulogy will happen long before they find out how badly you screwed
them.

--
for full context, visit https://www.homeownershub.com/uk-diy...e-1255097-.htm

Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote:

"Brian Gaff" wrote in message
news
Most people just don't bother it seems. I think with the ever changing
landscape of regs these days it would be impossible to future proof any
work done.
Brian

very true one minute removing a non load bearing wall in a house requires a
warrant next minute it doesn't .....the regs and building act are now a mess
......

But surely only the regs at the time the work was done (started?)
matter? it can't be rejected retrospectively, and assessment is by the
standards applying at the time. Or is that not how it works?

--

Roger Hayter

On 07/12/17 23:10, Roger Hayter wrote:
Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote:

"Brian Gaff" wrote in message
news
Most people just don't bother it seems. I think with the ever changing
landscape of regs these days it would be impossible to future proof any
work done.
Brian

very true one minute removing a non load bearing wall in a house requires a
warrant next minute it doesn't .....the regs and building act are now a mess
......

But surely only the regs at the time the work was done (started?)
matter? it can't be rejected retrospectively, and assessment is by the
standards applying at the time. Or is that not how it works?

It is still how it works. I finally got a completion certificate on my
house last year, and the building inspector really didnt want to know.



--
€œIt is hard to imagine a more stupid decision or more dangerous way of
making decisions than by putting those decisions in the hands of people
who pay no price for being wrong.€�

Thomas Sowell

"Roger Hayter" wrote in message
...
Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote:

"Brian Gaff" wrote in message
news
Most people just don't bother it seems. I think with the ever changing
landscape of regs these days it would be impossible to future proof any
work done.
Brian

very true one minute removing a non load bearing wall in a house requires
a
warrant next minute it doesn't .....the regs and building act are now a
mess
......

But surely only the regs at the time the work was done (started?)
matter? it can't be rejected retrospectively, and assessment is by the
standards applying at the time. Or is that not how it works?

Depends ....if the work was done before 2005 we issued a letter of comfort
and either let them off if the regs were laxer at the time of construction
or applied the current regs if as in the case of that wall removal now being
now exempt because the regs were subsequently laxer.....we encouraged people
to lie and say the work was done before 2005 because if they didn't we had
to take enforcement action and ask for a retrospective building warrant with
all the expense and problems that incurred........whatever way we did it you
had to balance between being kind to the seller and looking after the
interests of the buyer...not an easy judgment to make ....... the Scottish
Building Scotland act changed about 2004 starting 2005.....no idea what they
do now since I retired in 2010 but trying to give people what they wanted
was always my goal ....it took a bit of skill to look at an alteration or
extension and make a judgment that could come back and bite your bum.....The
phrase we used in the letter of comfort was "after a cursory examination" as
advised by our Lawyers ...tee hee..nice get out.......

"Tim Streater" wrote in message
.. .
In article , Jim GM4DHJ ...
wrote:

"Roger Hayter" wrote in message
. ..
Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote:

"Brian Gaff" wrote in message
news Most people just don't bother it seems. I think with the ever
changing
landscape of regs these days it would be impossible to future proof
any
work done.
Brian

very true one minute removing a non load bearing wall in a house
requires a
warrant next minute it doesn't .....the regs and building act are now a
mess
......

But surely only the regs at the time the work was done (started?)
matter? it can't be rejected retrospectively, and assessment is by the
standards applying at the time. Or is that not how it works?

Depends ....if the work was done before 2005 we issued a letter of comfort
and either let them off if the regs were laxer at the time of construction
or applied the current regs if as in the case of that wall removal now
being now exempt because the regs were subsequently laxer.....we
encouraged people to lie and say the work was done before 2005 because if
they didn't we had to take enforcement action and ask for a retrospective
building warrant with all the expense and problems that
incurred........whatever way we did it you had to balance between being
kind to the seller and looking after the interests of the buyer...not an
easy judgment to make ....... the Scottish Building Scotland act changed
about 2004 starting 2005.....no idea what they do now since I retired in
2010 but trying to give people what they wanted was always my goal ....it
took a bit of skill to look at an alteration or extension and make a
judgment that could come back and bite your bum.....The phrase we used in
the letter of comfort was "after a cursory examination" as advised by our
Lawyers ...tee hee..nice get out.......

Have you just bought a 1000 full-stops on ebay or something?

.....I like them.....

On 08/12/2017 10:00, Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote:
snip

Have you just bought a 1000 full-stops on ebay or something?

.....I like them.....


and like using them dottily?


--
Robin
reply-to address is (intended to be) valid

On Thu, 07 Dec 2017 19:14:02 GMT, Iggy
m wrote:

replying to AnthonyL, Iggy wrote:
Executors don't care, they're just selling the place.

You've missed the point.

--
AnthonyL

On Thu, 7 Dec 2017 10:58:45 -0800 (PST),
wrote:

On Thursday, 7 December 2017 18:42:15 UTC, AnthonyL wrote:
Well the additional work to the roof purlins is very obvious, though
it isn't "date and time" stamped.

But it was just a repair though wasn't it?


Ah yes, of course.

--
AnthonyL

"Robin" wrote in message
...
On 08/12/2017 10:00, Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote:
snip

Have you just bought a 1000 full-stops on ebay or something?

.....I like them.....


and like using them dottily?


UMURDO TOOTI.....

replying to AnthonyL, Iggy wrote:
I didn't think so, but I was a little to vague or broad. If the property's
sold no-one cares what you did or didn't do, as it's common to have to fix
most any house...as you discovered, possibly after 40-years of no resulting
problems. On the other hand, if relatives are moving in, a compliant and
corrected place would be a pleasure. Though, I see your point on my last part.
I could've typed better with an "only if you did nothing" would they later
find out how screwed they were.

Did I still miss the point or just lack a segue? Or, was the point of your
question really just the costs and efforts? I believe and practice, if you
have the means to fix, then it's always worth it for people's safety. However,
the Regulations are only the Minimum Requirements, for the current use and
filled room loads, not the best nor any universal safeguard guarantee. I think
you made the right choice, regardless of whether anyone notices or not.

--
for full context, visit https://www.homeownershub.com/uk-diy...e-1255097-.htm

"Tim Streater" wrote in message
.. .
In article , Jim GM4DHJ ...
wrote:

"Roger Hayter" wrote in message
. ..
Jim GM4DHJ ... wrote:

"Brian Gaff" wrote in message
news Most people just don't bother it seems. I think with the ever
changing
landscape of regs these days it would be impossible to future proof
any
work done.
Brian

very true one minute removing a non load bearing wall in a house
requires a
warrant next minute it doesn't .....the regs and building act are now a
mess
......

But surely only the regs at the time the work was done (started?)
matter? it can't be rejected retrospectively, and assessment is by the
standards applying at the time. Or is that not how it works?

Depends ....if the work was done before 2005 we issued a letter of comfort
and either let them off if the regs were laxer at the time of construction
or applied the current regs if as in the case of that wall removal now
being now exempt because the regs were subsequently laxer.....we
encouraged people to lie and say the work was done before 2005 because if
they didn't we had to take enforcement action and ask for a retrospective
building warrant with all the expense and problems that
incurred........whatever way we did it you had to balance between being
kind to the seller and looking after the interests of the buyer...not an
easy judgment to make ....... the Scottish Building Scotland act changed
about 2004 starting 2005.....no idea what they do now since I retired in
2010 but trying to give people what they wanted was always my goal ....it
took a bit of skill to look at an alteration or extension and make a
judgment that could come back and bite your bum.....The phrase we used in
the letter of comfort was "after a cursory examination" as advised by our
Lawyers ...tee hee..nice get out.......

Have you just bought a 1000 full-stops on ebay or something?

Nope, he stole them.

On Fri, 08 Dec 2017 13:44:03 GMT, Iggy
m wrote:

replying to AnthonyL, Iggy wrote:
I didn't think so, but I was a little to vague or broad. If the property's
sold no-one cares what you did or didn't do, as it's common to have to fix
most any house...as you discovered, possibly after 40-years of no resulting
problems. On the other hand, if relatives are moving in, a compliant and
corrected place would be a pleasure. Though, I see your point on my last part.
I could've typed better with an "only if you did nothing" would they later
find out how screwed they were.

Did I still miss the point or just lack a segue? Or, was the point of your
question really just the costs and efforts? I believe and practice, if you
have the means to fix, then it's always worth it for people's safety. However,
the Regulations are only the Minimum Requirements, for the current use and
filled room loads, not the best nor any universal safeguard guarantee. I think
you made the right choice, regardless of whether anyone notices or not.


On the sale of a property a questionairre is required which includes
details of work/improvements carried out and any Fensa/Building Reg
certificates. I'm sure you know this.

My Executors, likely to be either my wife of grandkids will need to
deal with this. It would be easiest for them, if the house is to be
sold, to have all paperwork neatly in place. It seems from this
thread that it also would be easiest for them if all paperwork was
missing. At the moment the paperwork (details of work) exists in the
"house file" and lacks Building Regs.

So whilst you say "Executors don't care" I don't want my Executors to
have to go through unecessary hassle even if I'm not around to see it
and that's the point I felt you missed.

--
AnthonyL

On 07/12/2017 14:38, AnthonyL wrote:
I've had two lots of remedial work done on the house due to gross
ignorance of previous owners:

1) Re-introduce roof purlin support (all engineering calcs available)

2) Re-introduce ceiling joist support for removed archway between two
rooms (only have photos and quote available)

A property I've just sold ran into (minor) problems for similar
support work due to lack of Building Regs approval.

I'm coming up to 2 years since the work was done and as I'm getting on
a bit I don't want to leave my Executors with unnecessary hassle -
though the modern solution seems to be Indemnity insurance on sale.

So am I just raising a can of worms and incurring costs for nothing or
making life easier in due course?

I don't see why 2) needs airing as its not a change to the original
structure.

This may be worth putting on uk.legal or the moderated group.

If an executor sells the house, they are not obliged to provide the same
details as the owner-seller.

I can't recall the term that is used, but in essence it means they are
not expected to furnish the same level of detail as an owner-seller.

On Sunday, 10 December 2017 12:39:12 UTC, AnthonyL wrote:

On the sale of a property a questionairre is required which includes
details of work/improvements carried out and any Fensa/Building Reg
certificates. I'm sure you know this.

My Executors, likely to be either my wife of grandkids will need to
deal with this. It would be easiest for them, if the house is to be
sold, to have all paperwork neatly in place. It seems from this
thread that it also would be easiest for them if all paperwork was
missing. At the moment the paperwork (details of work) exists in the
"house file" and lacks Building Regs.

So whilst you say "Executors don't care" I don't want my Executors to
have to go through unecessary hassle even if I'm not around to see it
and that's the point I felt you missed.

Writing 'we have no idea' is not hassle in my world


NT

On Sun, 10 Dec 2017 13:05:22 +0000, Fredxx wrote:

On 07/12/2017 14:38, AnthonyL wrote:
I've had two lots of remedial work done on the house due to gross
ignorance of previous owners:

1) Re-introduce roof purlin support (all engineering calcs available)

2) Re-introduce ceiling joist support for removed archway between two
rooms (only have photos and quote available)

A property I've just sold ran into (minor) problems for similar support
work due to lack of Building Regs approval.

I'm coming up to 2 years since the work was done and as I'm getting on
a bit I don't want to leave my Executors with unnecessary hassle -
though the modern solution seems to be Indemnity insurance on sale.

So am I just raising a can of worms and incurring costs for nothing or
making life easier in due course?

I don't see why 2) needs airing as its not a change to the original
structure.

This may be worth putting on uk.legal or the moderated group.

If an executor sells the house, they are not obliged to provide the same
details as the owner-seller.

I can't recall the term that is used, but in essence it means they are
not expected to furnish the same level of detail as an owner-seller.

Just to add that the owner/seller doesn't have to fill out the
questionnaire.

The house can be sold "as seen".

This may reflect on the final price, but if you are selling a "doer upper"
then all the fine detail may be irrelevant.

Sometimes the purchaser's solicitor asks loads of pointless questions just
to seem keen and proactive.

Cheers


Dave R




--
AMD FX-6300 in GA-990X-Gaming SLI-CF running Windows 7 Pro x64

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

On Sunday, 10 December 2017 12:39:12 UTC, AnthonyL wrote:
My Executors, likely to be either my wife of grandkids will need to
deal with this. It would be easiest for them, if the house is to be
sold, to have all paperwork neatly in place. It seems from this
thread that it also would be easiest for them if all paperwork was
missing.

Paperwork on *this* matter :-)

Lots of other paperwork on non-contentious matters will inspire confidence that all the paperwork is there.

Owain

On 10 Dec 2017 14:44:20 GMT, David wrote:

On Sun, 10 Dec 2017 13:05:22 +0000, Fredxx wrote:

On 07/12/2017 14:38, AnthonyL wrote:
I've had two lots of remedial work done on the house due to gross
ignorance of previous owners:

1) Re-introduce roof purlin support (all engineering calcs available)

2) Re-introduce ceiling joist support for removed archway between two
rooms (only have photos and quote available)

A property I've just sold ran into (minor) problems for similar support
work due to lack of Building Regs approval.

I'm coming up to 2 years since the work was done and as I'm getting on
a bit I don't want to leave my Executors with unnecessary hassle -
though the modern solution seems to be Indemnity insurance on sale.

So am I just raising a can of worms and incurring costs for nothing or
making life easier in due course?

I don't see why 2) needs airing as its not a change to the original
structure.

This may be worth putting on uk.legal or the moderated group.

If an executor sells the house, they are not obliged to provide the same
details as the owner-seller.

I can't recall the term that is used, but in essence it means they are
not expected to furnish the same level of detail as an owner-seller.

Just to add that the owner/seller doesn't have to fill out the
questionnaire.

The house can be sold "as seen".

This may reflect on the final price, but if you are selling a "doer upper"
then all the fine detail may be irrelevant.


I'm the "doer upper" otherwise the issue wouldn' arise g

Sometimes the purchaser's solicitor asks loads of pointless questions just
to seem keen and proactive.


Yes I found that out with the house I recently sold. Pages of
questions about the shared sewage system, access, building work
(including similar rectifications to those I've had to carry out here
- why do folk think it's safe to remove the bottom chimney breast
without support?) and at the end of it I had merely had to buy a £15
Fensa indemnity for some windows that the previous owner had a "I
don't believe in Fensa" installer do.


--
AnthonyL

replying to AnthonyL, Iggy wrote:
Thank you. Yes, a question they'd answer while not being the Resident
Homeowner nor a Construction Expert. Real Estate Agents normally direct and
instruct Sellers to not answer anything they didn't do themselves or have
literal expertise in, in fact the Executors may not look for any papers and
just answer it no. You've taken the best and most proper course of action, but
it may only benefit a witless future resident. What I might suggest is, that
you obtain a current Seller's Questionnaire and complete it in detail for them
with a "See Attached" notation.

--
for full context, visit https://www.homeownershub.com/uk-diy...e-1255097-.htm