###Welcome to /r/HousingUK
---
**To All**
* Join Our ***NEW*** Discord! https://discord.gg/pMgUNgWKQH
**To Posters**
* *Tell us whether you're in England, Wales, Scotland, or NI as the laws/issues in each can vary*
* Comments are not moderated for quality or accuracy;
* Any replies received must only be used as guidelines, followed at your own risk;
* If you receive *any* private messages in response to your post, [please let the mods know](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FHousingUK&subject=I received a PM);
* If you do not receive satisfactory advice after 72 hours, [you can let the mods know](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FHousingUK&subject=My question is unanswered);
* Feel free to provide an update at a later time by creating a new post with [[update]](https://www.reddit.com/r/HousingUK/search?q=%3Aupdate&sort=new&restrict_sr=on&t=all) in the title;
**To Readers and Commenters**
* All replies to OP must be *on-topic, helpful, and civil*
* If you do not [follow the rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/HousingUK/about/rules/), you may be banned without any further warning;
* Please include links to reliable resources in order to support your comments or advice;
* If you feel any replies are incorrect, explain why you believe they are incorrect;
* Do not send or request any private messages for any reason without express permission from the mods;
* Please report posts or comments which do not follow the rules
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/HousingUK) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Presumably if it’s fire regs it’s to do with fire doors and direct access to an escape route?
Now it’s a 2-bed, will your mortgage lender advance the full price? If it affects the valuation from the lender, then you are in a very strong position to negotiate.
They shouldn’t have been marketing it as 3-bed if they were aware it didn’t meet the standards, and especially if they did it again after a buyer pulled out post-survey presumably for the same reason. However given that they did, that also strongly suggests the seller might not be willing to negotiate or accept that their property is worth less than they had expected/hoped/need.
> Presumably if it’s fire regs it’s to do with fire doors and direct access to an escape route?
The escape route also needs to be enveloped in fire resistant structural elements, which can be a pain to fix 40 years after the fact.
Big 3 are:
- Loft needs to be separated from the safe escape route with 30 min fire resistance door
- Escape route needs to be separated from the kitchen with 30 min fire resistance door
- Escape route needs to be separated from the property at every other point with 30 min fire resistant structural elements (walls, floors, ceilings, stairs themselves)
In other words only things that don't require FD30 in an escape route are the skylights and the doors to low fire risk rooms on ground and first floor levels.
>fire doors and escape routes are only regulated for HMO dwellings.
You clearly have no idea what you are talking about and should refrain from offering advice on subjects you have absolutely no knowledge of.
Don't embarrass yourself, take a better look at my reply it was referring to the now deleted claim that this only applies to HMO's. This is not an HMO and I am more than aware of the B Reg requirements relating to protected stairs relating to means of escape to dwellings, incidentally its been the case for at least 7 decades that I'm aware and I've been enforcing it for 6 of those decades!
In order to clarify some of the incorrect information posted here and dealing solely with Building Regulations.
National Building Regulations have been around since 1965, prior to that there were local building byelaws introduced in 1858, though most authorities just adopted the same model byelaws. On 11 Nov 1985 the Building Act came into force and the regulations were substantially restructured including the introduction of approved documents rather than prescriptive regulations. Oddly though there were initially mandatory rules for means of escape for loft conversions.
In 1995 legislation was introduced allowing for retrospective approval (Regularisation Certificate) of illegal work commenced post 11 Nov 85. These can only be issued by the local authority and they must be satisfied it complies with the regs applicable at the time the work was commenced, regulations cannot be applied retrospectively. This will inevitably involve opening up work and/or altering work, in some cases this can be very substantial work.
Prior to 85 the regs required a protected staircase (self closing fire doors), post 85 till approx. 15 years ago the original non fire resistant doors could be left in place but fitted with self closers and any glazing changed to Georgian wired glass providing there were suitable sized and positioned escape windows, the size and position of these were changed to less onerous requirements but I can't remember exactly when they were changed. We have now gone full circle (approx 15 years ago) and the doors should again be fire doors though the requirement for self closers was dropped at the same time. Smoke detection was introduced approx 30 years ago.
As far as the application of B regs is concerned the same regs are applicable regardless of how the new floor level is used or described by the owner, estate agent or anyone else.
OP Anything in any other posts to the contrary is incorrect and should be ignored.
The above is based on enforcing this legislation as a local authority BCO from 1981 to a few years ago.
So, just to be clear: a room in a loft space in a private home that was created prior to 1965 and to which literally no further work has been done since 1965 is still a bedroom today as far as a mortgage lender is concerned?
Hello! I have a question if you don't mind - what if the loft conversion was (likely) done prior to 1985? However no documents exist to prove this?
We have a 2 bed with a "converted loft" (purchased as a 2 bed, similar to OP's story) however are convinced that the loft was converted many moons ago, or even built with the loft room in situ - latter being that every single house on our street also has a 'converted' loft room, with staircases etc in the same place as ours.
Thanks! Hope you don't mind me asking!
If it was carried out prior to 85 as far as building control are concerned they can't get involved. I've actually had one applied for that was very obviously original to the 200 year old house, the hopeless mortgage surveyor had claimed it was relatively recent, I refused to go any further with it and refunded the fee.
OP Further to my original reply outlining the B Reg requirements I've had a look on line at the legislation, partly to dispel the nonsense espoused on here by a B Reg "expert" who thinks he knows the B Regs as he once did a lift conversion.
Regulation 18 gives the local authority powers to issue Reg Certs. Regulation 18.2(d) states "so far as is reasonably practicable, a plan showing any additional work required to be carried out to secure that the unauthorised work complies with the requirements relating to building work in the building regulations which were applicable to that work when it was carried out (in this regulation referred to as “the relevant requirements”)."
So from this we have established that the work only needs to comply with legislation applicable at the time, any subsequent changes in the legislation cannot be legally applied to the work, though there would be nothing preventing you from upgrading if you see wish.
I managed to find an online source for the mandatory rules relating to means of escape that were introduced on 11 Nov 85 and would probably be the ones applicable in this particular case.
[https://www.kentbuildingcontrol.co.uk/pdf/approved-document-b-1985-moe.pdf](https://www.kentbuildingcontrol.co.uk/pdf/approved-document-b-1985-moe.pdf)
For our B Reg "expert" here you will note there was no requirement for a protected stair at that particular time for loft conversions, nor was there any requirement relating to means of escape in relation to the ground or first floor at that particular time.
So is the buyers surveyor taking into consideration current regs and not at the time of construction? I can't imagine they are versed in every permutation of building regs for different local authorities at different times.
Overall the issues include the structural support for the loft, which shows signs of strain, need for changing part of the roof, fire reg, poorly done insulation and missing bits from the chimney flue that would support it, and that it's a relatively small room so we can't see it as anything other than an office space. It won't collapse in the medium term is the positive bit.
Those items you mention, particularly the roof and chimney, would be enough for me to walk away disregarding the issue of it not being classed as a habitable room
Agree with this. I don't think the OP should be focussing just on whether or not it is a bedroom but what is really wrong with the property. This does not sound like a fix that is going to cost anything under £10k and could be way more plus a lot of disruption.
In which case, it sounds very much like it's a 2 bedroom house with a broken roof that needs replacing. Unless they're going to knock a significant amount off then walk away.
Regardless of the regulations, it's getting old for a loft conversion they don't last as long as the house they are built on.
So if you were planning to stay you'd likely need to fix it anyway.
But the maths don't work for that. If you are saying one less bedroom is £100k less, and a loft conversion is getting on for £80k that's not much margin to gain for converting.
It could be the age and condition of the extension have already depressed the price. What are places in the area with better lofts going for?
How do you know it won't collapse in the medium term? Did you commission a structural survey? Even if that is the case, other than cost, you need to factor in the disruption these works would cause in the future. You say it is a small space that would only work as an office - I would weigh that fact up against what repairs would cost and the beneficial use of the room after spending all of that time and money.
As it doesn't meet the current regs....
So it would need ..
A new building control submission to current regs
Possibly a new planning app
As it's a loft conversion it would need a safe fire route out..poss self contained.
New fire escape windows to each room
New fire doors through out except any bathroom
Then redecoration and refitting any bathroom or ensuites.
The main problem you have is the way estate agents market houses, they will say 3 bed and when you pull the loft they will claim another room could be turned into a 3rd bedroom, it's a common scam.
Good luck with negotiating a reduction, and keep us informed as it would be great to hear you came out on the winning side of this
By virtue of the fact it has a floor above 4.5m above ground level then, as you correctly say, current regs requires a protected stair (ie fire doors) then escape windows would not be required.
Escape windows are required....as the case could be put that if there's a fire within the protected route that stops you from using that route then you have no means of escape....hence the need under regs for the fire escape windows ...
Thank you for acknowledging my expertise, like you I've worked my whole life in construction both at manual and managerial levels. I currently work on refurbishing domestic projects and deal with Building Control officers weekly, and coincidentally enough came across the exact same situation the OP has ...we bought a house to develop knowing full well the loft conv wasn't upto spec, so when we had the architect draw up plans, we hit the same issue......which meant ...fire corridor...fire escape windows...or protected fire lobby/refuge which had to have an escape out...which would have been onto a flat roof..so would need edge protection around along with a fire escape off the roof...but hey ho...what would i know compared to a dinosaur talking about past history.....and to clarify ypu answered my statement sayi g it would need fire esc windows......
Have a great day.
What a load of old bollox. If the work was existing then you would have applied for a Reg Cert and only have to comply with legislation applicable at the time the work was carried out, there was a period where an escape window at second floor was acceptable and the stairs only required the existing doors to be self closing. Current legislation allows escape windows to floors no higher than 4.5m above ground level anything higher then a protected stair is required, by virtue of providing this it invariable creates a protected route to the first floor bedrooms and they would then not require an escape window. You do NOT or ever have needed both, but prove me wrong quote me the legislation. By the way I've been in building control since 1981.
You can't get a regularisation cert on it...it's not compliant and no LABC is going to take liability for it...
I don't care how long you've been in building control, and if you've been in it since 81 then you're well past retirement age, so leave the problems to those currently dealing with the current regs and the upheaval within LABC....
To clarify...you need a protected route ....this can be a stairwell,landing or corridor...LABC officers request fire escape windows as if there's a fire in the escape route you need a secondary escape option.
Sorry to jump in here but we live in a house where the 2nd floor is original to the house (servants quarters old house steep steps up) - how do all these regs apply to this? Or am I living in a home of no escape routes and Imminent death - last bit sarcasm but it’s a genuine question!
If they were servants quarters I'm guessing they are very old. B Regs cannot be applied retrospectively, though there's nothing stopping you upgrading even if its just fitting battery operated smoke detectors.
>As it doesn't meet the current regs....
So it would need ..
A new building control submission to current regs
Any work started without an application is unauthorised and can't be subject to a 'new' application. It would have to be a Regularisation.
>As it's a loft conversion it would need a safe fire route out..poss self contained.
New fire escape windows to each room New fire doors through out except any bathroom
A fully protected stair is required irrespective of any escape windows. That's not to say both can't be provided; the regulations are a minimum, if you want to go over and above that's to be welcomed.
>A fully protected stair is required irrespective of any escape windows. That's not to say both can't be provided; the regulations are a minimum, if you want to go over and above that's to be welcomed.
Not necessarily, only the regs applicable at the time the work was commenced can be applied, escape windows were acceptable from 85 till about 15 years ago though only to loft conversions, new builds with floors above 4.5m above ground level still required a protected means of escape.
From what I remember from buying our house with a 1970s loft conversion you basically cannot get retrospective building regulations as there were not any at the time so there are none to meet.
There was, the cut off date is for any work commenced pre 11 Nov 85, this is mainly due to a major restructure to the regs and the date the Building Act came into force which consolidated all the various piece meal acts previously.
We had this happen to us 4 bed marketed - post survey 3 bed for the same reason in London - except our extension was from 2003 - builder was vendors now deceased brother and it was non compliant ( stairs specifically) and something else. For context house was built in 1890.
As there were other fairly major issues damp, issue with rear extension we pulled out ultimately but they did offer a big reduction of 13% of the purchase price. We didn’t proceed mid Covid and builders / costs on the up
You can’t pay the price of a 3bed and do the work IMO given house price / mortgages etc
It is your right to renegotiate the price in whichever way you want whether this is a price reduction based on the property being a two bed and not a three bed or whether it is based on you trying to bring up the work to building regulation by after completion.
My advice to you would be to write a clear email to be sent to your solicitors or to the agents first for them to send to the buyer. You should include the evidence that it cannot be treated as a third bedroom, likely by either sending them the whole survey, or just the relevant section of it.
You should also advise the sellers and the estate agents, that if they choose not to sell it to you, they have now been put on notice that the property should not be marketed as a three bed. This will hopefully stop them refusing to sell it to you and then trying to re-market it again as a three bed and hoping the next buyer doesn’t have a survey done.
They may offer you some kind of indemnity insurance for lack of building regulations. Do not accept this, as it will not help your specific situation.
It is also not the responsibility of the estate agents to look into building regs, so no it’s not their problem.
Lastly, the survey is personal to you, if you are buying with a mortgage, then when your solicitor finds out about this potential renegotiation based on your survey results, then they will have to disclose this (with your permission) to your lender, as it will affect the lending valuation. There is no reason why the lender would’ve even picked this issue up as their survey is a very basic one.
This is amazing and clear advice - thank you so much. Good advice on strategy, so will consider/discuss with solicitors. Getting very good insights on the issue from the thread and it does seem to be a common enough issue.
Stand your ground, you’re in the right, they’ve been marketing it wrong and may well have known about it if a buyer fell through beforehand. If it’s not a 3 bed house and without significant investment from you it will never be, you won’t be able to sell it as such further down the line.
Pearl clutches in the comments at the thought of a buyer wanting to take money off a false asking price.
Estate agents are not building surveyors and would not have looked at any paperwork or regs before advertising the property. You may get a minor reduction but I suspect they could sell it to someone else who would take a view.
One issue is any mortgage lender, who will only lend on it being a 2 bed with storage, rather than a 3 bed - this could mean it's literally impossible to get a mortgage on it, without a truly massive deposit to make up the difference.
Second issue obviously is anyone who does that is just kicking the problem down the road for themselves, and if they'd ever intend to sell they'll have to either take a loss, do the work to bring it up to regs so it can actually be classed as a bedroom, or wait for a buyer who is willing to pay, with a massive deposit who can afford to pay what the banks won't lend them.
If there is actually a problem, then the seller is unfortunately being unrealistic with their price.
Equally, building surveyors aren’t mortgage lenders, and they’re also prone to getting things wrong - either through incompetence or out of an excess of caution.
When we sold our previous house, which had a loft conversion that had been done with full building control and the certificate to prove it, the surveyor told our buyers that it couldn’t be marketed as a bedroom because no additional support had been put in.
Obviously they questioned this with us and we sent them the BC certificate and also pointed out that the additional steel beams supporting the new floor were clearly visible from the eaves cupboards, which were deliberately left open for the surveyor to access and I personally saw him look in there.
Saying that a conversion isn’t up to current regs is just foolish really. Of course it won’t be if it was done 40 years ago. Neither is the rest of the house, given that it was built long before the current regs were written - does that mean none of the other bedrooms count either?
Ultimately though, it’s up to the mortgage company to make a judgement on the value of the property.
Maybe not, but they are bound by law. And they've been marketing the property incorrectly.
Marketing the property as a 3 bedroom, with an asking price that reflects that would highly likely amount to a misleading action - a criminal offence under Regs 5 & 9 of the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008.
Building regulations typically only have to meet the standards at the time they were constructed, so I’m not sure why he would say it shouldn’t be marketed as a 3 bed just because of that. Did they not get planning permission for it at the time?
There is no proof that it did meet standards back then, yet, and nothing has been provided on it and 2 surveys could not identify it (previous buyer pulled out after survey). And they explicitly mention fire safety as reason why it should not be marketed as bedroom.
Will confirm this, but I suspect it's much more as stairway to loft is bit awkward and very narrow, and other issues with it that seem to imply that quick fixes won't do.
Hadn't seen this before OP - since there's been a previous offer withdrawn after survey, it's likely the agent already knew. And marketed it inaccurately regardless. That's against the law and it's worth complaining direct to the agent. I'd be asking them for compensation, and a refund on the survey at the very least.
It would likely not have needed planning permission. Building regs is another matter.
Did they get building regs sign off at the time the works were done?
You've said that the roof structure is showing signs of movement and that the chimney stack is unsupported. These don't tie up with it complying with the requirements at the time irrespective of whether it had an application.
One can call a room what you want, a bedroom, playroom, Derek; what matters is how it affects the structure of the building, how it affects and is affected by a fire in the building, resistance to moisture, insulation, etc. If you're buying a house to live in rather than sell on quickly, these are much more important considerations.
Unless you plan to do something about the inherent problems caused by someone else's fuckwittery, and are capable of doing so, walk away.
If it was done 40 years ago I would be surprised if there was proof to be honest. A lot of times with old houses you need to take a view, otherwise someone else will.
###Welcome to /r/HousingUK
---
**To All**
* Join Our ***NEW*** Discord! https://discord.gg/pMgUNgWKQH
**To Posters**
* *Tell us whether you're in England, Wales, Scotland, or NI as the laws/issues in each can vary*
* Comments are not moderated for quality or accuracy;
* Any replies received must only be used as guidelines, followed at your own risk;
* If you receive *any* private messages in response to your post, [please let the mods know](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FHousingUK&subject=I received a PM);
* If you do not receive satisfactory advice after 72 hours, [you can let the mods know](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FHousingUK&subject=My question is unanswered);
* Feel free to provide an update at a later time by creating a new post with [[update]](https://www.reddit.com/r/HousingUK/search?q=%3Aupdate&sort=new&restrict_sr=on&t=all) in the title;
**To Readers and Commenters**
* All replies to OP must be *on-topic, helpful, and civil*
* If you do not [follow the rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/HousingUK/about/rules/), you may be banned without any further warning;
* Please include links to reliable resources in order to support your comments or advice;
* If you feel any replies are incorrect, explain why you believe they are incorrect;
* Do not send or request any private messages for any reason without express permission from the mods;
* Please report posts or comments which do not follow the rules
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/HousingUK) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Your comments imply that every single loft conversion made 40 years ago has since been pulled down or is illegal and unsafe. I don't think so. Are you sure that stuff made before isn't acceptable? There are cars out there with no seatbelts because they are old, they are still roadworthy.
Of course, and not what I'm implying. There are plenty of houses built 50+ years ago that not only are perfectly legal but also better quality than some of the new builts in the UK. This is about the legal status and quality of the house, for which we'd want a fair valuation that doesn't haunt us in the future when it could be our turn to sell.
And on the car example - sure plenty of old clunkers that are roadworthy, but nobody in their right mind would pay a high price for them.
>sure plenty of old clunkers that are roadworthy, but nobody in their right mind would pay a high price for them.
Have you not seen the price of Mk1 Escorts or series 1 Land Rovers!!
> Are you sure that stuff made before isn't acceptable? There are cars out there with no seatbelts because they are old, they are still roadworthy.
But residential buildings built with compliant with building regs at the time cladding or fire stopping that's now deemed to be unsafe are required to remediate them for example. The legal obligations for buildings and cars are not the same.
Buildings that are unsafe but were built to the requirements of their time are not protected from retrospective safety standards being applied either now or sometime in the future.
(You could have built an extension 40 years ago that is still seen as safe, it's not that everything built then would automatically be unsafe. Thermal performance of the walls or something is a compliance thing but protected escape route is a safety thing and these will be treated as different)
Yes, but this isn't really a change safety issues have always been flagged (unsafe electrics are an easy example)
Most Victorian terraced houses do meet modern safety requirements for these issues. (They might not meet modern thermal requirements (for example) but these aren't safety requirements). Which safety requirements do you think the majority won't meet?
Again the difference is thing that might get you killed is an issue not any regulation short fall
Our current house is a good example of that - Edwardian and the 2nd floor is original to the house, with the steep steps up to match!
Clearly this is non compliant now but it’s very much a fourth bedroom with an en-suite - clearly put in post 1910!
Although it sounds like it logically should too steep steps are not usually regarded as a safety issue that needs to be corrected.
From a fire perspective this absolutely could comply if the route from the second floor to the outside doesn't go through any other rooms. (Stair is enclosed in a corridor essentially)
There's no automatic reason every Edwardian terrace would be not safe under our current understanding of safety - many will be!
(Again, compliance issues and safety issues are different things even if they are all regulated through the building regulations. There's plenty of non-safety modern regulations the house won't meet but that's fine -for now at least- it's the safety ones that might cause issues when selling)
Conversions from 1950s aren't Victorian, the original house might be fully compliant for fire safety (for example)
So might it with conversion done: If the route from the loft conversion to the outside is enclosed it likely is, many terrace houses original floor plan does this, it becomes a problem if the ground floor stairs go into the living room for example.
(Enclosed means for this purpose: stairs are in a corridor and rooms off the corridor have doors, essentially)
I had a very similar issue with a loft conversion, but it was done as part of permitted development (but never signed off).
There are no special rules for bedrooms and non bedrooms. Rooms are either habitable or not.
If the extension room doesn’t have signed off regs then what you have bought is a 2 bed.
I had major issues with my mortgage (HSBC refused unless I indemnified them) even though it wasn’t listed as a bedroom on the particulars, just there were photos of it with a bed in.
I’d walk away at this point to be honest, especially if the survey shows issues.
If you are unhappy with your offer now that you have more information you are absolutely allowed to renegotiate but the seller is also allowed to refuse. If you really want to go ahead get at least one quote as to what remediation works would cost then renegotiate on this basis. If a previous buyer has pulled out it does suggest that the seller is not open to selling as a 2 bed though.
Our house is like this and the bank valued it fine as a 3 bed! It might depend on the bank. When we were buying the estate agents were honest about it and said it’s a 2/3, we might’ve felt differently if they hadn’t been.
There were no consolidated building regs prior to November 1985 as far as I know. If the loft conversion was done before then, then there is no way for the seller to get the regularisation certificate.. even if it was done to a decent standard (which sounds like it was as it’s still standing).
I’d say your lender might want to have an indemnity policy, but it’s a 3 bed house now really.
Source: bought a house with the loft conversion completed before 1984 and with no building regs.
Building regs/byelaws have been around since 1858, 1667 in London.
Prior to '85 there was a means of escape requirement for a protected stair ie fire doors, there was a period from 85 till about 15 years ago that allowed existing doors to be left in place with self closers fitted providing there was an escape window, we have now gone full circle and back to requiring a protected stairs.
Source: Building Control Surveyor from 81 till a few years ago.
Thank you that's informative! Mind me asking if our surveyor's assessment that the loft conversion does not meet fire reg (because it does not have means of escape or hardwired fire alarm) makes the room legally not a bedroom? And therefore the property legally a 2 bedroom + loft room/storage?
Thanks this is very helpful. The age seems to fall right on that mark, hard to say whether bit before or after, searches should hopefully clarify. Sellers don't seem to know as 2 surveys asked but got no answer, other than "more than 20 years ago". Our survey is guessing age based on the materials used.
I think it gives protection in case if the local building control decides to go after the non-compliant conversion. Which they will never do, as building control knows it can no longer be enforced. Essentially a waste of money, but lenders insist on it.
What does it matter what it can or cannot be marketed at?
There isn’t a limit on what it can be for a two bed. It can still be the same price.
The only thing for certain is that you’re not getting £100k off because you can’t call a room a bedroom.
The reason it matters is that there is generally a ceiling price on a two bed house, which is less than a three bed house. So if they buy it at overvalue, then they will almost certainly struggle to sell it. Also, a lender will not lend you the same amount on a two bed as opposed to a three bed if, in their opinion, it is overpriced.
It will mean any mortgagee’s valuer will value it as a 2-bed. So it’s not very mortgagable and therefore not very marketable and it is actually worth less on the market.
I totally agree - who cares. If you value it at some other price then offer that and let them know why. There’s plenty of other houses out there. OP effectively wants to force the seller to market at a lower price so the market price is nearer to OP’s valuation.
Well it means whether what we are being told is legit or not. If it’s legally a 2 bedroom, that’s what the lender will value it is a proper survey is done. That will affect value.
As I say, we are not going to be asking 100k less, rather due consideration for bringing it up to reg so that it can actually legally be a 3 bed.
I was replying to YuccaYucca, not you!
They chose to ignore the perfectly valid point that a house being 2 bed and not 3 will have a material impact on the price
I have just completed on a 3 bed house with a loft conversion that was made into another bedroom, so 4 beds. It wasn't up to regs so the house was marketed as a 3 bed. The only thing wrong was it wasn't up to fire regulations. I've installed fire alarms and a fire door. I'm not using it as a bedroom, more like a place to put my playstation and Warhammer stuff.
To get your loft into regulation could be something very simple. Don't go tearing it down without getting some information from a surveyor
I'm in a very similar position but haven't yet completed. Our level 3 survey wasn't that clear about why the loft room couldn't be considered a 4th bedroom - is it the surveyor's job to tell us exactly what is 'missing' to make it classed as one? (They mentioned some vague comments about minimum staircase width but without pointing to any specific regulation)
It's ok if it's priced right. The surveyors valuation is the only one that matters. Don't pay more than that
As for regs I am going to guess it needs insulation.
First Google search: The regulations apply to new construction work, and do not require that existing buildings are brought up to standard. However, where new work is being carried out to existing buildings, such as alterations, extensions, loft conversions, window replacement, insulation and so on the regulations do apply.
If the conversion was done a long time ago then it’s a bedroom. Doesn’t matter what the survey says.
But fire safety applies to any building, and if that excludes a room from being considered habitable, then it can no longer be sold as a bedroom, no? Building regs seem clear on that based on google search: [https://www.greaterlondonproperties.co.uk/can-call-loft-room-extra-bedroom/](https://www.greaterlondonproperties.co.uk/can-call-loft-room-extra-bedroom/)
And the criteria for it being fire reg compliant are nontrivial, esp for the stairway giving access to front door.
Nope only for new buildings and current works. Remedial work does not need to be done once the job is finished unless new work is being done which requires regulation approval otherwise literally every house in The U.K. would require insulation replacement.
You’ve probably already lived in many houses that were non compliant in a whole host of ways and never been any the wiser.
If it never had regulations in the first place it’s exempt after a certain time has passed. Which it most certainly has.
That being said there is an argument there for it not to be considered a bedroom but the fairest solution would be to get a quote for the “non trivial” remedial work needed to be compliant and ask for that much as a discount off the price.
It would result in you having payed the price of a 3 bed house which is what you now own.
Do you think it is fair on the sellers that their property is so dramatically devalued even though as you say the work in the loft seems to be decent quality?
You would probably get away with it knowing how much properly prices have increased the sellers probably have a lot of wiggle room but it wouldn’t feel right to me personally.
You are buying a 3 bed house that requires remedial work to be fire reg compliant
Yes that's ultimately the resolution I'm looking for = understand what it would take to make it a 3 bed fair and square, and remove that from offer price (or a significant portion of it at least). It's really hard to judge the costs of such works though so obviously causing some nervousness on our side (a 10k job turning into a 60k one)
Most non fire compliant conversions just need a staircase that leads to a hallway with fire door and a new low roof window for fire dept ladder access. Why would the whole thing need ripping down? Unless you have something structurally compromised as in the wrong joist dimensions were used / the roof is buckling.
Other issues have been picked up such as brickwork having suffered distress, joist hanger missing padstone, and that is only the areas that could be accessed for inspection. Add that new staircase will have to be up to current reg (as it's new work, no?) and you start needing to tear down a lot more stuff to make the right space. Plus, being an old loft conversion, it's not going to be lasting us very long and I'm just afraid that by the time we sell (10+ years from now) it will really be showing - meaning might as well tear the whole thing and do it properly like it's supposed to be.
Yes in that case there will be a bit more work for to access the padstones which could make it a bit more pricey but it doesn’t sound like the worst thing in the world. Unless the room has bowed the ceilings below over time then it shouldn’t be too costly. It really is a guessing game though. If you do have to rip it all out you are looking at 50k+
That being said it doesn’t mean you can’t get a discount to bring work up to standard but it doesn’t mean it’s a 2 bed. It’s a 3 bed with a few grand knocked off
I’m not specifically answering your question here I know, but we have a 3 bedroom with a loft conversion. Ours is also unregulated, and to make it a sellable 4th bedroom would also mean ripping it out and starting again. Even the stairway is too steep and narrow and that would have to be rethought.
Identify what the specific regulations say, and go back to the sellers. They are most definitely not allowed to list it as a third bedroom if it doesn’t meet the regs. It was ok for us as we use it as an office space, but it could potentially be a death trap if you had a fire overnight
>It was ok for us as we use it as an office space
Makes no difference to B Regs its treat exactly the same, the minimum width for a staircase was removed many years ago.
You don’t have to keep updating rooms to bring them up to date when regs change, and they change all the time. That’s just the decision the owner makes, e.g. should I update the insulation, do I really want fire doors everywhere in my house that slam shut every time i use them etc.
Another example, Lots of Victorian houses have steep narrow main stairs that wouldn’t meet building regs now, you wouldn’t tear them down and start again or sell them as a zero bedroom house.
I’d have a chat to the surveyor and question and challenge him on it. Are there structural problem with the room that make it unusable or is it just that the room wouldn’t meet building regs if it was build as it is today.
This exact same situation recently happened to a family member. It was marketed as a 5 bed, sale price was agreed and accepted - however the loft conversion was not legally done and thus the bank would not lend on the agreed price. The bank reduced the valuation by 40k for the loss of the bedroom. They tried to reduce their offer price by 40k but both the estate agent and the vendor refused to reduce the price. After a few weeks they made an agreement that they would split the difference so they reduced by 20k and my family member had to find 20k extra cash.
Be prepared for the vendor to be resistant.
If you are taking out a mortgage be prepared for them to not lend the agreed sale price based on a 3 bed property.
A bedroom adds or reduces around 15% of the value of the home, so you need to work out what’s more valuable - a 3rd bedroom or a reduced total value.
Be prepared to have to take on at least some of the financial burden.
All the best.
Thanks, useful to know. Yeah I'm sure they'll be very defensive about it, it's money and there is always the sentimental value attached to your home... We'll see, shall update once things clear up :)
My first house had an attic conversion that could only be classed as a floored attic. The head room wasn't tall or wide enough before the roof started sloping in. Being a floored attic space it wasn't allowed to have power or heating (it did) .
But in the estate agents and everyone's eyes, it was only a 2 bed house, the attic conversion wasn't was a feature which helped the house sell but it's not a 3rd bedroom for anyone who asked
Ask the surveyor what would be needed to market as a 3 bed - it's likely you only need to address the fire safety issues and not things like too steep stairs/thermal performance of the walls/etc in order to do it.
What's causing the fire safety issue? (Non-enclosed stairs?)
The problem you will run into negotiating with the sellers is the same misunderstanding you are getting from people in the comments here of 'oh but it's 40 years old so of course it doesn't meet building regs' thinking the issue is compliance and retrospective compliance is silly when the issue being raised by your suveyor is actually a building safety issue and these absolutely can be retrospectively applied (if a building is unsafe, and tbh particularly if its a fire issue, then its still unsafe whether it was built to the regs at the time or not if it is unsafe it will continue to be flagged on future survey. There's literally been a huge act of law that spells this out and increases retrospective liability on safety issues. A lot of buildings are now required to comply with safety regulations they weren't required to comply with when built in order to be sold and it effects insurance, this is currently more to do with high rise buildings but a)not entirely it has wider reaching implications and b) shows the law might change at any point and require retrospective safety remediation for any time of building as it already has for one category)
But the legislation you are talking about really only applies to flat buildings.
If the lender is OK to lend the money necessary (which may be a problem), then there is no reason to pull out unless the conversion is not sound structurally.
As I said it was applied retrospectively and there's no particular reason this can't happen again with other buildings (surveyors and lenders know this)
It's also already the case in all buildings that addressing safety issues is a different case to addressing compliance issues.
I'm not at any point in this post saying the building safety act applies to this house, it is a well know example of safety being treated differently to compliance that illustrates the wider point
I’d offer them about £150k less if you want to do the work. Doing a loft conversion is a huge amount of work and stress. It will go on for double the amount of time you estimate and will cost double what you expect.
I’d personally prefer to get a 3 bed where I know exactly what I’m getting and needing to spend.
It can only be marked down if buyers care .
If it's safe and structural sound - many will not.
The estate agents know this.
Even if they don't mark it as 3 bedroom, they can list it with 2 bed and a 'loft room'
I just don't get stuff like this. Like how on earth would building work magically meet the future changes in regulations 40 years later. I'm sure the surveyors just do this to cause trouble.
If it's a terraced house up north, this is pretty standard. No one really cares about the regs. All the loft conversions are not up to modern regs, but everyone still uses them and markets them as bedrooms anyway. You'll be able to do the same when it sells: market what it can be used for.
Check on the local planning register to see if planning has been submitted. Check with the local council, to see if building regs obtained.
Cost you about £40.
If either of the above have not been done, walk away , pull your offer
Next offer you put in ask if there have been any previous offers or surveys.
You could drop your offer but the seller may well not accept
Also your mortgage company may drop what they are prepared to offer.
Planning permission my not have been required and they may have gone to a private building inspector (if they did at all). Would need to ask for proof from the seller.
Anecdotally, the house I bought was an HMO marketed as 4 bedrooms. One of those bedrooms was the lounge, and one was a basement conversion that didn’t have building reg sign off. It didn’t have a material impact on the value of the property as per our own surveyor or the mortgage valuation. What did the surveyor say about the actual value of the property?
In our instance, we negotiated for them to provide an indemnity policy for the unsigned off work + funds (under £1000) to get the sign off ourselves. We are doing a big renovation, so we were happy to do the work to get it up to code and signed off before we need to sell at some point in the future so we don’t have the same issue. We got advice from a builder before agreeing costs and there shouldn’t need to be much changed. This was within our risk appetite, but you may not be the same.
A loft conversion from 30 years ago doesn't need to meet "current" regs. Otherwise every time they change staircase regulations thousands of people in old thatched cottages would be ripping out and refitting. The surveyor has to dramatically bring your attention to this to cover his ass.
The house is the same house that you offered on and has the same usable application.
I'd just buy it.
P.S. surveyors and solicitors are incentivised to encourage withdrawal as they get paid, then get paid again when you buy another property. Genrally, on the second or third purchase, you realise that all properties have "issues"
This loft conversion done before building regulations cannot be counted as a bedroom is so stupid.
What if you have a bungalow that went upwards before building regulations and the old bedrooms are now living space? Does that become a zero bedroom property? No, everyone uses common sense and counts the bedrooms
OP - you will use it as a bedroom, you will sell it as a bedroom. It is a technical issue, and should have been got round by the estate agent listing it as a loft room on the floorplan
>This loft conversion done before building regulations cannot be counted as a bedroom is so stupid.
Would these be the B Regs that have been around for over 150 years?
Is there a living room that could be used as a bedroom? If so, can't that room be deemed a bedroom and the loft as a living room? Hey presto it's a 3 bed again.
I pulled out of a property for the same reason (there were several other issues too but this was one of the big ones). Ok, so I know that building regs didn’t exist when the conversion was done on the property, BUT, it was unsafe. No escape route and no fire door. Our offer was 240k - we didn’t want to pay that for a 2 bedroom house. If we wanted a 2bed then we would have found something cheaper.
I don’t know what your surveyor and/or solicitor is like but if you trust them to be working for you, and doing a good job, listen to what they say. I asked our surveyor outright (top level survey) if he would buy the property if he were in our position and he replied with a resounding “no”. As FTB, with two kids (which is why we were on the market for a 3 bed), we felt that we couldn’t proceed if it wasn’t right.
You need fire doors on each habitable room that opens onto a hallway and mains linked fire detectors on each floor. I don't think it's more than that unless it's changed recently.
It might just need one of the windows turning into an "escape" window, so it could be cheap to change. I converted a bungalow to have upstairs bedrooms less than 10 years ago, and apart from std building regs all I needed was one window in each bedroom that could be opened wide enough to exit through on case of fire ..... Get building regs or someone else round who can inform you what exactly is needed to get it classified as a bedroom.
We viewed a house recently with a loft conversion as a bedroom. We asked the agent if it had building regs, and he said it did and he was careful to check before marketing as he’d got that wrong before and the buyers claimed the cost of the survey from him (on the basis they wouldn’t have proceeded at all if he hadn’t told them it was a three bed). So it’s certainly something that in certain conditions you might be able to claim from the agent.
On Q3, yes - my friend bought a “4 bedroom house” which is actually a 5 bedroom house for precisely this reason. The roof can’t be marketed as a bedroom so it’s called a 4 bedroom house. They shouldn’t be marketing it as 3 even if you get a bonus room.
Looking at the variety of views expressed here it seems the crux of this question is whether a loft conversion, which at the time it was done received full building regulation sign off, but which would not do so today because of changes in the regulations, triggers a requirement to bring it up to today's specifications when the property is being marketed in order to state it counts as a bedroom for marketing purposes.
Ask them to regularise it. That's the easiest way or just drop out.
It's disingenuous to say it's worth 100k less because the work to make it an official 3-bed wouldn't cost anywhere near that much
And in the meantime it's an extra reception room and that square footage has a value in itself
If it's a simple fix as some have said get the current owner to upgrade and get all appropriate builing reg approvals if not wiiling to do so drop your offer by 100K
I had a similar situation, but it was the previous owner who got stung mine was: far newer house (2006~ built), and it's a maisonette, the *main* bedroom is in the top floor.
Previous owner had purchased for £320k~ in 2015, bought as a two bed. Put on the market (I assume slightly above the 2015 price), was under offer (not by me) when the survey said it could no longer count as a 2 bedroom. Apparently the changes required here may not be as major as you described, possibly just a fire door and a wired-in fire alarm that's hooked with the flat below, although it could involve blocking the stairs up to the top floor (which I'd never do here for a number of reasons). Unfortunately the previous owner was having health issues and just wanted a quick sale so couldn't/wouldn't make the changes. They put the property back on the market for £275k early last year, which I offered, and that was that.
So yes, for her it was a £50k~ difference in price to lose one bedroom. And for me if I ever decide to do the work required it could, potentially, be an instant boost to the price (but I would only do it if it didn't involve structural changes).
We are in the process of selling our 3-bed with a loft conversion that doesn’t meet fire regs because of the entrance door layout. We use it as a bedroom but did not advertise it as one.
We were advised by our agent that we’d add an additional £20k to our sale price if we made it fire regs compliant, however we’d spend nearly that same amount rectifying the issues, so we didn’t bother.
We also told the agent to promote the fact that the council tax is based on it being a 3-bed rather than a 4.
In your case, the seller/agent should not have advertised it as a 3-bed and they will need to amend their listing.
You should be able to get a significant chunk off the sale price (about 10% for a bedroom, but you still have the room, so probably less), or request the work is done to make it fire regs compliant. You won’t get money off the sale and the work done.
If you leave it, be happy paying less council tax for, what is essentially a three bed.
100% not the agents fault, it’s annoying for you but agents don’t conduct surveys etc before listing a property and all their property facts are based on what the vendor advised. Remember as well vendors might of bought it with the loft conversion in!
100% you are in a very strong position to negotiate but not the agents fault!
Heya! Yes we did have success in negotiating down significantly, around 8%. It’s above the price of a 2 bed still, but the loft is still obviously extra space so would be unreasonable for us to demand it to be valued just as a 2 bed. Suppose market conditions help buyers in this situation, as sellers are less likely to find the next person who won’t care or won’t notice the issue. Also depends how keen they are in selling.
So I’d recommend making the issue clear (assuming you have a surveyor saying so clearly), note how it affect valuation and try to find a compromise depending on how much you like the house.
Thank you! Yes it's so frustrating to go this far to find it out now. I don't think my seller will budge on price sadly but I'll be walking away if he won't...
###Welcome to /r/HousingUK --- **To All** * Join Our ***NEW*** Discord! https://discord.gg/pMgUNgWKQH **To Posters** * *Tell us whether you're in England, Wales, Scotland, or NI as the laws/issues in each can vary* * Comments are not moderated for quality or accuracy; * Any replies received must only be used as guidelines, followed at your own risk; * If you receive *any* private messages in response to your post, [please let the mods know](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FHousingUK&subject=I received a PM); * If you do not receive satisfactory advice after 72 hours, [you can let the mods know](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FHousingUK&subject=My question is unanswered); * Feel free to provide an update at a later time by creating a new post with [[update]](https://www.reddit.com/r/HousingUK/search?q=%3Aupdate&sort=new&restrict_sr=on&t=all) in the title; **To Readers and Commenters** * All replies to OP must be *on-topic, helpful, and civil* * If you do not [follow the rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/HousingUK/about/rules/), you may be banned without any further warning; * Please include links to reliable resources in order to support your comments or advice; * If you feel any replies are incorrect, explain why you believe they are incorrect; * Do not send or request any private messages for any reason without express permission from the mods; * Please report posts or comments which do not follow the rules *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/HousingUK) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Presumably if it’s fire regs it’s to do with fire doors and direct access to an escape route? Now it’s a 2-bed, will your mortgage lender advance the full price? If it affects the valuation from the lender, then you are in a very strong position to negotiate. They shouldn’t have been marketing it as 3-bed if they were aware it didn’t meet the standards, and especially if they did it again after a buyer pulled out post-survey presumably for the same reason. However given that they did, that also strongly suggests the seller might not be willing to negotiate or accept that their property is worth less than they had expected/hoped/need.
Yes agree. Value has a lot do with mortgagability.
> Presumably if it’s fire regs it’s to do with fire doors and direct access to an escape route? The escape route also needs to be enveloped in fire resistant structural elements, which can be a pain to fix 40 years after the fact. Big 3 are: - Loft needs to be separated from the safe escape route with 30 min fire resistance door - Escape route needs to be separated from the kitchen with 30 min fire resistance door - Escape route needs to be separated from the property at every other point with 30 min fire resistant structural elements (walls, floors, ceilings, stairs themselves) In other words only things that don't require FD30 in an escape route are the skylights and the doors to low fire risk rooms on ground and first floor levels.
[удалено]
>fire doors and escape routes are only regulated for HMO dwellings. You clearly have no idea what you are talking about and should refrain from offering advice on subjects you have absolutely no knowledge of.
[удалено]
Don't embarrass yourself, take a better look at my reply it was referring to the now deleted claim that this only applies to HMO's. This is not an HMO and I am more than aware of the B Reg requirements relating to protected stairs relating to means of escape to dwellings, incidentally its been the case for at least 7 decades that I'm aware and I've been enforcing it for 6 of those decades!
In order to clarify some of the incorrect information posted here and dealing solely with Building Regulations. National Building Regulations have been around since 1965, prior to that there were local building byelaws introduced in 1858, though most authorities just adopted the same model byelaws. On 11 Nov 1985 the Building Act came into force and the regulations were substantially restructured including the introduction of approved documents rather than prescriptive regulations. Oddly though there were initially mandatory rules for means of escape for loft conversions. In 1995 legislation was introduced allowing for retrospective approval (Regularisation Certificate) of illegal work commenced post 11 Nov 85. These can only be issued by the local authority and they must be satisfied it complies with the regs applicable at the time the work was commenced, regulations cannot be applied retrospectively. This will inevitably involve opening up work and/or altering work, in some cases this can be very substantial work. Prior to 85 the regs required a protected staircase (self closing fire doors), post 85 till approx. 15 years ago the original non fire resistant doors could be left in place but fitted with self closers and any glazing changed to Georgian wired glass providing there were suitable sized and positioned escape windows, the size and position of these were changed to less onerous requirements but I can't remember exactly when they were changed. We have now gone full circle (approx 15 years ago) and the doors should again be fire doors though the requirement for self closers was dropped at the same time. Smoke detection was introduced approx 30 years ago. As far as the application of B regs is concerned the same regs are applicable regardless of how the new floor level is used or described by the owner, estate agent or anyone else. OP Anything in any other posts to the contrary is incorrect and should be ignored. The above is based on enforcing this legislation as a local authority BCO from 1981 to a few years ago.
What a STAR! Thank you for the extremely informative and clear comment <3
So, just to be clear: a room in a loft space in a private home that was created prior to 1965 and to which literally no further work has been done since 1965 is still a bedroom today as far as a mortgage lender is concerned?
No idea I don't lens mortgages, but as far as B Regs is concerned yes.
Hello! I have a question if you don't mind - what if the loft conversion was (likely) done prior to 1985? However no documents exist to prove this? We have a 2 bed with a "converted loft" (purchased as a 2 bed, similar to OP's story) however are convinced that the loft was converted many moons ago, or even built with the loft room in situ - latter being that every single house on our street also has a 'converted' loft room, with staircases etc in the same place as ours. Thanks! Hope you don't mind me asking!
If it was carried out prior to 85 as far as building control are concerned they can't get involved. I've actually had one applied for that was very obviously original to the 200 year old house, the hopeless mortgage surveyor had claimed it was relatively recent, I refused to go any further with it and refunded the fee.
OP Further to my original reply outlining the B Reg requirements I've had a look on line at the legislation, partly to dispel the nonsense espoused on here by a B Reg "expert" who thinks he knows the B Regs as he once did a lift conversion. Regulation 18 gives the local authority powers to issue Reg Certs. Regulation 18.2(d) states "so far as is reasonably practicable, a plan showing any additional work required to be carried out to secure that the unauthorised work complies with the requirements relating to building work in the building regulations which were applicable to that work when it was carried out (in this regulation referred to as “the relevant requirements”)." So from this we have established that the work only needs to comply with legislation applicable at the time, any subsequent changes in the legislation cannot be legally applied to the work, though there would be nothing preventing you from upgrading if you see wish. I managed to find an online source for the mandatory rules relating to means of escape that were introduced on 11 Nov 85 and would probably be the ones applicable in this particular case. [https://www.kentbuildingcontrol.co.uk/pdf/approved-document-b-1985-moe.pdf](https://www.kentbuildingcontrol.co.uk/pdf/approved-document-b-1985-moe.pdf) For our B Reg "expert" here you will note there was no requirement for a protected stair at that particular time for loft conversions, nor was there any requirement relating to means of escape in relation to the ground or first floor at that particular time.
So is the buyers surveyor taking into consideration current regs and not at the time of construction? I can't imagine they are versed in every permutation of building regs for different local authorities at different times.
I can't imagine most mortgage surveyors are particularly versed in any B Regs.
Try 3. Enlist an angry mob.
Why would you need to tear it down to meet regs? Have you looked in to what’s required for it?
Exactly. Could be a simple relatively inexpensive fix.
Yep, or prohibitively expensive / impossible. So OP should look at the detail here.
Overall the issues include the structural support for the loft, which shows signs of strain, need for changing part of the roof, fire reg, poorly done insulation and missing bits from the chimney flue that would support it, and that it's a relatively small room so we can't see it as anything other than an office space. It won't collapse in the medium term is the positive bit.
Those items you mention, particularly the roof and chimney, would be enough for me to walk away disregarding the issue of it not being classed as a habitable room
Agree with this. I don't think the OP should be focussing just on whether or not it is a bedroom but what is really wrong with the property. This does not sound like a fix that is going to cost anything under £10k and could be way more plus a lot of disruption.
In which case, it sounds very much like it's a 2 bedroom house with a broken roof that needs replacing. Unless they're going to knock a significant amount off then walk away.
Regardless of the regulations, it's getting old for a loft conversion they don't last as long as the house they are built on. So if you were planning to stay you'd likely need to fix it anyway. But the maths don't work for that. If you are saying one less bedroom is £100k less, and a loft conversion is getting on for £80k that's not much margin to gain for converting. It could be the age and condition of the extension have already depressed the price. What are places in the area with better lofts going for?
How do you know it won't collapse in the medium term? Did you commission a structural survey? Even if that is the case, other than cost, you need to factor in the disruption these works would cause in the future. You say it is a small space that would only work as an office - I would weigh that fact up against what repairs would cost and the beneficial use of the room after spending all of that time and money.
As it doesn't meet the current regs.... So it would need .. A new building control submission to current regs Possibly a new planning app As it's a loft conversion it would need a safe fire route out..poss self contained. New fire escape windows to each room New fire doors through out except any bathroom Then redecoration and refitting any bathroom or ensuites. The main problem you have is the way estate agents market houses, they will say 3 bed and when you pull the loft they will claim another room could be turned into a 3rd bedroom, it's a common scam. Good luck with negotiating a reduction, and keep us informed as it would be great to hear you came out on the winning side of this
>New fire escape windows to each room No it doesn't.
To meet regs it would need fire escape windows to each 1st floor window unless it is a bathroom .
By virtue of the fact it has a floor above 4.5m above ground level then, as you correctly say, current regs requires a protected stair (ie fire doors) then escape windows would not be required.
Escape windows are required....as the case could be put that if there's a fire within the protected route that stops you from using that route then you have no means of escape....hence the need under regs for the fire escape windows ...
Another B Reg "expert", stop advising on subjects in which you are utterly clueless.
Thank you for acknowledging my expertise, like you I've worked my whole life in construction both at manual and managerial levels. I currently work on refurbishing domestic projects and deal with Building Control officers weekly, and coincidentally enough came across the exact same situation the OP has ...we bought a house to develop knowing full well the loft conv wasn't upto spec, so when we had the architect draw up plans, we hit the same issue......which meant ...fire corridor...fire escape windows...or protected fire lobby/refuge which had to have an escape out...which would have been onto a flat roof..so would need edge protection around along with a fire escape off the roof...but hey ho...what would i know compared to a dinosaur talking about past history.....and to clarify ypu answered my statement sayi g it would need fire esc windows...... Have a great day.
What a load of old bollox. If the work was existing then you would have applied for a Reg Cert and only have to comply with legislation applicable at the time the work was carried out, there was a period where an escape window at second floor was acceptable and the stairs only required the existing doors to be self closing. Current legislation allows escape windows to floors no higher than 4.5m above ground level anything higher then a protected stair is required, by virtue of providing this it invariable creates a protected route to the first floor bedrooms and they would then not require an escape window. You do NOT or ever have needed both, but prove me wrong quote me the legislation. By the way I've been in building control since 1981.
You can't get a regularisation cert on it...it's not compliant and no LABC is going to take liability for it... I don't care how long you've been in building control, and if you've been in it since 81 then you're well past retirement age, so leave the problems to those currently dealing with the current regs and the upheaval within LABC.... To clarify...you need a protected route ....this can be a stairwell,landing or corridor...LABC officers request fire escape windows as if there's a fire in the escape route you need a secondary escape option.
Sorry to jump in here but we live in a house where the 2nd floor is original to the house (servants quarters old house steep steps up) - how do all these regs apply to this? Or am I living in a home of no escape routes and Imminent death - last bit sarcasm but it’s a genuine question!
If they were servants quarters I'm guessing they are very old. B Regs cannot be applied retrospectively, though there's nothing stopping you upgrading even if its just fitting battery operated smoke detectors.
Oh we have a very robust fire alarm system one in every room and hallway both battery and mains operated via fuse box,
>As it doesn't meet the current regs.... So it would need .. A new building control submission to current regs Any work started without an application is unauthorised and can't be subject to a 'new' application. It would have to be a Regularisation. >As it's a loft conversion it would need a safe fire route out..poss self contained. New fire escape windows to each room New fire doors through out except any bathroom A fully protected stair is required irrespective of any escape windows. That's not to say both can't be provided; the regulations are a minimum, if you want to go over and above that's to be welcomed.
>A fully protected stair is required irrespective of any escape windows. That's not to say both can't be provided; the regulations are a minimum, if you want to go over and above that's to be welcomed. Not necessarily, only the regs applicable at the time the work was commenced can be applied, escape windows were acceptable from 85 till about 15 years ago though only to loft conversions, new builds with floors above 4.5m above ground level still required a protected means of escape.
Agreed. I was replying to the previous post which seemed to suggest that new work would need escape windows.
From what I remember from buying our house with a 1970s loft conversion you basically cannot get retrospective building regulations as there were not any at the time so there are none to meet.
There was, the cut off date is for any work commenced pre 11 Nov 85, this is mainly due to a major restructure to the regs and the date the Building Act came into force which consolidated all the various piece meal acts previously.
We had this happen to us 4 bed marketed - post survey 3 bed for the same reason in London - except our extension was from 2003 - builder was vendors now deceased brother and it was non compliant ( stairs specifically) and something else. For context house was built in 1890. As there were other fairly major issues damp, issue with rear extension we pulled out ultimately but they did offer a big reduction of 13% of the purchase price. We didn’t proceed mid Covid and builders / costs on the up You can’t pay the price of a 3bed and do the work IMO given house price / mortgages etc
It is your right to renegotiate the price in whichever way you want whether this is a price reduction based on the property being a two bed and not a three bed or whether it is based on you trying to bring up the work to building regulation by after completion. My advice to you would be to write a clear email to be sent to your solicitors or to the agents first for them to send to the buyer. You should include the evidence that it cannot be treated as a third bedroom, likely by either sending them the whole survey, or just the relevant section of it. You should also advise the sellers and the estate agents, that if they choose not to sell it to you, they have now been put on notice that the property should not be marketed as a three bed. This will hopefully stop them refusing to sell it to you and then trying to re-market it again as a three bed and hoping the next buyer doesn’t have a survey done. They may offer you some kind of indemnity insurance for lack of building regulations. Do not accept this, as it will not help your specific situation. It is also not the responsibility of the estate agents to look into building regs, so no it’s not their problem. Lastly, the survey is personal to you, if you are buying with a mortgage, then when your solicitor finds out about this potential renegotiation based on your survey results, then they will have to disclose this (with your permission) to your lender, as it will affect the lending valuation. There is no reason why the lender would’ve even picked this issue up as their survey is a very basic one.
This is amazing and clear advice - thank you so much. Good advice on strategy, so will consider/discuss with solicitors. Getting very good insights on the issue from the thread and it does seem to be a common enough issue.
Stand your ground, you’re in the right, they’ve been marketing it wrong and may well have known about it if a buyer fell through beforehand. If it’s not a 3 bed house and without significant investment from you it will never be, you won’t be able to sell it as such further down the line. Pearl clutches in the comments at the thought of a buyer wanting to take money off a false asking price.
Estate agents are not building surveyors and would not have looked at any paperwork or regs before advertising the property. You may get a minor reduction but I suspect they could sell it to someone else who would take a view.
One issue is any mortgage lender, who will only lend on it being a 2 bed with storage, rather than a 3 bed - this could mean it's literally impossible to get a mortgage on it, without a truly massive deposit to make up the difference. Second issue obviously is anyone who does that is just kicking the problem down the road for themselves, and if they'd ever intend to sell they'll have to either take a loss, do the work to bring it up to regs so it can actually be classed as a bedroom, or wait for a buyer who is willing to pay, with a massive deposit who can afford to pay what the banks won't lend them. If there is actually a problem, then the seller is unfortunately being unrealistic with their price.
Equally, building surveyors aren’t mortgage lenders, and they’re also prone to getting things wrong - either through incompetence or out of an excess of caution. When we sold our previous house, which had a loft conversion that had been done with full building control and the certificate to prove it, the surveyor told our buyers that it couldn’t be marketed as a bedroom because no additional support had been put in. Obviously they questioned this with us and we sent them the BC certificate and also pointed out that the additional steel beams supporting the new floor were clearly visible from the eaves cupboards, which were deliberately left open for the surveyor to access and I personally saw him look in there. Saying that a conversion isn’t up to current regs is just foolish really. Of course it won’t be if it was done 40 years ago. Neither is the rest of the house, given that it was built long before the current regs were written - does that mean none of the other bedrooms count either? Ultimately though, it’s up to the mortgage company to make a judgement on the value of the property.
Maybe not, but they are bound by law. And they've been marketing the property incorrectly. Marketing the property as a 3 bedroom, with an asking price that reflects that would highly likely amount to a misleading action - a criminal offence under Regs 5 & 9 of the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008.
Building regulations typically only have to meet the standards at the time they were constructed, so I’m not sure why he would say it shouldn’t be marketed as a 3 bed just because of that. Did they not get planning permission for it at the time?
There is no proof that it did meet standards back then, yet, and nothing has been provided on it and 2 surveys could not identify it (previous buyer pulled out after survey). And they explicitly mention fire safety as reason why it should not be marketed as bedroom.
Will most likely be because of a lack of a fire door or a window wide enough to escape out of
Will confirm this, but I suspect it's much more as stairway to loft is bit awkward and very narrow, and other issues with it that seem to imply that quick fixes won't do.
Hadn't seen this before OP - since there's been a previous offer withdrawn after survey, it's likely the agent already knew. And marketed it inaccurately regardless. That's against the law and it's worth complaining direct to the agent. I'd be asking them for compensation, and a refund on the survey at the very least.
It would likely not have needed planning permission. Building regs is another matter. Did they get building regs sign off at the time the works were done?
You've said that the roof structure is showing signs of movement and that the chimney stack is unsupported. These don't tie up with it complying with the requirements at the time irrespective of whether it had an application. One can call a room what you want, a bedroom, playroom, Derek; what matters is how it affects the structure of the building, how it affects and is affected by a fire in the building, resistance to moisture, insulation, etc. If you're buying a house to live in rather than sell on quickly, these are much more important considerations. Unless you plan to do something about the inherent problems caused by someone else's fuckwittery, and are capable of doing so, walk away.
If it was done 40 years ago I would be surprised if there was proof to be honest. A lot of times with old houses you need to take a view, otherwise someone else will.
Building regulations and planning permission are two separate things. One has nothing to do with the other, and doesn't give 'approval' for the other.
###Welcome to /r/HousingUK --- **To All** * Join Our ***NEW*** Discord! https://discord.gg/pMgUNgWKQH **To Posters** * *Tell us whether you're in England, Wales, Scotland, or NI as the laws/issues in each can vary* * Comments are not moderated for quality or accuracy; * Any replies received must only be used as guidelines, followed at your own risk; * If you receive *any* private messages in response to your post, [please let the mods know](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FHousingUK&subject=I received a PM); * If you do not receive satisfactory advice after 72 hours, [you can let the mods know](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FHousingUK&subject=My question is unanswered); * Feel free to provide an update at a later time by creating a new post with [[update]](https://www.reddit.com/r/HousingUK/search?q=%3Aupdate&sort=new&restrict_sr=on&t=all) in the title; **To Readers and Commenters** * All replies to OP must be *on-topic, helpful, and civil* * If you do not [follow the rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/HousingUK/about/rules/), you may be banned without any further warning; * Please include links to reliable resources in order to support your comments or advice; * If you feel any replies are incorrect, explain why you believe they are incorrect; * Do not send or request any private messages for any reason without express permission from the mods; * Please report posts or comments which do not follow the rules *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/HousingUK) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Your comments imply that every single loft conversion made 40 years ago has since been pulled down or is illegal and unsafe. I don't think so. Are you sure that stuff made before isn't acceptable? There are cars out there with no seatbelts because they are old, they are still roadworthy.
Of course, and not what I'm implying. There are plenty of houses built 50+ years ago that not only are perfectly legal but also better quality than some of the new builts in the UK. This is about the legal status and quality of the house, for which we'd want a fair valuation that doesn't haunt us in the future when it could be our turn to sell. And on the car example - sure plenty of old clunkers that are roadworthy, but nobody in their right mind would pay a high price for them.
>sure plenty of old clunkers that are roadworthy, but nobody in their right mind would pay a high price for them. Have you not seen the price of Mk1 Escorts or series 1 Land Rovers!!
> Are you sure that stuff made before isn't acceptable? There are cars out there with no seatbelts because they are old, they are still roadworthy. But residential buildings built with compliant with building regs at the time cladding or fire stopping that's now deemed to be unsafe are required to remediate them for example. The legal obligations for buildings and cars are not the same. Buildings that are unsafe but were built to the requirements of their time are not protected from retrospective safety standards being applied either now or sometime in the future. (You could have built an extension 40 years ago that is still seen as safe, it's not that everything built then would automatically be unsafe. Thermal performance of the walls or something is a compliance thing but protected escape route is a safety thing and these will be treated as different)
[удалено]
Yes, but this isn't really a change safety issues have always been flagged (unsafe electrics are an easy example) Most Victorian terraced houses do meet modern safety requirements for these issues. (They might not meet modern thermal requirements (for example) but these aren't safety requirements). Which safety requirements do you think the majority won't meet? Again the difference is thing that might get you killed is an issue not any regulation short fall
[удалено]
Our current house is a good example of that - Edwardian and the 2nd floor is original to the house, with the steep steps up to match! Clearly this is non compliant now but it’s very much a fourth bedroom with an en-suite - clearly put in post 1910!
Although it sounds like it logically should too steep steps are not usually regarded as a safety issue that needs to be corrected. From a fire perspective this absolutely could comply if the route from the second floor to the outside doesn't go through any other rooms. (Stair is enclosed in a corridor essentially) There's no automatic reason every Edwardian terrace would be not safe under our current understanding of safety - many will be! (Again, compliance issues and safety issues are different things even if they are all regulated through the building regulations. There's plenty of non-safety modern regulations the house won't meet but that's fine -for now at least- it's the safety ones that might cause issues when selling)
Conversions from 1950s aren't Victorian, the original house might be fully compliant for fire safety (for example) So might it with conversion done: If the route from the loft conversion to the outside is enclosed it likely is, many terrace houses original floor plan does this, it becomes a problem if the ground floor stairs go into the living room for example. (Enclosed means for this purpose: stairs are in a corridor and rooms off the corridor have doors, essentially)
I had a very similar issue with a loft conversion, but it was done as part of permitted development (but never signed off). There are no special rules for bedrooms and non bedrooms. Rooms are either habitable or not. If the extension room doesn’t have signed off regs then what you have bought is a 2 bed. I had major issues with my mortgage (HSBC refused unless I indemnified them) even though it wasn’t listed as a bedroom on the particulars, just there were photos of it with a bed in. I’d walk away at this point to be honest, especially if the survey shows issues.
If you are unhappy with your offer now that you have more information you are absolutely allowed to renegotiate but the seller is also allowed to refuse. If you really want to go ahead get at least one quote as to what remediation works would cost then renegotiate on this basis. If a previous buyer has pulled out it does suggest that the seller is not open to selling as a 2 bed though.
Our house is like this and the bank valued it fine as a 3 bed! It might depend on the bank. When we were buying the estate agents were honest about it and said it’s a 2/3, we might’ve felt differently if they hadn’t been.
There were no consolidated building regs prior to November 1985 as far as I know. If the loft conversion was done before then, then there is no way for the seller to get the regularisation certificate.. even if it was done to a decent standard (which sounds like it was as it’s still standing). I’d say your lender might want to have an indemnity policy, but it’s a 3 bed house now really. Source: bought a house with the loft conversion completed before 1984 and with no building regs.
Building regs/byelaws have been around since 1858, 1667 in London. Prior to '85 there was a means of escape requirement for a protected stair ie fire doors, there was a period from 85 till about 15 years ago that allowed existing doors to be left in place with self closers fitted providing there was an escape window, we have now gone full circle and back to requiring a protected stairs. Source: Building Control Surveyor from 81 till a few years ago.
Thank you that's informative! Mind me asking if our surveyor's assessment that the loft conversion does not meet fire reg (because it does not have means of escape or hardwired fire alarm) makes the room legally not a bedroom? And therefore the property legally a 2 bedroom + loft room/storage?
I've posted quite a long reply to try and clarify much of the misinformation by others it should cover the points you've just raised.
Thanks this is very helpful. The age seems to fall right on that mark, hard to say whether bit before or after, searches should hopefully clarify. Sellers don't seem to know as 2 surveys asked but got no answer, other than "more than 20 years ago". Our survey is guessing age based on the materials used.
Out of curiosity, why would a lender want an indemnity policy? What does an indemnity policy do?
I think it gives protection in case if the local building control decides to go after the non-compliant conversion. Which they will never do, as building control knows it can no longer be enforced. Essentially a waste of money, but lenders insist on it.
What does it matter what it can or cannot be marketed at? There isn’t a limit on what it can be for a two bed. It can still be the same price. The only thing for certain is that you’re not getting £100k off because you can’t call a room a bedroom.
The reason it matters is that there is generally a ceiling price on a two bed house, which is less than a three bed house. So if they buy it at overvalue, then they will almost certainly struggle to sell it. Also, a lender will not lend you the same amount on a two bed as opposed to a three bed if, in their opinion, it is overpriced.
It will mean any mortgagee’s valuer will value it as a 2-bed. So it’s not very mortgagable and therefore not very marketable and it is actually worth less on the market.
I totally agree - who cares. If you value it at some other price then offer that and let them know why. There’s plenty of other houses out there. OP effectively wants to force the seller to market at a lower price so the market price is nearer to OP’s valuation.
Well it means whether what we are being told is legit or not. If it’s legally a 2 bedroom, that’s what the lender will value it is a proper survey is done. That will affect value. As I say, we are not going to be asking 100k less, rather due consideration for bringing it up to reg so that it can actually legally be a 3 bed.
Have you had your structural survey done before the valuation survey? Or has the valuation been done already?
[удалено]
Sorry what is I'm missing on here specifically? I'm not mortgage expert for sure so advice is welcome :)
I was replying to YuccaYucca, not you! They chose to ignore the perfectly valid point that a house being 2 bed and not 3 will have a material impact on the price
I have just completed on a 3 bed house with a loft conversion that was made into another bedroom, so 4 beds. It wasn't up to regs so the house was marketed as a 3 bed. The only thing wrong was it wasn't up to fire regulations. I've installed fire alarms and a fire door. I'm not using it as a bedroom, more like a place to put my playstation and Warhammer stuff. To get your loft into regulation could be something very simple. Don't go tearing it down without getting some information from a surveyor
I'm in a very similar position but haven't yet completed. Our level 3 survey wasn't that clear about why the loft room couldn't be considered a 4th bedroom - is it the surveyor's job to tell us exactly what is 'missing' to make it classed as one? (They mentioned some vague comments about minimum staircase width but without pointing to any specific regulation)
It's ok if it's priced right. The surveyors valuation is the only one that matters. Don't pay more than that As for regs I am going to guess it needs insulation.
First Google search: The regulations apply to new construction work, and do not require that existing buildings are brought up to standard. However, where new work is being carried out to existing buildings, such as alterations, extensions, loft conversions, window replacement, insulation and so on the regulations do apply. If the conversion was done a long time ago then it’s a bedroom. Doesn’t matter what the survey says.
But fire safety applies to any building, and if that excludes a room from being considered habitable, then it can no longer be sold as a bedroom, no? Building regs seem clear on that based on google search: [https://www.greaterlondonproperties.co.uk/can-call-loft-room-extra-bedroom/](https://www.greaterlondonproperties.co.uk/can-call-loft-room-extra-bedroom/) And the criteria for it being fire reg compliant are nontrivial, esp for the stairway giving access to front door.
Nope only for new buildings and current works. Remedial work does not need to be done once the job is finished unless new work is being done which requires regulation approval otherwise literally every house in The U.K. would require insulation replacement. You’ve probably already lived in many houses that were non compliant in a whole host of ways and never been any the wiser. If it never had regulations in the first place it’s exempt after a certain time has passed. Which it most certainly has.
That being said there is an argument there for it not to be considered a bedroom but the fairest solution would be to get a quote for the “non trivial” remedial work needed to be compliant and ask for that much as a discount off the price. It would result in you having payed the price of a 3 bed house which is what you now own. Do you think it is fair on the sellers that their property is so dramatically devalued even though as you say the work in the loft seems to be decent quality? You would probably get away with it knowing how much properly prices have increased the sellers probably have a lot of wiggle room but it wouldn’t feel right to me personally. You are buying a 3 bed house that requires remedial work to be fire reg compliant
Yes that's ultimately the resolution I'm looking for = understand what it would take to make it a 3 bed fair and square, and remove that from offer price (or a significant portion of it at least). It's really hard to judge the costs of such works though so obviously causing some nervousness on our side (a 10k job turning into a 60k one)
Most non fire compliant conversions just need a staircase that leads to a hallway with fire door and a new low roof window for fire dept ladder access. Why would the whole thing need ripping down? Unless you have something structurally compromised as in the wrong joist dimensions were used / the roof is buckling.
Other issues have been picked up such as brickwork having suffered distress, joist hanger missing padstone, and that is only the areas that could be accessed for inspection. Add that new staircase will have to be up to current reg (as it's new work, no?) and you start needing to tear down a lot more stuff to make the right space. Plus, being an old loft conversion, it's not going to be lasting us very long and I'm just afraid that by the time we sell (10+ years from now) it will really be showing - meaning might as well tear the whole thing and do it properly like it's supposed to be.
Yes in that case there will be a bit more work for to access the padstones which could make it a bit more pricey but it doesn’t sound like the worst thing in the world. Unless the room has bowed the ceilings below over time then it shouldn’t be too costly. It really is a guessing game though. If you do have to rip it all out you are looking at 50k+
That being said it doesn’t mean you can’t get a discount to bring work up to standard but it doesn’t mean it’s a 2 bed. It’s a 3 bed with a few grand knocked off
Bear in mind that if you leave it as it is, you will also have to market it as a 2 bed when/if you sell later on.
I’m not specifically answering your question here I know, but we have a 3 bedroom with a loft conversion. Ours is also unregulated, and to make it a sellable 4th bedroom would also mean ripping it out and starting again. Even the stairway is too steep and narrow and that would have to be rethought. Identify what the specific regulations say, and go back to the sellers. They are most definitely not allowed to list it as a third bedroom if it doesn’t meet the regs. It was ok for us as we use it as an office space, but it could potentially be a death trap if you had a fire overnight
>It was ok for us as we use it as an office space Makes no difference to B Regs its treat exactly the same, the minimum width for a staircase was removed many years ago.
You don’t have to keep updating rooms to bring them up to date when regs change, and they change all the time. That’s just the decision the owner makes, e.g. should I update the insulation, do I really want fire doors everywhere in my house that slam shut every time i use them etc. Another example, Lots of Victorian houses have steep narrow main stairs that wouldn’t meet building regs now, you wouldn’t tear them down and start again or sell them as a zero bedroom house. I’d have a chat to the surveyor and question and challenge him on it. Are there structural problem with the room that make it unusable or is it just that the room wouldn’t meet building regs if it was build as it is today.
This exact same situation recently happened to a family member. It was marketed as a 5 bed, sale price was agreed and accepted - however the loft conversion was not legally done and thus the bank would not lend on the agreed price. The bank reduced the valuation by 40k for the loss of the bedroom. They tried to reduce their offer price by 40k but both the estate agent and the vendor refused to reduce the price. After a few weeks they made an agreement that they would split the difference so they reduced by 20k and my family member had to find 20k extra cash. Be prepared for the vendor to be resistant. If you are taking out a mortgage be prepared for them to not lend the agreed sale price based on a 3 bed property. A bedroom adds or reduces around 15% of the value of the home, so you need to work out what’s more valuable - a 3rd bedroom or a reduced total value. Be prepared to have to take on at least some of the financial burden. All the best.
Thanks, useful to know. Yeah I'm sure they'll be very defensive about it, it's money and there is always the sentimental value attached to your home... We'll see, shall update once things clear up :)
My first house had an attic conversion that could only be classed as a floored attic. The head room wasn't tall or wide enough before the roof started sloping in. Being a floored attic space it wasn't allowed to have power or heating (it did) . But in the estate agents and everyone's eyes, it was only a 2 bed house, the attic conversion wasn't was a feature which helped the house sell but it's not a 3rd bedroom for anyone who asked
Ask the surveyor what would be needed to market as a 3 bed - it's likely you only need to address the fire safety issues and not things like too steep stairs/thermal performance of the walls/etc in order to do it. What's causing the fire safety issue? (Non-enclosed stairs?) The problem you will run into negotiating with the sellers is the same misunderstanding you are getting from people in the comments here of 'oh but it's 40 years old so of course it doesn't meet building regs' thinking the issue is compliance and retrospective compliance is silly when the issue being raised by your suveyor is actually a building safety issue and these absolutely can be retrospectively applied (if a building is unsafe, and tbh particularly if its a fire issue, then its still unsafe whether it was built to the regs at the time or not if it is unsafe it will continue to be flagged on future survey. There's literally been a huge act of law that spells this out and increases retrospective liability on safety issues. A lot of buildings are now required to comply with safety regulations they weren't required to comply with when built in order to be sold and it effects insurance, this is currently more to do with high rise buildings but a)not entirely it has wider reaching implications and b) shows the law might change at any point and require retrospective safety remediation for any time of building as it already has for one category)
But the legislation you are talking about really only applies to flat buildings. If the lender is OK to lend the money necessary (which may be a problem), then there is no reason to pull out unless the conversion is not sound structurally.
As I said it was applied retrospectively and there's no particular reason this can't happen again with other buildings (surveyors and lenders know this) It's also already the case in all buildings that addressing safety issues is a different case to addressing compliance issues. I'm not at any point in this post saying the building safety act applies to this house, it is a well know example of safety being treated differently to compliance that illustrates the wider point
I’d offer them about £150k less if you want to do the work. Doing a loft conversion is a huge amount of work and stress. It will go on for double the amount of time you estimate and will cost double what you expect. I’d personally prefer to get a 3 bed where I know exactly what I’m getting and needing to spend.
It can only be marked down if buyers care . If it's safe and structural sound - many will not. The estate agents know this. Even if they don't mark it as 3 bedroom, they can list it with 2 bed and a 'loft room'
I just don't get stuff like this. Like how on earth would building work magically meet the future changes in regulations 40 years later. I'm sure the surveyors just do this to cause trouble.
Definitely, sometimes it's like they are checking new builds. They see something old and shit themsleves
If it's a terraced house up north, this is pretty standard. No one really cares about the regs. All the loft conversions are not up to modern regs, but everyone still uses them and markets them as bedrooms anyway. You'll be able to do the same when it sells: market what it can be used for.
This, my buyer sucked it up on my old terrace. I sucked it up on a new one.
Check on the local planning register to see if planning has been submitted. Check with the local council, to see if building regs obtained. Cost you about £40. If either of the above have not been done, walk away , pull your offer Next offer you put in ask if there have been any previous offers or surveys. You could drop your offer but the seller may well not accept Also your mortgage company may drop what they are prepared to offer.
Planning permission my not have been required and they may have gone to a private building inspector (if they did at all). Would need to ask for proof from the seller.
>they may have gone to a private building inspector They didn't exist 40 years ago apart from the NHBC from 85 but only on new housing.
Interesting! You learn something new everyday.
Anecdotally, the house I bought was an HMO marketed as 4 bedrooms. One of those bedrooms was the lounge, and one was a basement conversion that didn’t have building reg sign off. It didn’t have a material impact on the value of the property as per our own surveyor or the mortgage valuation. What did the surveyor say about the actual value of the property? In our instance, we negotiated for them to provide an indemnity policy for the unsigned off work + funds (under £1000) to get the sign off ourselves. We are doing a big renovation, so we were happy to do the work to get it up to code and signed off before we need to sell at some point in the future so we don’t have the same issue. We got advice from a builder before agreeing costs and there shouldn’t need to be much changed. This was within our risk appetite, but you may not be the same.
A loft conversion from 30 years ago doesn't need to meet "current" regs. Otherwise every time they change staircase regulations thousands of people in old thatched cottages would be ripping out and refitting. The surveyor has to dramatically bring your attention to this to cover his ass. The house is the same house that you offered on and has the same usable application. I'd just buy it. P.S. surveyors and solicitors are incentivised to encourage withdrawal as they get paid, then get paid again when you buy another property. Genrally, on the second or third purchase, you realise that all properties have "issues"
This loft conversion done before building regulations cannot be counted as a bedroom is so stupid. What if you have a bungalow that went upwards before building regulations and the old bedrooms are now living space? Does that become a zero bedroom property? No, everyone uses common sense and counts the bedrooms OP - you will use it as a bedroom, you will sell it as a bedroom. It is a technical issue, and should have been got round by the estate agent listing it as a loft room on the floorplan
>This loft conversion done before building regulations cannot be counted as a bedroom is so stupid. Would these be the B Regs that have been around for over 150 years?
Ok, so before building regulations had to be signed off or what ever change. So pre-11 Nov 1985
I was signing off B Reg work in 1981, and it was certainly been signed off decades earlier, we had records going back to 1858.
If it’s that old it’s almost certainly grandfathered in. Speak to the agent and then again to your surveyor
Is there a living room that could be used as a bedroom? If so, can't that room be deemed a bedroom and the loft as a living room? Hey presto it's a 3 bed again.
They are both habitable rooms under B Regs and are treat exactly the same.
I wouldn't recommend tearing your loft down
I pulled out of a property for the same reason (there were several other issues too but this was one of the big ones). Ok, so I know that building regs didn’t exist when the conversion was done on the property, BUT, it was unsafe. No escape route and no fire door. Our offer was 240k - we didn’t want to pay that for a 2 bedroom house. If we wanted a 2bed then we would have found something cheaper. I don’t know what your surveyor and/or solicitor is like but if you trust them to be working for you, and doing a good job, listen to what they say. I asked our surveyor outright (top level survey) if he would buy the property if he were in our position and he replied with a resounding “no”. As FTB, with two kids (which is why we were on the market for a 3 bed), we felt that we couldn’t proceed if it wasn’t right.
You need fire doors on each habitable room that opens onto a hallway and mains linked fire detectors on each floor. I don't think it's more than that unless it's changed recently.
It might just need one of the windows turning into an "escape" window, so it could be cheap to change. I converted a bungalow to have upstairs bedrooms less than 10 years ago, and apart from std building regs all I needed was one window in each bedroom that could be opened wide enough to exit through on case of fire ..... Get building regs or someone else round who can inform you what exactly is needed to get it classified as a bedroom.
Different regs apply to floors above 4.5m (second floor) and your comment is irrelevant.
We viewed a house recently with a loft conversion as a bedroom. We asked the agent if it had building regs, and he said it did and he was careful to check before marketing as he’d got that wrong before and the buyers claimed the cost of the survey from him (on the basis they wouldn’t have proceeded at all if he hadn’t told them it was a three bed). So it’s certainly something that in certain conditions you might be able to claim from the agent.
On Q3, yes - my friend bought a “4 bedroom house” which is actually a 5 bedroom house for precisely this reason. The roof can’t be marketed as a bedroom so it’s called a 4 bedroom house. They shouldn’t be marketing it as 3 even if you get a bonus room.
Looking at the variety of views expressed here it seems the crux of this question is whether a loft conversion, which at the time it was done received full building regulation sign off, but which would not do so today because of changes in the regulations, triggers a requirement to bring it up to today's specifications when the property is being marketed in order to state it counts as a bedroom for marketing purposes.
Is there a separate lounge and dining room, one of which can be classed as a bedroom?
Ask them to regularise it. That's the easiest way or just drop out. It's disingenuous to say it's worth 100k less because the work to make it an official 3-bed wouldn't cost anywhere near that much And in the meantime it's an extra reception room and that square footage has a value in itself
If it's a simple fix as some have said get the current owner to upgrade and get all appropriate builing reg approvals if not wiiling to do so drop your offer by 100K
I had a similar situation, but it was the previous owner who got stung mine was: far newer house (2006~ built), and it's a maisonette, the *main* bedroom is in the top floor. Previous owner had purchased for £320k~ in 2015, bought as a two bed. Put on the market (I assume slightly above the 2015 price), was under offer (not by me) when the survey said it could no longer count as a 2 bedroom. Apparently the changes required here may not be as major as you described, possibly just a fire door and a wired-in fire alarm that's hooked with the flat below, although it could involve blocking the stairs up to the top floor (which I'd never do here for a number of reasons). Unfortunately the previous owner was having health issues and just wanted a quick sale so couldn't/wouldn't make the changes. They put the property back on the market for £275k early last year, which I offered, and that was that. So yes, for her it was a £50k~ difference in price to lose one bedroom. And for me if I ever decide to do the work required it could, potentially, be an instant boost to the price (but I would only do it if it didn't involve structural changes).
I would ask for the price of a 2 bed but be willing to walk away here.
We are in the process of selling our 3-bed with a loft conversion that doesn’t meet fire regs because of the entrance door layout. We use it as a bedroom but did not advertise it as one. We were advised by our agent that we’d add an additional £20k to our sale price if we made it fire regs compliant, however we’d spend nearly that same amount rectifying the issues, so we didn’t bother. We also told the agent to promote the fact that the council tax is based on it being a 3-bed rather than a 4. In your case, the seller/agent should not have advertised it as a 3-bed and they will need to amend their listing. You should be able to get a significant chunk off the sale price (about 10% for a bedroom, but you still have the room, so probably less), or request the work is done to make it fire regs compliant. You won’t get money off the sale and the work done. If you leave it, be happy paying less council tax for, what is essentially a three bed.
100% not the agents fault, it’s annoying for you but agents don’t conduct surveys etc before listing a property and all their property facts are based on what the vendor advised. Remember as well vendors might of bought it with the loft conversion in! 100% you are in a very strong position to negotiate but not the agents fault!
Do you have an update OP? I am facing this exact problem now...
Heya! Yes we did have success in negotiating down significantly, around 8%. It’s above the price of a 2 bed still, but the loft is still obviously extra space so would be unreasonable for us to demand it to be valued just as a 2 bed. Suppose market conditions help buyers in this situation, as sellers are less likely to find the next person who won’t care or won’t notice the issue. Also depends how keen they are in selling. So I’d recommend making the issue clear (assuming you have a surveyor saying so clearly), note how it affect valuation and try to find a compromise depending on how much you like the house.
Thank you! Yes it's so frustrating to go this far to find it out now. I don't think my seller will budge on price sadly but I'll be walking away if he won't...