Yes, exactly. I know loads of people that have done it too
The 12 months time limit [for building regs] or the 4 year time limit [for breaches of planning permission], like have not got any! start from the date of the breach. The date of the breach, insofar as planning permission is concerned at any rate, has been held by case law to be from the date that "operations were substantially completed"
Here is a bit about this sort of thing regarding building regs
Remedies Where Work Has Been Carried Out Without Building Regulations Approval Time Limit on Enforcement ActionThe local authority is only entitled to serve a Section 36 Notice (see above) within 12 months of the offending work being carried out. After that time they may still apply to the court for an injunction which if granted would prevent the property from being used. So far this legislation has never been tested, that is to say that no local authority has has actually applied for an injunction, which demonstrates that it is somewhat unlikely that action will be taken after 12 months has expired. If an application for an injunction was made, the court would have to consider whether it would be in the public interest to grant it. Presumably therefore an injunction would not be granted unless the breach of building regulations represented a danger to public safety. It seems unlikely that the court would grant an injunction in the case of a small extension or conservatory, or for replacement glazing, however it is possible that the construction of a building, particulary an apartment block, may represent a danger. It should be noted that a injunction can be granted whether or not building regulations approval was obtained for the work. Despite the fact that there is no time limit on the local authority's right to apply for an injunction, it is generally accepted that if 10 years or more have passed since the work was carried out then there is no serious risk of action for breach of building regulations being taken.
Retrospective Building Regulations ApprovalIf the work which should have been passed by building control (or self-certified if applicable) has been carried out in the past 12 months, or if you are not satisfied that there is no risk of an injunction, then you may ask the seller to apply for retrospective approval building regulations approval. This will involve the building control department inspecting the work and, if they are satisfied, issuing a regularisation certificate. There is of course a risk that the work will not comply with the regulations, in which case a section 36 notice may be issued. It is worth considering that depending on the nature of the work the inspection process may be quite complicated, for example if the work is the construction of a house and the foundations were not inspected when laid, to do so once the house is complete could be expensive and time consuming
Lack of Building Regulations Indemnity InsuranceAs an alternative to obtaining retrospective building regulations approval, indemnity insurance may instead be obtained. This is an insurance policy where the premium is paid just once and would cover the purchaser and mortgage lender against any financial losses suffered should a section 36 notice be served. Cover is generally only available in the following circumstances:-
If indemnity insurance is obtained it should pointed out to the purchaser that they must not alert the local authority to the existence of the breach of building regulations in future, nor must they change the use of the property, nor reveal the existence of the policy to anyone other than a future purchaser or the solicitor acting for them in a sale or remortgage, otherwise the indemnity policy would be invalidated.
john...
The 12 months time limit [for building regs] or the 4 year time limit [for breaches of planning permission], like have not got any! start from the date of the breach. The date of the breach, insofar as planning permission is concerned at any rate, has been held by case law to be from the date that "operations were substantially completed"
Here is a bit about this sort of thing regarding building regs
Remedies Where Work Has Been Carried Out Without Building Regulations Approval Time Limit on Enforcement ActionThe local authority is only entitled to serve a Section 36 Notice (see above) within 12 months of the offending work being carried out. After that time they may still apply to the court for an injunction which if granted would prevent the property from being used. So far this legislation has never been tested, that is to say that no local authority has has actually applied for an injunction, which demonstrates that it is somewhat unlikely that action will be taken after 12 months has expired. If an application for an injunction was made, the court would have to consider whether it would be in the public interest to grant it. Presumably therefore an injunction would not be granted unless the breach of building regulations represented a danger to public safety. It seems unlikely that the court would grant an injunction in the case of a small extension or conservatory, or for replacement glazing, however it is possible that the construction of a building, particulary an apartment block, may represent a danger. It should be noted that a injunction can be granted whether or not building regulations approval was obtained for the work. Despite the fact that there is no time limit on the local authority's right to apply for an injunction, it is generally accepted that if 10 years or more have passed since the work was carried out then there is no serious risk of action for breach of building regulations being taken.
Retrospective Building Regulations ApprovalIf the work which should have been passed by building control (or self-certified if applicable) has been carried out in the past 12 months, or if you are not satisfied that there is no risk of an injunction, then you may ask the seller to apply for retrospective approval building regulations approval. This will involve the building control department inspecting the work and, if they are satisfied, issuing a regularisation certificate. There is of course a risk that the work will not comply with the regulations, in which case a section 36 notice may be issued. It is worth considering that depending on the nature of the work the inspection process may be quite complicated, for example if the work is the construction of a house and the foundations were not inspected when laid, to do so once the house is complete could be expensive and time consuming
Lack of Building Regulations Indemnity InsuranceAs an alternative to obtaining retrospective building regulations approval, indemnity insurance may instead be obtained. This is an insurance policy where the premium is paid just once and would cover the purchaser and mortgage lender against any financial losses suffered should a section 36 notice be served. Cover is generally only available in the following circumstances:-
- The work was completed at least 12 months prior to the inception of the policy (or 4 years if cover is required for the construction of the property)
- No application for approval has been made, whether refused or pending, and neither buyer or seller are aware of local authority having been put on notice that the works have been carried out
- The property must have been used as a residential dwelling for at least 12 months prior to the inception of the property and must continue to be so used
- No notice, whether formal or informal, of impending enforcement action must have been received by the seller or served to the seller's knowledge
- A survey or valuation report must have been carried out and must not make any adverse comments in respect of the work to be insured
If indemnity insurance is obtained it should pointed out to the purchaser that they must not alert the local authority to the existence of the breach of building regulations in future, nor must they change the use of the property, nor reveal the existence of the policy to anyone other than a future purchaser or the solicitor acting for them in a sale or remortgage, otherwise the indemnity policy would be invalidated.
john...
