CIL horror story for a novice

[nelly]

Building control who has been hired by the builder on behalf of my friend have verbally verified that the wall was unsafe and had to come down.  They are part of a neighbouring councils building control but are allowed to sign off for projects within neighbouring consortium areas.  I am not sure if this strengthens our case but it cannot hurt for an email from building control to be sent to the enforcement officer.  If anyone has any knowledge on this please do comment.

Edited Sunday at 09:46 by nelly

[Redbeard]

1 hour ago, nelly said:

I wanted to understand if we are forced to submit a new build application but the property only is up to the standard of an extension then what would be the implications of that?

 

Quite simply it may not comply, although it might... As I mentioned above the way of assessing compliance (or not) is different for extensions and new-build. What do you have at the moment in the way of drawings and specifications. What were your insulation values going to be in the extension? How about the existing house? Presumably the intention was to upgrade that too? How? (External insulation of walls? Internal insulation? How much in the roof? Are there rooms in the roof or is it just a wide open space? (The latter makes it easier for you/your friend). Give us as much detail as you can. Probably air-tightness is going to be the biggest difference. The whole (new-build) house will have to achieve better than 8m3/m2/hr. This is not exciting by many standards, but it's better than a lot of existing buildings achieve.

[Redbeard]

1 hour ago, nelly said:

 

 

Re getting a letter of support from BCO, I have no idea whether the Planners would take this into account but it cannot do any harm. At this stage you need all the offers of help you can get.

Edited Sunday at 11:29 by Redbeard
Accidental duplicate

[Thorfun]

Maybe something from a structural engineer would carry some weight?

[nelly]

hi, 

All great points.  Will try the structural engineer to.  Everything's a bit more difficult with xmas coming up as people are away etc.  Given the shell of the building is up and does not actually deviate from the plans logically I am just wondering what they actually have to enforce on apart from the fact they were not happy that a wall was rebuilt (same foundations but different window/door positions), is the principal of enforcement to ensure that there has been no detriment to the public.  I spoke to a planning consultant briefly who is not taking on any new cases but he has put me in touch with someone else that we can work with so I will contact them tomorrow but his initial advice was do not accept the councils position by submitting a new application but I would need to follow this up with who ever we end up working with.  It does not seem like a good use of tax payers money to pursue this.

[Redbeard]

39 minutes ago, nelly said:

logically I am just wondering what they actually have to enforce on

 

Well it depends on whether you take your view or theirs. Yours, I think, is that although you took all the walls down (the front one having nearly fallen down, I accept) this is not a rebuild. Theirs seems to be that, since they were able to take pics of a cleared site, it obviously is. If it is, it needs to comply fully with new-build Building Regs and Planning requirements. That would, for example, one assumes, include all-new foundations. You do not mention foundations, but I think the suggestion is that the walls have been rebuilt on the existing ones, which may not (or may) be deemed sufficient.

[nelly]

16 hours ago, Redbeard said:

 

Well it depends on whether you take your view or theirs. Yours, I think, is that although you took all the walls down (the front one having nearly fallen down, I accept) this is not a rebuild. Theirs seems to be that, since they were able to take pics of a cleared site, it obviously is. If it is, it needs to comply fully with new-build Building Regs and Planning requirements. That would, for example, one assumes, include all-new foundations. You do not mention foundations, but I think the suggestion is that the walls have been rebuilt on the existing ones, which may not (or may) be deemed sufficient.

hi, no we do not have all new foundations, the front wall foundations remain and where the front door has been moved and pushed back the foundations put in place.   I believe this 70s built house already had deep foundations.

 

I am due to speak to a planning consultant today and I think our hope will be not to get the LA not to enforce on the basis that its not in the public interest to do so.  I will update on this forum as to what actually happens.

[G and J]

I hear Nigeria is lovely at this time of year.   😕 

[BTC Builder]

I've said it in a thread of my own. CIL is a scam. The self build exemption is full of pitfalls and booby traps which councils will happily allow you to fall into. If you're exempt because you are self building, you should be able to claim the exemption you're entitled to, even if you've started in error without the correct paperwork due to poor advice from architects/designers or plain ignorance.

 

I had someone reply telling me that CIL is in fact not a scam because councils need money.

 

In your case, you've received some truly awful advice in this thread with regards to applying for demolition and replacement dwelling. That's the worst thing you can do.

 

What will happen is, the council will gladly allow you to walk down this path, then when it is approved, the CIL officer will be in touch and say something like,

 

"oh no, you've already started the build and you can only claim CIL exemption before any work commences, as per government guidelines. It's a real shame and I don't want to do this, I really don't, I swear, but that will be £52k please."

 

They'll have you by the bollocks and there'll be nothing you can do. All you can do is fight this now to stay within your current approval which didn't trigger CIL in the first place. 

 

Of course the council want you to do a new application which will trigger CIL and will legally allow them to bill you £52k. It makes a wee bit of sense when you think about it that way.

[Gus Potter]

On 20/12/2024 at 14:31, nelly said:

The brick work will be completed by this weekend leaving the site clear for Xmas and no risk to the party wall.   It is a clear breech that the front wall which was supposed to be largely amended by us was taken down but only through isafety concerns rather than any malice.  If anyone has any advice please let me know. 

My thoughts are. Safety on site is paramount. This is works on an old unstable structure and this happens in real time. Sometimes it is not possible to safely brace a structure during demolition and you need to take it down to ground level.

 

On 20/12/2024 at 16:59, nelly said:

The builder then said the front wall became unstable during the part demolition with the council building control backing him up (building control was hired directly by the builder and works for a neighboring borough that allows them to cover other boroughs).  Building control says he is happy to back us up and write a statement.

This is good evidence of you working safely.

 

 

On 20/12/2024 at 14:31, nelly said:

The council found out and got a picture of the cleared site

Did you leave the existing founds and masonry below ground? If so then it is argueably a repaired wall rather than a new wall structure. Let's see that photo they have of a "cleared site".. to qualify as a complete wall removal they must have a photo of the ground from above.. rather than just one taken from an oblique view! Wall removal means all of it right down to the top of the founds! Complete removal means the founds too. Bet they don't have a photo of that!

 

With my SE hat on. Now you have left your neighbour with a potentially un supported party wall. That party wall may have a chimney breast. If you are end terrace then your house (and the roof) may have been butressing the rest of the houses in the middle.. I could make a bit of hay with that as an SE.

 

I would go back and distill down why you did what you did , why you did it (on advice from the builder and BC) and then maybe get an SE to back you up. If there is still some evidence that an SE can work with then they may be able to help.

 

In summary I would get all my ducks in a row before responding to the council. Ideally any response you give has to force them to incur expense (eat into their time..) or take a pragmatic view and that will concentrate their mind. The low level planning / BC officers have managers who look at the cost / time sheets.

 

 

 

 

Edited 21 hours ago by Gus Potter

[Alan Ambrose]

Also, was building control involved in all this and are they local authority?

 

Ah, I see the answer is ‘yes’. Then it sounds like one part of the council is telling you to do something … without warning you that another part of the same legal entity is going to try to profit from it. Strong letter to head of council suggesting unethical behaviour to start with as such behaviour could be interpreted as a revenue scam. That’ll probably do it. It wants to be worded carefully, so maybe you want a cleverish lawyer to write it.

Edited 20 hours ago by Alan Ambrose

[nelly]

 

All these points are so helpful.  Merry xmas. Updates to follow asap. 

"Did you leave the existing founds and masonry below ground?"  Yes I believe so but I will ask this to the builder to be sure but what he told me was "no new foundation was built"

 

A local developer seems to be reasonably sure that this will not warrant enforcement but I will not be resting on my laurels till this has been resolved!

[nelly]

"Now you have left your neighbour with a potentially un supported party wall. That party wall may have a chimney breast. If you are end terrace then your house (and the roof) may have been butressing the rest of the houses in the middle.. I could make a bit of hay with that as an SE." 

 

The party wall surveyor ensured it was supported and protected.  The builder put so much manpower behind the build that shell was completely built within 2 weeks of that wall coming down