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 9 hours ago 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 7 hours ago 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.