Buying a thatched cottage

[PipPip]

Hello, first time post from a newbie!
We are in the process of buying a 17th century grade II listed thatched cottage in a conservation area. Two hurdles have come up so far:
- mortgage company (Coventry Building Society) basic valuation came in at £450k. We offered £485k. The house was marketed at £585k which is not out of line with similar cottages in the area (Hampshire). Not a huge issue as we have a big deposit but still feels worrying.
Valuer also recommended timbers be treated. Strange, we had a full survey by a RICS qualified period property expert who said they are sound, as is the entire structure with no damp or other issues, just trivial decorative stuff and a bit of new plumbing required. Think I need to ignore the building society survey as he has no recent thatched sales in the village or surrounds to benchmark against so I suspect he has just down valued as it was a hard one to value accurately.
- seller has put up a partition wall in a bedroom to create a landing giving access to the family bathroom without the need to go via the bedroom. They say they spoke to a conservation officer beforehand and he told them (verbally) that if natural light is not affected (it's not, landing and bedroom have their own windows), it's a temporary structure and the exposed original 17th century floorboards are not damaged then they do not need listed buildings consent. The partition meets all these criteria so the seller thought all was good. Our surveyor and solicitor think possibly consent may be required, although they are not certain, and my solicitor says he is duty bound to inform our lender.

No idea how this will pan out. We are utterly smitten with the house and must buy it. Maybe our lender will insist on retrospective consent, putting the whole chain in jeopardy due to the delay (top of chain is moving into rented and wants to move NOW). Maybe they will shrug and accept it. Maybe they will insist we try to get some kind of indemnity (is this even possible for a known potential listed buildings consent breach?). Maybe our lender will amend their valuation further? The seller is fed up now and has said they will simply remove the wall if required. I don't want to do that, would rather keep it and apply for retrospective consent myself after purchasing as surveyor said its extremely unlikely that a conservation officer reject it and ask for it to be taken down. Seller has offered to give us £500 to cover the risk that it has to be removed by us after purchase.

Bit of a baptism of fire into listed properties this. Luckily we have no intention of extending or renovating, previous owners have already been through all that pain! Love this house so much though. We viewed 50 houses before falling for this one so are desperate to get all this resolved.

 

[LadyArowana]

Unless there is some condition imposed by the lender in relation to this I would take the £500 and keep quiet. More responsible folks will probably be along shortly with wiser opinions :lol: and welcome to the forum too.

 

[Keithj]

Welcome!

When we bought ours, we were advised that there were very few surveyors who knew much about timber framed buildings. Some research found one, who did a very thorough survey and wrote us a book listing what needed to be done. It was a bit scary, but the work is now done.

Building society surveyors, in my experience, are only interested in whether or not their money is safe. Their valuations of period properties tend to be low. We were told we would not get a mortgage on ours because of the condition - we didn't need one anyway.

Regarding the partition: if it doesn't damage the structure and could be removed, I wouldn't expect any problem, but it's down to your individual Conservation Officer. Pick up the phone and ask him.

Like you, we looked at many houses till we found the right one. Like you, several obstacles were thrown into our path. We got there in the end, and we love it!

 

[jocelyn plummer]

Welcome!

Building Society Surveyors work to a tick list, which is all about risk to the Lender and has little or no relevance to the actual condition of the building. They are assessing the minimum amount they can get back if there is a change in circumstances, which is why they have given a low valuation. Be
guided by your Solicitor, RICS Surveyor, and talk to the Conservation Officer. The higher your deposit is, the less fuss the lenders make!
don't let the Sellers rattle you.

Best of Luck!

 

[El Greyo]

... Conservation Officer. Pick up the phone and ask him.

Sadly, I expect this is not likely to be possible. Our local authority specifically say they will not give advice to prospective buyers of listed properties. In fact even as a homeowner now, we cannot phone a CO for advice (I've tried). We can send a question by email but it will cost £60 (and the advice is not binding). I believe more and more local authorities are following this policy.

It's a real shame but is due to cost cutting. It means we have to feel our way in the dark - and ask on PP.

 

[Flyfisher]

Welcome to the forum PipPip. I agree with the above comments about building society valuation surveys. They are entirely for the benefit of the lender for them to judge their risk. If for any reason they have to repossess, they are only concerned with recovering their money and this will usually mean a fast sale and covering their expenses. This will always result in a low valuation but is of little consequence if you're happy with and can afford the seller's asking price (or whatever you negotiate). If you are concerned with the condition of the house then you should arrange your own survey by a specialist in such houses.

As for the partition wall, when was the house listed and have you seen the listing description? Many are quite vague about such details and it's quite likely that there is no information to support whether the partition was in place, or not, when the house was listed - making its legality hard to prove or disprove. Also, given the architecturally-trivial nature of the partition, who would want to make a big fuss about it anyway? The fact that your seller is saying that they were advised that consent was not required is not, I think, particularly relevent unless there is written confirmation from the CO, because COs and opinions can change.

I can see no good reason to get a CO involved at this stage (unless you're planning making your own changes to the house) and I don't really see why the building society needs to know about the partition - it'll just cause confusion and slow things down. So I tend to agree with LadyA - take the £500 and forget about it. Everyone else will.

 

[El Greyo]

Welcome PipPip.

We had no experience with a period property when we bought our thatched, timber frame, cottage so were also searching round for advice. I found the best source was our surveyor. I found one that had good experience with old properties and he gave us a very good report. He was also very willing to speak to us over the phone at length before and after the report and I found he gave good advice. It sounds like you too sought out a good building surveyor with specific knowledge so speak to him/her.

It doesn't sound like the seller is reasonable, I wonder if he would be able to approach the Conservation Officer. As a homeowner following up on a previous query, he might be able to get further than you can.

 

[Flyfisher]

Our surveyor and solicitor think possibly consent may be required, although they are not certain, and my solicitor says he is duty bound to inform our lender.

Consider the situation from the surveyor's and solicitor's perspective. Basically they don't know if consent is required or not and it's not their responsibility to find out. They have no expertise in such matters so it would be unprofessional for them to give formal advice one way or the other, which could lead to a professional negligence claim if it turned out to be wrong - which is why they haven't done so. They've done their job of informing you of a possibility but it's for you to decide how to proceed.

 

[garnett]

Hi all

As a Conservation Officer I have sympathy. We get approached on house sales every day and asked for advice. At least 9 out of 10 don't go any further and we spend a couple hours of public money each time. That is why we are putting a £100 charge in place to offer a fast track service in this scenario. This is waived for buildings at risk.

You need to tell the Mortgage Company Surveyor that timber treatment will require LBC and is not likely to be grated. That usually makes them go away.

Garnett

 

[Flyfisher]

That timber treatment point is an interesting one.

if it costs £100 to call a CO, how many people will bother to do that in the case of a lender insisting on timber treatment? More likely, I'd suggest, that they'd just go ahead with the treatment to get their mortgage and not tell anyone, because nobody will ever find out anyway. And once the treatment has been done, what can the CO do about it, even if discovered? Even worse, what if the lender insists on an injected DPC?

Making it more difficult and expensive to contact a CO must surely be a bad thing in terms of the protection of listed properties.

 

[robgil]

... Conservation Officer. Pick up the phone and ask him.

Sadly, I expect this is not likely to be possible. Our local authority specifically say they will not give advice to prospective buyers of listed properties. In fact even as a homeowner now, we cannot phone a CO for advice (I've tried). We can send a question by email but it will cost £60 (and the advice is not binding). I believe more and more local authorities are following this policy.

It's a real shame but is due to cost cutting. It means we have to feel our way in the dark - and ask on PP.

Thats mental , I have phoned my local CO a few times now for advice. Nothing major but they were happy to help all the same, and my house isnt even listed.

 

[PipPip]

Thanks for all the replies.
I already had a full structural survey by a period property specialist who has been excellent, providing lots of advice and guidance. His report was full and thorough. First read through was terrifying, second not so bad and then he called me and talked me through it after which I realised there was nothing too worrying. Unusually he commented to me "there is nothing that would stop me from buying the house". In respect of the timber frame he said there is evidence of historic beetle infestation and we should check when this was treated and damp readings are slightly raised at the footings of the timber but nothing unusual and the timbers are all basically solid and sound. It's the mortgage valuesr who subsequently recommended that timbers will need specialist damp treatment but he did not make it a condition of the loan. My surveyor says to ignore that advice as its incorrect. We have established that the beetle infestation was treated 20 years ago and there has been no recurrence so I'm pretty certain that we have nothing to worry about there.

I did actually manage to speak to our local CO with no charge. She said they will not provide advice to prospective purchasers, she advised that we should apply for listed buildings consent for the partition to be certain and then they will come out and inspect the works on the back of that. If the mortgage company does not come back with a requirement to get this consent I am minded to leave it for now and just accept the £500 offered by the vendor to cover any potential future cost of removing it. The partition point came up as the house was substantially extended in 1995 and 2000 with multiple versions of plans submitted (someone had a lot of pain) and we could not see it on the final approved plans. The consequence of all these extensions and alterations is that the size and layout are good for us so apart from redecorating we plan no further alterations.

The listing was in 1984 and is incredibly vague. It just says 17th century timber framed red brick thatched building with 19th century thatched side extension. The surveyor was worried about the partition having potentially damaged the exposed 17th century floorboards. The seller is frustrated by this as those floorboards were covered with carpet for decades and probably at the time of listing. They exposed them, had some repairs done where there were gaps and had them restored/oiled so it galls them that suddenly they would need to be protected under the listing. But I guess that's the way the system works!

The thatch will be the next fun to deal with. It is Norfolk reed and was put in before the listing, in 1982. It still amazingly sound and we had a separate thatch survey done. He reckoned it's got 20 years left in it easily. When we come to rethatch they generally insist of straw but ours was water reed at the time of listing so hopefully we can use that to get the longer lasting reed again. I suspect it will be a battle.

 

[Flyfisher]

It sounds like you've done all the right things, especially regarding your own survey.

I still wouldn't be worrying about that partition wall. After all, the reason it's not shown on the approved plans for the 1995 & 2000 works could be that it was done before the 1982 listing. Who can prove otherwise? :wink:

More seriously, the fact that there have been two rounds of approved works indicates that the previous owners have hardly been cavalier with the house.

The point about the Norfolk reed thatch is interesting. I have no experience of thatch but I'd be surprised if there was a battle to rethatch with the same materials as was present at the time of listing. Rethatching with the same material as original (or at least as was present at the time of listing) might even be reasonably considered a like-for-like repair and not even require LBC. Can our resident COs comment on this?

 

[garnett]

Flyfisher

I completely agree with you, but the government does not.

We were 5 and I am the last man standing. We are looking at a further 20% cut next year and the year after. The government is currently consulting on privatisation of the Conservation Officer role, so you will be paying full commercial rates if they get their way

In other authorities around us, were charging has been introduced, they have not seen a significant fall in enquiries.

At the moment I actually believe that the vast majority of listed building owners don't want to break the law and carry out unauthorised works.

If they do then it gets dealt with when the next house sale falls through as is happening in this case as the legal people now understand the implication of listing. It was one of the few good things that came out of the HIP Training that they did.

If you have an alternative that could address the funding issue I am keen to hear.

Garnett

 

[PipPip]

I have to say that just going through this process as a buyer, if I was looking at buying a listed house requiring renovation and extension works I would have walked away by now. I'm quite pedantic (I'm a chartered accountant) and a bit of a stickler for the rules so whilst I am sure I would cope, I really don't think I could be bothered with the hassle and effort involved. I am only pursuing this property as the major work has been done and even then, we have wobbled a few times during the buying process. Seems a shame to me that the listing system effectively discourages careful risk averse types, the types most likely to care for our heritage.

 

[garnett]

Sorry - missed the thatch issue while writing the other bit.

Thatching styles and materials are very much down to local tradition. Most thatch is here in Devon and it is combed wheat reed. As you go across the country both materials and style change in to long straw. Post WW2 some conservationists preferred long straw so you actually got buildings changing.

In Devon we also have lots of soot blackened thatch. This is actual evidence that the building had an open fire before chimneys were introduced so the thatch is 500 years old or more.

There is also the issue of availability of wheat read. There won't be much available this year due to the rain.

To answer your question, legally we can't ask for betterment in an application. However if this building has a Norfolk water reed roof and they are proposing to put Polish water read or even African pampas grass on the roof then consent may well be required.

Our job is never black and white. With experience you realise that there are many shades of grey. That takes years to learn and at the moment that knowledge is disappearing in local government due to the cuts.

Good luck

Garnett

 

[LadyArowana]

With experience you realise that there are many shades of grey. That takes years to learn

50, apparently, how long it takes to learn, well, each to their own...... :lol:

 

[Flyfisher]

Flyfisher
I completely agree with you, but the government does not.

I suppose such things are a soft target because it probably doesn't have any significant effect on constituency votes, so who cares?

We were 5 and I am the last man standing. We are looking at a further 20% cut next year and the year after. The government is currently consulting on privatisation of the Conservation Officer role, so you will be paying full commercial rates if they get their way

I wouldn't really mind paying for council-provided services on-demand except for the fact we seem to receive less and less for our council tax yet it is never reduced. I guess this is a reflection of how expensive it has become to run the country, so taxes need to increase while services continue to decrease - or be farmed out to the private sector, who can often seem to run things at a profit - which is ludicrous when you think about it.

If the nation really values its historic buildings then it would seem reasonable to expect it to provide a little assistance to the people who are actually bearing the cost and effort of looking after them. But since when did a government ever look beyond the next general election? What's that old saying about knowing the price of everything and the value of nothing?

In other authorities around us, were charging has been introduced, they have not seen a significant fall in enquiries.

Fair enough, though I wonder if that will still be the case in 10 or 20 years time? PipPip makes a very good point about people being put off from buying a listed property. Make things difficult and people will just buy something else - there are plenty of old unlisted properties out there - and an empty house is a deteriorating house. Still, if it ever came to that I'd expect some future government to change the rules again to make listed property ownership more attractive and reverse the trend (if it happens at all), although we all know that heritage is an ever-declining asset and properties lost in the meantime are lost forever.

At the moment I actually believe that the vast majority of listed building owners don't want to break the law and carry out unauthorised works.

I'd agree with that, but it's not the responsible owners we need to worry about is it?

If you have an alternative that could address the funding issue I am keen to hear.

Probably not without understanding all the existing figures, but when we can find 9bn+ for a sports day I find it hard to believe it's really a financial issue rather than more of a policy matter.

 

[philpjuk100]

With experience you realise that there are many shades of grey. That takes years to learn

50, apparently, how long it takes to learn, well, each to their own...... :lol:

 

[Flyfisher]