Assume you have a solicitor for conveyancing - might be worth taking advice from them or a specialist they might know
Normally the buyer would take out insurance in case they later discover unauthorised works which weren’t known at point of purchase so they are covered for the costs of any rectification ordered.
Being a family purchase might make that tricky as obviously you are very well acquainted with the seller so the company might not believe that you were unaware
this is a more recent photo of the side of the house - can clearly see the level of external fix needed! Can also see the new roof (to left) that isnt quite in the right tiles. does anyone have any views on whether this is wrong
enough to cause retrospective consent problems?
As said before it really will depend on your local CO, some are happy to treat a full roof replacement as necessary maintenance and not require LBC, others will take more of a literal approach and insist on exact replacements, keeping as much original as possible and needing LBC
The lean-to roof on the left might be new, but is barely visible. The very big roof on the right doesn't look like the old roof that you can glimpse here and can be seen clearly in an earlier photo of the other side. That roof does look to have been replaced, and fairly recently by the look of it. A like for like with new clay tiles is going to be less of an issue than if clay pantiles have been removed and sold for re-use elsewhere and replaced with concrete pantiles. From this angle it's not possible to tell what's on that roof.
With that very steep pitch and upstand on the gable end, that roof could well have been thatched and not tiled when originally built, and the low eaved building under it the original part of the house. It may already have been tiled by the time the house was extended to its current grander form.
It might be an idea to come clean with the CO, rather than wait for them to catch up with you. With the change of ownership you can demonstrate listed building awareness and offer co-operation going forwards.
Yes that was replaced last year. But it was never previously thatched, always tiled. Just think my father let it be done with more modern tiles. Which wasn’t a good choice but hopefully not totally against possible consent.
As has been said, think it’s going to be a judgement call by the CO.
so I'm in now - and got quotes that suggest all the advice you all gave me was pretty accurate - many thanks.
Water coming down the walls internally because of roof problems, so very very keen to get going...listed consent seems to be ok and dont need planning permission...
But...BATS. not obvious we have any but must be likely (there have been bats in the past and a few flying around, though not as many as 10 years ago sadly). And its pretty much too late to get a bat survey. so technically it may mean waiting till may, with all the additional damage that will come with that.
Cant decide whether to risk it - ie build in some sensible mitigations to the works and cross fingers none are found (or if they are that the builders are willing to carry on). has anyone ever had builders find bats, and how did they respond? don't want to have them down tools and incur costs while getting a license if the worst comes to the worst. but not sure I'll be even able to get the work done next year if I need a survey in may, the license, then start and have to complete by sept.