Should I try to get my house listed before building works?

[JoceAndChris]

I thought I would put this off, having been scared by many mutterings of "preserved in aspic""you'll never be able to get rid of that perspex roof" etc..

But then I hear that VAT gets knocked off the price of building works and grants may be available for restoration. What is the truth? Seeing as I plan on staying here a very long time and just want what's best for the building (remove cement render, perhaps new roof, get connected to mains, restore perspex lean-to) what do you advise?

 

[skier-hughes]

Our CO has been working on listing for 4 years.......... it may be some time before you start work

If you are doing it correctly then as we decided it makes no difference to the actual works done.
Ok, you may find a builder who will work on zero vat, but in the great scheme of things it's not that much. What if your small builder isn't vat registered?
Our CO, when asked about grants said (in a nice manner), "you can afford to buy the house, you want to live in it in a different way to that which it is now, why are you expecting everyone else to pick up the bill!!!!"

 

[ljn]

So you have to balance what you might have to spend extra to comply with listed building with what you might save on VAT...

In my case, the Conservation Officers have been very helpful, rather than restricting, and we have been able to make all the modifications we wanted. Like having a architect consultant.

The saving on VAT is limited to new building works or replacing things with sympathetic ones, like replacing a plastic window with a timber one in keeping with the building. Repairs are not covered by the zero VAT. Re-wiring, for example is not included, but kitchen cabinets and built in cupboards/wardrobes can be. One basic rule is that if you need Listed Building Consent, you can get zero VAT, if not, you don't.

SPAB have published a small pamphlet on the VAT exemption: http://www.spab.org.uk/html/online-shop/the-bookshop/?sSubCategory=Technical%20Pamphlets%20and%20Guides

The Listed Property Owners Club also provides info, but you have to sign up http://www.lpoc.co.uk/?id=36

I looked into removing cement render. As far as I understand, when you hack off the render, the front of the bricks come off with it. So I am learning to love the render.

I get the CO's point about getting a grant.
I got a 2k contribution to do up the front of my building. That's because I live in a scummy part of the country. For me, it is a drop in the oceanic renovation bill, but if you think that I get 2k because I have a house, while someone that can't afford a house can't have anything...

 

[JoceAndChris]

Thanks for your helpful response. Nothing you tell me is particularly encouraging to get the building listed. Maybe it is worth the few grand we'll spend on VAT to avoid all the headaches of fighting to get it listed, fighting to get approval for the works, then arguing a case for VAT exemption. After all, the VAT we pay will be usefully propping up the economy (???)

So, small time builders are willing to fiddle the VAT. That seems a bit scary to me. Couldn't we all end up in prison?

 

[Craig]

Best bet is to buy a commercial property and convert it back to residential use. Then you are entitled to reclaim virtually all of your VAT (listed or not).

 

[Flyfisher]

So, small time builders are willing to fiddle the VAT. That seems a bit scary to me. Couldn't we all end up in prison?

Not registering for VAT is not the same as fiddling the VAT. Businesses don't need to be VAT registered if their annual turnover is less than £67,000. I would guess that many one-man businesses are below that threshold.

 

[Moo]

Businesses don't need to be VAT registered if their annual turnover is less than £67,000. I would guess that many one-man businesses are below that threshold.

But you still have to pay the VAT on materials, don't you?

Best bet is to buy a commercial property and convert it back to residential use. Then you are entitled to reclaim virtually all of your VAT (listed or not).

That happened to us. The nice young woman at the VAT office volunteered the information that, since the building had been offices since before WW2 we could be classed as a self-build conversion (or something like that) and could claim back all (yes - ALL) the VAT.
Which was a double blessing because it transpired that half the roof needed major works doing and the VAT we got back paid for it.

 

[Flyfisher]

But you still have to pay the VAT on materials, don't you?

Someone has to pay VAT on materials, yes. The idea is that it's normally the 'end user', ie the house owner in this case. If the builder is not VAT registered they will have to pay VAT on materials and, of course, they'll pass this on to the house owner, so it doesn't really make much difference.

But if the builder is buying lots of materials, I think they'll struggle to keep below the VAT threshold. When I've used painters and decorators in the past it has been usual to buy the materials ourselves, so the materials would not contribute to their annual turnover, which is what triggers the VAT registration requirement.

 

[JoceAndChris]

Thanks Flyfisher and Moo, that's all really useful.

 

[JoceAndChris]

At their own, leisurely pace (8 weeks :roll: ) the Council have responded to my query about which of them would be responsible for listing Beacon Cottage.

Their answer is that none of them are responsible and I should write to English Heritage. They also sent me a useful article which broadly indicates general criteria for listing a building.

The easiest to list seems to be pre 1700, as I'm sure you're all aware. Then it appears buildings from 1700-1840 which survive in anything like their original condition also get a fair crack of the whip, which fortunately includes this one. What happened in 1840 to make EH turn their nose up at the buildings? That seems a terrible shame to me.

I have been advised to write a letter spelling out the particular historic charms of Beacon Cottage and accompany it with illustrative photos. (I wonder how lengthy to make this document; I could write a book!)

So I'm planning to wax lyrical about original fireplaces (thanks Gareth), reed ceilings, diamond shaped flags and original floorboards, diminishing Swithland slate roof (thanks Jon and Gareth), the barbican (thanks Penners for that word), the windows with all their original shutters, the vaulted undercroft, the ha ha, and of course the gate. (thanks Gervase for some great sentences on that one).

As well as speaking of its architectural merits is it also worth mentioning the personal history of the house, its connections with the Ryder family, the beacon fires (supposedly lit at times of national celebration) that took place here and gave it its name, and its life as wartime barracks? I have very little documentary evidence for any of this stuff.

Are there any costs in this process beyond the cost of a stamp?

 

[Flyfisher]

What happened in 1840 to make EH turn their nose up at the buildings? That seems a terrible shame to me.

I doubt these are 'hard' cut-off dates, after all there are plenty of 20th century buildings that are listed, although I'd guess they would need rather specific criteria of importance than a 15th century cottage, which would be almost automatically deemed important simply for surviving.

Out of interest, does anyone know of any 21st century listed buildings?

 

[Cloudscape]

According to EH here: http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/server/show/nav.00100200400d001 , a building needs to be thirty years old to be considered for listing. But I guess there could be exceptions.

 

[Gareth Hughes]

According to EH here: http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/server/show/nav.00100200400d001 , a building needs to be thirty years old to be considered for listing. But I guess there could be exceptions.

And ten years old if it's under threat. Which this http://www.bdonline.co.uk/story.asp?storyCode=3135946 apparently isn't, though actually it is.

Joce - write up a nice report with photos (and a location map), and other than the cost of the ink and the stamp, there's no further cost to you (until it's listed and you have to do lots of expensive repairs... ). I'd happily proof read it for you before sending it off.

EH will then take forever to come to a decision, because they're too busy tarting about on TV.

 

[Jon Maine]

Best bet is to buy a commercial property and convert it back to residential use. Then you are entitled to reclaim virtually all of your VAT (listed or not).

5% vat on conversions and if there is vat on the asking price you must get the vendor to zero rate before the sale or you will never claim it back if the intended use is residential.

 

[JoceAndChris]

Joce - write up a nice report with photos (and a location map), and other than the cost of the ink and the stamp, there's no further cost to you (until it's listed and you have to do lots of expensive repairs... ). I'd happily proof read it for you before sending it off.

Thankyou, that's a very kind offer and one I'll gratefully take you up on!

Forgive my patchy understanding. Last year we didn't buy Monk's Thatch in Orton Waterville, partly because it had a terrible, cheap, modern conservatory that we were told was listed and would be very difficult to get removed.

But reading this forum it seems that when your house is listed you could be asked to remove unsympathetic modern developments. So it's just a question of depends on the house, depends on the CO? Here it seems reasonable they could ask us to sort out the cement render, the cement pointing downstairs, maybe un-tank the kitchen, or get rid of the perspex roof in the scullery. Or, they might list these things and make it difficult to restore our home?

Please tell me they don't list cement.

And that if they ask you to make repairs or restorations, they are reasonable about the time needed to save up and do it.

 

[Flyfisher]

But reading this forum it seems that when your house is listed you could be asked to remove unsympathetic modern developments.

No one can enforce any changes to a building from the state it was in when listed. If you have a placcy conservatory grafted onto your 14th century cottage at the time time it was listed then the placcy becomes just as listed as the rest of the property. The CO might support LBC for the removal of the conservatory (or maybe not) but they can't enforce it's removal.

Having said that, gross defacement of an historic property might well prevent it being listed in the first place.

As for cement, there must be hundreds, if not thousands, of listed properties with cement render that was already in place at the time of their listing. In theory the cement render is listed and I suspect LBC would be required to replace it with something more appropriate.
I doubt such LBC would be disputed though!

 

[JoceAndChris]

Thanks Flyfisher, that is reassuring.

If you have a placcy conservatory grafted onto your 14th century cottage at the time time it was listed then the placcy becomes just as listed as the rest of the property. The CO might support LBC for the removal of the conservatory (or maybe not) but they can't enforce it's removal.[/quote]

What a pity! Plastic has no place grafted onto a 14th C cottage, anyone who thinks it does should not be allowed to live there, preferably, shot.

 

[Anita]

The only one downside about listing prior to commencing building works as far as I can see is the time factor. Given that the applications are to prepare (along with plans/maps/details of materials etc..) and then the application for LBC takes 8 weeks to consider (if all is staraightforward) - and if you are progressing quickly with your project , then there may be some delay involved.

However if you have discussions with your Conservation Officer PRIOR to making the application, then hopefully any teething problems or issues can be resolved at that stage.

For us, like I guess with many forum users - delay is not really an issue due to the fact that my O/H is doing 99.9% of the work himself on top of working full time in the building industry.

We were extremely lucky to obtain a maximum grant of £1000 from our local council to remove the leaky, ugly, monopitch asbestos roof from our attached byre/woodstore and replace it with a double pitched slate roof with heavy traditional handmade trusses. My O/H also rebuilt the front and side wall in reclaimed bricks (after it was rebuilt around the 1950's with totally inapproriate ones), and added lovely wooden barn doors rather than the metal sliding monstrocity that we inherited! The £1000 was a bit of a drop in the ocean in the overall costs of the project which has provided my O/H with a charming and spacious workshop/forge/ big-boys playroom, but a very welcome help towards the almost £2000 costs of specialist contractors to remove the offending asbestos.

Oh, and the swallows love the new (nest friendly) oversized trusses, and the louvred opening put in for their convenience!

 

[Flyfisher]

Plastic has no place grafted onto a 14th C cottage,

I agree.

But, playing devil's advocate for a moment, there are plenty of listed period properties that have been altered during their lifetime and not always sympathetically. I've mentioned before that our C16 timber-framed house was given a Georgian makeover at some time and the original oak-mullion tudor windows were ripped out to make room for large sash windows. Other works included 'boxing in' exposed oak beams and, in the drawing room, completely 'dry-lining' the original oak-frame and wattle-n-daub, with lath and plaster and adding a brand new chimney (which covered up more original tudor windows) complete with an adam-esque marble fireplace. All completely unsympathetic to the original construction and not even just an 'add-on' makeover because a lot of the original fabric was lost during the works.

By comparison, a plastic conservatory simply added onto such a building would be far less damaging to the original fabric and could arguably be regarded as an example of a modern evolutionary step in the life of the property. And, who knows, in a couple of hundred years, any surviving plastic conservatories might be listed and protected in their own right as examples of 21st century building methods that were only possible when fossil fuels were so widely and cheaply available.

It's a funny old world.

 

[Hatster]

I agree that I like talking to the CO and getting their advice.

But on the other hand, if I wasn't listed I could have my double-glazed Yorkshire casements :twisted: