Reading the first post, the annex was their prior to sellers purchase? They have added heating, electricals and some external cladding?
Does adding heating, and electricals require planning permission? Ok does the cladding, it changes the outside look so may require the lesser permis but the owner would still be personally liable for work done for 10 years from the start of the works as no decinal exists which is not uncommon when an owner does the work themselves.
Confused
Which bit of “walk away - actually, run” are you having difficulty with?
Hi all, thanks again for your replies.
I must say it seems I’ve given the wrong impression here; I’m not desperate to buy this particular property and I know there are others out there (although I am limited to certain areas of a particular city and the market is particularly hot at the moment). What I’m trying to do is assess and increase my understanding of any risks I would be taking on and finding ways of reducing those risks, especially given the house meets a lot of the specifications I am looking for. I haven’t yet signed the compromis.
The house is in a very good condition – with a very good contrôle technique showing up no major problems whatsoever (only a slight fusebox issue that doesn’t pose too much danger and can be easily fixed). No asbestos, no termites, good insulation etc. Very decent for a 1930s terrace. The notaire confirmed my understanding of this in my first meeting with him. Most of the houses in this area are of a similar age and style and frankly having seen some of them none matched up to the condition this one was in.
I have appointed my own notaire, entirely separate from the owner and estate agents. It was he who brought up these potential issues in the first place – I wouldn’t have noticed this on my own. So I’m fairly confident the advice I am getting is unbiased and reliable to the extent that it can be. It was also he who said that houses in this area often have some work or other that hasn’t been regularised.
I’m not terribly worried about the quality of the work, given the good contrôle technique and that the seller is responsible for hidden defects by law (although I understand in practice it could be difficult to get him to cough up if needs be). I’m more worried about the planning permission aspect of things and exactly what risk this poses to me. It’s not even certain that the work isn’t conforme, and there’s certainly nothing to suggest that it wouldn’t be. It’s a perfectly normal looking extension – which was in fact there before the current owner bought the house 3-4 years ago anyway – which has been refurbished (new roofing, new cladding) along with the interior and roof of the rest of the house. And given it’s at the back of the house and the neighbours have no problems with it with it – indeed they all have similar extensions (and at the back of the garden is a big wall behind which there is a car park and a block of flats, so no worries there) I’m trying to work out what potential issues there could be. And how, if there was an issue, the mairie would be able to prove it to a sufficient degree to oblige me to alter it.
As I mentioned before the works aren’t listed in the compromis (except the roofing work on the ‘original’ (ie. not extension) part of the house he had done by a professional, for which I have seen the facture and attestation d’assurance. In fact the compromis says that ‘no work has been carried out in the last ten years’ apart from this. Surely, if I sign this, this would actually be quite helpful down the line in case of issues with regards to planning etc?
This is correct, Corona. The extension existed when the current owner purchased house (I’ve no information on how old it actually is). Can you clarify - do you mean the owner as in the current owner or the new owner, would be personally liable for work done from 10 years ?
To add some technical detail: the extension is constructed with hollow concrete blocks - apparently very common in France - with wood cladding.
The current owner, if they have carried out works are responsible for those from the point that they commenced is my understanding.
As I said, some of the works heating and lighting wouldnt have required planning permission so understandably there isnt paperwork for those but the cladding would probably require the permis from the maire. Therefore clearing up as you have said any issue locally with the maire is a good idea.
Curious as to why they are selling after only 3-4 years
Clearly you are ‘hooked’ on wanting this property even after asking advise of your intentions on the forum. Advice has been offered in good faith which has predominantly leaned towards walking away.
Modern France is constructed of hollow concrete blocks and even if the extension you are worried about was built of gold blocks then without absolute proof of its permission to be there in my opinion you are throwing good money after bad.
I suggested in an earlier post that you should walk away, my suggestion still stands.
Thanks everyone - your advice was pretty clear!
I have told the agent that either the seller puts a clause in the compromis committing to regularising the works, and provides a full list of the works he’s carried out, or I withdraw the offer.
The agency shared my frustration with the seller in this regard. If the seller is legit this ultimatum shouldn’t bother him too much, especially since my offer was near his asking price.
Yes I think that’s the nub of it. The seller should realise that any other potential buyer could well pose the same questions so would be sensible to sort this out. If they are wanting to pull wool over people’s eyes then they won’t - which is doubly suspicious.
All it should take is a visit to Marie to deal with retrospective planning - if even needed, and the completion of a H2 form to be sent to tax office to make sure all that side is in order too.
I am confused now.
If the extension was there when the current owner bought the house, he can’t declare it as work that he carried out because he didn’t do it.
My suspicion is that the seller simply won’t get what all the fuss is about, he clearly never thought it worth fussing over when he bought it.
Has it been mentioned whether the seller is a French person or a foreigner? My gut feeling, which I know is dangerous, is that a French person is more savvy about what rules it is safe to ignore and what rules you can’t afford to ignore, simply because they have more experience. A French person might bend a rule because they are pretty sure they can get away with it, a foreigner might bend a rule without even knowing there is a rule.
Yes, thats the form i was trying to recall.
If planning was approved then as you rightly note when the work was complete the form would have been submitted.
The authorities are quick to remind people when an application is approved that the H2 form needs to be submitted and if not recieved the reminders keep on coming until submitted or you advise that you are no longer proceeding with the application.
Sounds like a plan. Which parts of the planning requires it? The original extension?
Had a reply from the agent; the seller isn’t willing to regularise the work. So that’s that.
Having looked at the cadastre, and assuming I’ve understood it correctly, the extension doesn’t feature, so I guess this means it was never declared. I wonder if he’s trying to flog his house on to avoid any potential problems for himself. As JaneJones says, if everything’s in order it’s just a matter of applying retrospectively for permission. And since he was willing to do that for some of the works any way, why not the rest?
It was a French seller.
In the end it was a good learning process!
One door closes, another opens 
I think that is often the case. But it can equally apply that a French person can get away with things that we can’t.
Rétrospective planning seems to be a pretty common solution, so the fact that the seller is not prepared to do so suggests something might be awry - whether the building itself of the unpaid taxes who knows.
He’s already got those and now the agents and notaire know also.
I’m a great believer in fate, and although sad to walk away from a house that you were obviously very keen on, I most definitely think you’ve probably avoided issues further down the line, and I’m sure you’ll find something equally, if not more suitable. Best of luck with the search!
Poking my head in here because this is an interesting read. We suspect the house we put an offer on doesn’t have all the permits in order (see my newbie thread). What exactly is involved in an after-the-fact regularisation? Would the seller need to do that? And would it truly be 100% A-OK after that, as if it was all done correctly from the start? If so, then why does anyone bother to get permits in the first place? If we’re right, they have been underpaying taxes for a while too. We don’t have any idea what the new taxes would be, but definitely more than advertised.
We have not yet signed the Compromis.We are probably going to walk away without signing, but we would like to know what is involved in regularising in case we encounter something similar in the future. Any links to websites would be helpful. I haven’t found much with Google in English that explains it all.
That would again be a question for the mairie or their office. Retrospective planning applications can be put in and the mairie should have a reasonable idea of what would pass and what would not especially as the additions have been there for some time, biggest danger is if you exceed the 150m2 wasnt it? As that may go up the next level to the battiment de france (sp) and give someone some power and they are probably going to use it, especially to a foreigner.
Every case will be different so youll just have to give it a go but make sure if they say its ok to get it in writing.
Yes, the new part increased the m2 to greater than 150. Apparently that’s a magic number.