Consent after Building - Sleep Out

[mdub]

I am currently looking at purchasing a property with a sleep out. I believe it was built without consent (which may not be a good thing, it looks like its closer the boundary than its height), but I would like to run water and power to it and use it as a home office.

What sort of difficulty am I in for regarding this? I'll get consultation from a plumber & electrician regarding the utilities, but I'd like to know, how does the council usually handle this sort of thing (a previously constructed building that we're looking to consent after the fact?).

[PTILoveYou]

You better talk to a property planner from your local council about this.

Unpermitted work like this councils usually take very seriously (especially if it has an illegal kitchen in it, but probably not in your case).

Also if your bank finds out about the illegal sleep out, they may ask for more deposit.


Example, there was a half section 3 bedroom house on Katrina Place, Royal Heights, Auckland, with an illegal sleepout. Westpac declined to lend me 80% on it.

[John the builder]

you can get a CoA (certificate of Acceptance) for the building work The planning issues are a different matter

If it is for your own use why not just ignore the issues and use as an existing building.

It should be referred to as unapproved. The word illegal that Gary uses is very emotive the fact is that council cant do anything under the Building act and cannot require removal even though they say this alot. So why would a bank not lend against it or lend against the rest?

The issues under the resource M A are a different matter but if push comes to shove this only needs a retrospective resource consent

[elguapo]

Unpermitted work like this councils usually take very seriously (especially if it has an illegal kitchen in it, but probably not in your case).

How do you define an illegal kitchen?

[PTILoveYou]

How do you define an illegal kitchen?

If it is not council approved then I would consider it illegal.

In this instance if it is not council approved, and this kitchen catches fire and burn down the house, the insurance won't pay for the rebuild/repair...

Any other alterations are probably ok, as long as it is done by registered trades people, but an additional kitchen is a big no no.

Then again I'm no expert in this matter.

AMR on the forum would know more.

[John the builder]

If it is not council approved then I would consider it illegal.

illegal should be a test of the law not an opinion
do you mean to say that all work done under schedule 1 is illegal as it isnt approved by council?

If building work is done without consent by a present or previous owner then it can be satisfied by a CoA but this is not mandatory (unless certain conditions apply under s41), so how can something be illegal be made legal so easily?

There is no offense to have unapproved building work under the BA It is only an offense under s40 to be carrying out work that requires consent and none has been obtained. The offense is with the person doing the work not the owner who owns it. (who could be the owner but if work is finished he isn't carrying out work.

(Council officers routinely misstate this as an offense BTW, but owners need to defend their position)

and this kitchen catches fire and burn down the house, the insurance won't pay for the rebuild/repair..

.

all building work has to comply with the Building act whether it has consent or not. Having a consent does not guarantee that work is compliant but it goes a way to demonstrate it. A kitchen can catch fire anyway and insurer will pay out the issue is only whether the work caused the fire, and even if consented if there is some negligence on the part of the owner he may not be insured (ie he caused the fire, or arson)

[elguapo]

If it is not council approved then I would consider it illegal.

Can you please make reference to the law under which a 'non council approved' kitchen is illegal.

[PTILoveYou]

Can you please make reference to the law under which a 'non council approved' kitchen is illegal.

Better to ask an insurance company whether they will provide cover for an unapproved/unconsented second kitchen.

[elguapo]

Better to ask an insurance company whether they will provide cover for an unapproved/unconsented second kitchen.

What does this have to do with my question?

[PTILoveYou]

What does this have to do with my question?

The consequence of unable to insure such property is a lot bigger than not having it permitted in the council system...

[elguapo]

The consequence of unable to insure such property is a lot bigger than not having it permitted in the council system...

But there is clearly a law against this, so the legal consequence from having an 'illegal kitchen' must be significant. I just what to know what law makes 'unapproved' kitchens illegal. I'm not bothered about what insurers think.

[PTILoveYou]

But there is clearly a law against this, so the legal consequence from having an 'illegal kitchen' must be significant. I just what to know what law makes 'unapproved' kitchens illegal. I'm not bothered about what insurers think.

If I have time I will call up Auckland Council Property Services this week for an answer =)

[John the builder]

I would be most interested to know whether anyone has had experience of an insurer declining to insure for this reason. I appreciate they are twitchy if they think work is shonky and could lead to fire etc but the cause of fire would have to be related to the workmanship surely?

Can anyone clarify?

[Wayne]

Well said again JTB

[mrsaneperson]

The consequence of unable to insure such property is a lot bigger than not having it permitted in the council system...

Gary there are literally 1000's of these situations throughout NZ. My experience has always been that if you are upfront with the insurance company regarding any unconsented work they will still give insurance on it.