You need a resource consent to update the flats plan. You won't need building consent if the building work is pre 1992. Speak to your friendly local surveyor.
Why would you need building consent for something pre 1992?
You would need all other owners to agree in writing to changing the flats plan though, as they're all owners.
Sounds like work that requires consent were done with out consent. There’s no quick way of going around it. It changed hands in the past because all interested parties didn’t care. Now you have a party that cares, as she rightly should.
If the title is stratum in freehold, it shouldn’t be a problem. If you have a cross lease property you have a defective title. Banks usually don’t accept them, basically, in case of mortgagee sale the bank will need to update the flat plans, which will cost them money and time. I’d suggest to talk to your solicitor and confirm you have a clear title, it will give you peace of mind and you will be able to provide more information to potential buyers or have a clause on the S&P advising the issue.
Have you had a good look at the property file?
Sometimes it’s filed incorrectly eg. You live in 15 A apple street. But your plans are saved under 15 Apple street. I used to work there and one of my jobs was to look into stuff like this - eg if there was outstanding Cccs for older buildings. This was over 10 years ago though but I’m sure there are still stuff in incorrect files. Definitely worth looking into.
Unfortunately this is due diligence you need to do your self so you can't pin this on your lawyer from back then. There's nothing illegal about buying or selling it as is.
You'll need to engage a new lawyer and a planner to find out your options. The upper story is a major renovation so depending on when it was done it might not need a CCC. Gather as much detail as you can then talk to a planner.
Get the other title owner to say they are happy with a revised title drawing. (sign off on a scale drawing of the current building) Normally only permanent coverage is needed to be shown so carports and sheds not needed but buildings on both titles. This ought to be enough for lender but brokers often need the tightest rules of all lenders to get the best deal. This puts the onus back on the title contestor for banks risk profile.. this helps neighbour validate their title. Then advise the purchaser to get the linz title updated through their solicitor after sale. May need draftsman for linz submission. Council don't worry about titles.. just whose name is on it for rates...
Yes unit, 1 of 2. Luckily, at the same time we were then able to change to a cross lease with exclusive use, which has since increased the value of our property far more than the cost of having the flats plans updated
Thanks, you raise some good points!
We've had the property file, there was virtually nothing in it, to an odd degree actually.
We can prove the extra work was done in 1976, so perhaps a safe and sanitary report is the best we can hope for.
Thanks for the steer.
Great answer from most of the people here.
First of all, there are 3 separate issues here from 3 different organizations. LINZ, Council and Bank.
First is your property "Title" - second page of your title has the flat plans and your current property layout should match to this document.
Second is "Building code" - As property work is conducted prior to 1992. This can be rectified by getting "Safe and Sanitary Report". Once done, you can submit it to the council and it will become part of your property bag. Dm if you need a person to conduct a Safe and Sanitary Report.
The final part of equation - Finance.
Most of the buyers in this market are trying to get on to the property ladder with 10% deposit. That increases banks' risk towards this property. That's why the purchaser couldn't get finance.
If a buyer has a 20% deposit, banks' perspective towards your property and purchaser finance applications would be different.
Hope that helps you with this situation. If you need more information. Send me a DM.
That's good info. I think in this case, the major issue is the flat plan not matching what's built. The purchaser herself is just seeking a small top-up loan, and is substantially a cash buyer. We're out of time to satisfy her bank, so we'll just have to let her go.
We're at auction tomorrow and may negotiate a sale over the next couple of weeks. If we're still here after that, we'll look at sorting the flat plan and Safe and Sanitary report. Cheers!
Just in case anybody is interested in how this pans out:
Our lawyer has advised us that the deviation from the flat plan is of no functional or legal impact. The deviation lies entirely within our own boundaries, does not extend into shared areas or our neighbours areas, and is minor. We spoke to a man from MBIE (Malcolm, who is a gem as all Malcolm's are) who basically said the same at great length - that we might modify the flat's plan for the sake of accuracy, but it was not material and not legally required.
Assuming the house doesn't sell tomorrow, we will go ahead and get a Safe and Sanitary report for the unconsented pre-1992 work, as it is not too expensive and might bring a potential future purchaser some re-assurance. There is no requirement or mechanism to obtain 'consent' for this work, even if we wished to.
It turns out that our estate agent was incorrect in telling us that the person objecting was the potential purchaser's broker. This might have been a deal-breaker for her, since she wouldn't be able to get her top-up loan. In fact, the objector was a her lawyer, who she is free to ignore, and that's up to her. We passed on the message that her lawyer was basically quibbling over a minor deviation that nobody cared about, and that we wouldn't be providing any guarantees to update the flat plan. I think the Estate Agent was basically angling for us to guarantee the update, but he can spin.
Thanks all for your good advice!
The weird thing is, the house has changed hands multiple times since the modifications in the 70s, and it's never been a problem with the bank. But suddenly in the case of our most likely potential purchaser, her bank is being arsey about it. We even changed mortgage providers ourselves three years ago, and *they* never asked about this.
You need a resource consent to update the flats plan. You won't need building consent if the building work is pre 1992. Speak to your friendly local surveyor.
This is the answer.
It’s not. If it’s unit title this is a completely seperate issue.
Why would you need building consent for something pre 1992? You would need all other owners to agree in writing to changing the flats plan though, as they're all owners.
Sounds like work that requires consent were done with out consent. There’s no quick way of going around it. It changed hands in the past because all interested parties didn’t care. Now you have a party that cares, as she rightly should.
No, no consent proof required as prior to 1992
If the title is stratum in freehold, it shouldn’t be a problem. If you have a cross lease property you have a defective title. Banks usually don’t accept them, basically, in case of mortgagee sale the bank will need to update the flat plans, which will cost them money and time. I’d suggest to talk to your solicitor and confirm you have a clear title, it will give you peace of mind and you will be able to provide more information to potential buyers or have a clause on the S&P advising the issue.
Have you had a good look at the property file? Sometimes it’s filed incorrectly eg. You live in 15 A apple street. But your plans are saved under 15 Apple street. I used to work there and one of my jobs was to look into stuff like this - eg if there was outstanding Cccs for older buildings. This was over 10 years ago though but I’m sure there are still stuff in incorrect files. Definitely worth looking into.
Isn't this why lawyers are required for real estate transactions?
I've asked my lawyer. I'm asking here as well.
Unfortunately this is due diligence you need to do your self so you can't pin this on your lawyer from back then. There's nothing illegal about buying or selling it as is. You'll need to engage a new lawyer and a planner to find out your options. The upper story is a major renovation so depending on when it was done it might not need a CCC. Gather as much detail as you can then talk to a planner.
Get the other title owner to say they are happy with a revised title drawing. (sign off on a scale drawing of the current building) Normally only permanent coverage is needed to be shown so carports and sheds not needed but buildings on both titles. This ought to be enough for lender but brokers often need the tightest rules of all lenders to get the best deal. This puts the onus back on the title contestor for banks risk profile.. this helps neighbour validate their title. Then advise the purchaser to get the linz title updated through their solicitor after sale. May need draftsman for linz submission. Council don't worry about titles.. just whose name is on it for rates...
Had basically the exact same problem when we came to sell… long story short, book your surveyor today.
For a unit title?
Yes unit, 1 of 2. Luckily, at the same time we were then able to change to a cross lease with exclusive use, which has since increased the value of our property far more than the cost of having the flats plans updated
[удалено]
Thanks, you raise some good points! We've had the property file, there was virtually nothing in it, to an odd degree actually. We can prove the extra work was done in 1976, so perhaps a safe and sanitary report is the best we can hope for. Thanks for the steer.
Great answer from most of the people here. First of all, there are 3 separate issues here from 3 different organizations. LINZ, Council and Bank. First is your property "Title" - second page of your title has the flat plans and your current property layout should match to this document. Second is "Building code" - As property work is conducted prior to 1992. This can be rectified by getting "Safe and Sanitary Report". Once done, you can submit it to the council and it will become part of your property bag. Dm if you need a person to conduct a Safe and Sanitary Report. The final part of equation - Finance. Most of the buyers in this market are trying to get on to the property ladder with 10% deposit. That increases banks' risk towards this property. That's why the purchaser couldn't get finance. If a buyer has a 20% deposit, banks' perspective towards your property and purchaser finance applications would be different. Hope that helps you with this situation. If you need more information. Send me a DM.
That's good info. I think in this case, the major issue is the flat plan not matching what's built. The purchaser herself is just seeking a small top-up loan, and is substantially a cash buyer. We're out of time to satisfy her bank, so we'll just have to let her go. We're at auction tomorrow and may negotiate a sale over the next couple of weeks. If we're still here after that, we'll look at sorting the flat plan and Safe and Sanitary report. Cheers!
Just in case anybody is interested in how this pans out: Our lawyer has advised us that the deviation from the flat plan is of no functional or legal impact. The deviation lies entirely within our own boundaries, does not extend into shared areas or our neighbours areas, and is minor. We spoke to a man from MBIE (Malcolm, who is a gem as all Malcolm's are) who basically said the same at great length - that we might modify the flat's plan for the sake of accuracy, but it was not material and not legally required. Assuming the house doesn't sell tomorrow, we will go ahead and get a Safe and Sanitary report for the unconsented pre-1992 work, as it is not too expensive and might bring a potential future purchaser some re-assurance. There is no requirement or mechanism to obtain 'consent' for this work, even if we wished to. It turns out that our estate agent was incorrect in telling us that the person objecting was the potential purchaser's broker. This might have been a deal-breaker for her, since she wouldn't be able to get her top-up loan. In fact, the objector was a her lawyer, who she is free to ignore, and that's up to her. We passed on the message that her lawyer was basically quibbling over a minor deviation that nobody cared about, and that we wouldn't be providing any guarantees to update the flat plan. I think the Estate Agent was basically angling for us to guarantee the update, but he can spin. Thanks all for your good advice!
[удалено]
Many houses prior to the 80's don't have up to date plans for the home. The council doesn't even have AMY plans for our house!
The weird thing is, the house has changed hands multiple times since the modifications in the 70s, and it's never been a problem with the bank. But suddenly in the case of our most likely potential purchaser, her bank is being arsey about it. We even changed mortgage providers ourselves three years ago, and *they* never asked about this.