Buying a house without fully approved structures

O

omnom

Active Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2014
Messages
84
Reaction score
18
Location
Bramley, Johannesburg
I was looking to make an offer for a house, so I asked for a list of disclosures and whether there were approved plans, among other things. Turns out there is an unapproved bathroom on the servant's quarters.

Before I call the estate agent and discuss this, I want to get my eggs in a row.

Has anybody been through this? My thoughts:

1. The seller is saying they're not going to address the issue. My feeling is - if this is a small thing to fix, they should get it fixed since they are currently in contravention of municipal law and this isn't the same as a broken window or peeling paint. And if it's not a small thing, they need to discount the asking price to cover it and any potential fines.

However, I'm having a hard time figuring out what it will cost to address (hire an architect to draft as-is plans and submit to municipality = what?).

2. If one thing is unapproved, there's probably more than one thing unapproved - I'll need to assume the worst. If the plans weren't approved, who did the construction and why didn't they care? Is the construction quality up to par? This makes me nervous as there is already a questionable construction choice - they built around a tree, literally allowing a round wall to ingress a new hallway. I'm concerned this tree's roots is going to cause problems one day.

3. Will the FI approve my bond if this isn't resolved (guess I'll have to ask each institution one at a time)

I've read a couple of articles saying almost the same two seemingly contradictory things: this happens a lot, it's a big problem. If it's such a big problem why does it happen a lot?
 
A friend of mine had something similar so I can maybe just give you a small warning.
The law is quite complicated and in some cases it can be easy to fix and in others it can be an absolute nightmare.
As a worst case scenario which happened to my friend, the house covered more percent of the land then it was legally allowed to because of the unregistered modifications the previous owner made. In this case my friend had to cancel buying the house as rezoning would have required permission from all residents in the complex, some of whom refused. His only other option was to buy and then remove everything back to the original plans.
I can maybe ask my friend to check out this post and tell you the full story.
 
I bought a house where the wall in the kitchen was replaced with a load bearing wall to make the kitchen bigger. This load bearing wall is not on the plan.
The agent and the seller said that it was on the plan and I only got the plan when I went to the municipality after I moved in.

In my case, the voetstoots "law" applies and I have to sit with the fine if the municipality comes my way.
I am extending my boundary wall to where the municipal boundary meets and someone I know is drawing up the plan where it excludes the change from the previous owner.

I wouldn't buy the house if I was you, rather take them to task on it before you make that offer. I have come to realize that people are very fscking dodgy when it comes to selling houses. I have a meeting with my lawyer and previous home owner later today at 5pm as I am suing him for all the plumbing problems and him removing the bathroom vanity.
 
Op. I think the concern is valid , but reading your post sounds like you are more looking for any possible way to reduce the price than to solve the issue.

If you really think it's such a big issue , and uncertain about quality and and and , why not just walkway ?
 
Call the city inspector ask him to inspect property . From there will force owner to fix plans
 
ponder said:
Walk away.
Click to expand...

+1. Walk away.

However...If you decide to take the risk, I've been in this situation. In my case, the seller was forced to get an architect in to draw up plans because we made it a condition in the offer to purchase that we require approved plans - it cost the seller about R6k. We're now waiting on the Homeowners association to approve and then it will get lodged with the municipality. I did confirm the structure is not on a municipal servitude.

See: http://mybroadband.co.za/vb/showthread.php/694127-House-purchase-from-HELL!
 
walk away. been there. ended up in court because previous owner did not have approved plans for changes.
 
Short answer: Yeah, walk away.

However: Our house had something done (by us), 12 years ago, relatively minor but still should have had municipal approval. Some years later we submitted plans to municipality for further renovations. The architect included the previous unapproved work done a few years before on the plan as existing structure. Municipality approved the new work, and as the previously done work was on the plan as existing then that was now regarded as legal too.

Roll forward nine years... Building inspector never came nine years ago to pass the finished work. Called them recently to come do so as we wanted our deposit back from nine years ago (R1500). He gave us an occupation certificate for the house, showing everything on the plan as done, dusted and approved.
 
Here is my expensive lesson, approved plans is not enough. You need the occupation certificate also.
Until you have that piece of paper the "approved" plans means nothing, the occupation certificate means that the building was inspected and is in line with the plans.

Cost about 12k to rectify items that were not in line with the approved plans. e.g window glass was substandard, sewage inspection cover plate was in the wrong place (the 2 things that stands out in my mind, cannot really remember the rest, was all small stupid things)

PS: condition of sale was that approved plans should be provided, which it was. At the time did not realize that it means nothing.
 
Last edited:
Yes, seeing that Certificate of Occupation from the municipality in my inbox ended years of worry in the back of our minds that perhaps, maybe, one day, when we wanted to sell we'd have problems.
 
CamiKaze said:
I bought a house where the wall in the kitchen was replaced with a load bearing wall to make the kitchen bigger. This load bearing wall is not on the plan.
The agent and the seller said that it was on the plan and I only got the plan when I went to the municipality after I moved in.

In my case, the voetstoots "law" applies and I have to sit with the fine if the municipality comes my way.
I am extending my boundary wall to where the municipal boundary meets and someone I know is drawing up the plan where it excludes the change from the previous owner.

I wouldn't buy the house if I was you, rather take them to task on it before you make that offer. I have come to realize that people are very fscking dodgy when it comes to selling houses. I have a meeting with my lawyer and previous home owner later today at 5pm as I am suing him for all the plumbing problems and him removing the bathroom vanity.
Click to expand...

Voetstoots does not absolve the seller of all resposibility especially if you asked and they failed to disclose that information.
 
Beachless said:
Voetstoots does not absolve the seller of all resposibility especially if you asked and they failed to disclose that information.
Click to expand...
There is a clause that toxic or someone else posted from Chas Everett that states that if you bought a house without making sure that you have the latest plans then the onus is on the buyer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X