Hi, I’m in the process of purchasing a II listed cottage (circa 17th c) but I’m struggling to understand what is original and what has been changed. The listing explains what the property looks like from outside, all external original features and original internal flooring but it makes no reference to anything else internally. How do I know what is authentic and what has been messed with? Any help would be greatly received.
- Thread starter Honeybee
- Start date
fallschirmjager
Member
- Messages
- 60
- Location
- Essex
Search the List: Map Search | Historic England
Explore over 400,000 listed buildings and historic places on the National Heritage List for England.
historicengland.org.uk
The above website should have the original advisors report for the property which should cover the historic context of the building. Just find the property via the map.
A listing description is purely to identify the property. It doesn’t cover everything by a country mile. Most buildings won’t have even been entered when they were added to the list in a hurry. If there’s anything of specific merit, it may have been called out, but don’t rely on the listing description at all.
CliffordPope
Member
- Messages
- 1,023
I think the lists are simply to highlight noteworthy features. Everything in a listed building is "listed", ie you can't touch it. Even ghastly 70's additions to an otherwise original building still need permission to touch.
We were once served notice to replace missing asbestos slates on a Victorian station conversion, even though they knew we were intending to get permission to replace the entire roof with proper reclaimed slates.
We were once served notice to replace missing asbestos slates on a Victorian station conversion, even though they knew we were intending to get permission to replace the entire roof with proper reclaimed slates.
What a deeply broken system.
Mrs McG
Member
- Messages
- 86
- Location
- Bedfordshire
If you’re not far enough advanced in the purchase to have instructed a surveyor (who could tell you much of what you want to know) then I would assume that during its 400 years of history pretty much everything has been ‘messed with’ at some point or another.
The fact that it’s listed means that any ‘messing about’ is pretty much locked in now, although my personal experience is that a CO is more open to altering post-Edwardian features and those should be easier for you to spot.
The fact that it’s listed means that any ‘messing about’ is pretty much locked in now, although my personal experience is that a CO is more open to altering post-Edwardian features and those should be easier for you to spot.
Flyfisher
Member
- Messages
- 10,286
- Location
- Norfolk, UK
It's certainly not perfect. What has always surprised me is that the planning process for unlisted properties encompasses a 'post-planning' process to certify that the consented works have been implemented correctly, ie building control. In contrast, the listed building process only encompasses LBC to consent the works but there is no follow-up process to certify they've been implemented corrrectly.
So prospective purchasers might be given LBC documentation but how many actually bother to check that what was consented was actually implemented correctly? Or worse, that other non-consented works were also carried out? So they purchase a listed property with LBC thinking that everything is fully legal only to discover later that there is something that was not consented and that they are now liable for its reversal, should the authorities ever decide to pursue the matter.
Mrs McG
Member
- Messages
- 86
- Location
- Bedfordshire
AFAIK, and I’m neck deep in all this at the moment, it is the responsibility of the building inspector who signs off the build to flag relevant elements of the build to the COs. The inspector who signs it off may be from the council or a private inspector.
Flyfisher
Member
- Messages
- 10,286
- Location
- Norfolk, UK
I'm sure that's true, when building control is involved with the works, but what about alterations to a listed property for which LBC is required (and granted) but do not require building control?
There is zero closed loop, which rather makes a bit of a mockery of the process - all the drawn out debate up front, then just get on with it! Even an enforcement order, doesn’t necessarily get checked after the reversals are done (or not).
There are certainly many areas of our huge full building LBC that will be amended as we go for the best course, some run by our CO, others probably not. There are also many areas that are not defined, so the onus is on us to do the right thing.
There are certainly many areas of our huge full building LBC that will be amended as we go for the best course, some run by our CO, others probably not. There are also many areas that are not defined, so the onus is on us to do the right thing.
LadyArowana
Member
- Messages
- 3,694
Very generally I would say that for our local authority they evaluate proposed changes on the basis of whether they feel there is a ‘heritage gain’, a ‘loss of heritage‘ or it is entirely neutral. As an example, we relocated a boiler to a place that was not part of the original footprint of the house, which allowed restoration of an original stone fireplace feature, so this was regarded as a heritage gain. A neighbour was allowed a glass linkway between his basement level and unde pavement vaults. The rational for this was that as part of the project an original doorway was opened up to replace an unsympathetic window, and metal steps were being replaced with stone ones. The CO felt that taken as a whole there was a heritage gain and the glass linkway was in any case entirely reversible and did not pose a risk to original fabric of the house. I doubt we would have been allowed the same because the same area of our house was essentially in original condition.
There are always quirks and anomalies of course. In some instances people are refused permission to alter things which are later additions to a property but are deemed to show an interesting historical development. The type of property can also be relevant. For example on a terrace of houses changes could need to not impact the quality of the terrace as a whole. This might be particularly relevant if it was something like a symmetrical Georgian terrace which had been designed to look like a more grand country house with a distinctive central element.
There are always quirks and anomalies of course. In some instances people are refused permission to alter things which are later additions to a property but are deemed to show an interesting historical development. The type of property can also be relevant. For example on a terrace of houses changes could need to not impact the quality of the terrace as a whole. This might be particularly relevant if it was something like a symmetrical Georgian terrace which had been designed to look like a more grand country house with a distinctive central element.
As you've pointed out it's basically impossible to know how old each part of your listed building is and if it's 'original' or not. For example my G2 listed coach house was knocked down (with the exception of 1 wall) in the 1970s and rebuilt in order to make way for a road. This means I can't change anything because the 1970s sections are also listed, despite having no historic value.
Previous owners have also installed uPVC casement windows of varying quality with no sign of LBC on the planning portal. But how can it be proven these aren't 'original'? And if we want to update them we have basically 2 options:
1. get LBC and will be told to install incredibly expensive and inefficient timber single-glazed sash windows.
2. don't get LBC, install some new windows which are both more efficient and more in keeping with the property (double glazed sashes) and hope no one notices. After all, in a few years who can prove that they haven't been there for decades?
Which would you do?
At the end of the day, you have to accept when buying a listed property that someone will have done work to it without LBC, simply because the system is so broken and only allows you to revert back to the CO's idea of 'original' (despite there being 0 evidence of what the original actually looked like). This can also work to your advantage as there will be no audit trail of alterations which a CO would require you to reverse.
Previous owners have also installed uPVC casement windows of varying quality with no sign of LBC on the planning portal. But how can it be proven these aren't 'original'? And if we want to update them we have basically 2 options:
1. get LBC and will be told to install incredibly expensive and inefficient timber single-glazed sash windows.
2. don't get LBC, install some new windows which are both more efficient and more in keeping with the property (double glazed sashes) and hope no one notices. After all, in a few years who can prove that they haven't been there for decades?
Which would you do?
At the end of the day, you have to accept when buying a listed property that someone will have done work to it without LBC, simply because the system is so broken and only allows you to revert back to the CO's idea of 'original' (despite there being 0 evidence of what the original actually looked like). This can also work to your advantage as there will be no audit trail of alterations which a CO would require you to reverse.