Must the seller provide planning and Building Regulations documents? A seller is not automatically required to obtain and supply every document a buyer requests. The answer depends on whether it is accessible elsewhere, what remains unresolved and the requirements of the particular transaction. A buyer can still need satisfactory evidence before proceeding.
The useful question is therefore more precise: are the parties trying to obtain another copy of an available document, or investigate a genuine gap in the property’s approval history?
What does the proposed Conveyancing Protocol say?
The October 2026 consultation draft addresses this in the contract-bundle provisions at step 13, item 4. It proposes that conveyancers should avoid routinely supplying or requesting planning documents, Building Regulations approvals and certificates that can be accessed through local authority records or relevant online registers. Requests remain appropriate when documents are unavailable publicly or an issue needs clarification.
This is proposed wording, not an adopted replacement Protocol. It concerns how documents are exchanged. It does not establish that alterations were authorised, dispense with investigation or decide every seller’s contractual obligations. The draft also recognises that professional duties to clients, including lenders, take precedence.
What should the seller provide?
As a practical starting point, sellers should collect the documents they hold and give their conveyancer an accurate account of alterations. The government’s guide to selling a home recommends gathering relevant paperwork before marketing.
Useful information includes:
- What was built, altered or installed, and approximately when.
- Whether the work was undertaken by the seller or an earlier owner.
- Application references, decision notices, approved plans and certificates already held.
- Correspondence about inspections, conditions, complaints or enforcement.
- Any indemnity policy or explanation retained from the original purchase.
Where the seller does not know the history, that uncertainty should be explained. A statement that no certificate is held should not be presented as proof that approval was unnecessary. Nor should a seller say that work was signed off merely because someone submitted an application.
The contract, replies to enquiries and any specific agreement about outstanding documents also need consideration. Neither side should treat a general procedural principle as a complete answer to those matters.
Publicly available does not always mean the enquiry is resolved
A council website may display an application number without providing the decision, approved drawings or evidence concerning conditions. An entry for a building control application may leave the final certification question unanswered.
Before requesting another document, the buyer’s conveyancer should identify what has actually been located and what it proves. The address, description of work and dates need to match the alterations being investigated.
A proportionate enquiry might say:
The public record identifies permission for the rear extension, but the available documents do not show whether condition 3 was discharged. Please provide any relevant decision or correspondence held by the seller and explain what is known about compliance with that condition.
This illustrative wording identifies a specific gap. It is more useful than repeatedly asking for all permissions without explaining what remains outstanding. Our article on when additional conveyancing enquiries are necessary considers that wider approach.
Missing documents and missing approval are different problems
Three situations should be kept separate:
- A document exists but the seller has lost their copy. Locating the existing record may resolve the issue.
- An application exists but completion evidence is missing. Further investigation may be needed to establish what happened after the application.
- No approval record has been identified. The work, date and applicable requirements need investigation before concluding that it was unauthorised.
Planning permission and Building Regulations address different matters. One does not establish compliance with the other. For a fuller explanation of certificates, insurance and possible regularisation, read our missing Building Regulations certificate guide.
A reported example: the 1970s flat conversion
Our earlier article describes a buyer whose searches revealed no planning permission or completion certificate for a London flat conversion. A historic London Building Act entry and a later council response provided evidence of the conversion’s history, although the underlying plans and certificate were unavailable.
The difficulty was therefore broader than asking the seller to find a modern certificate. Read the 1970s flat-conversion example for the distinction between missing records, approval history and mortgageability. It also shows why an empty online search should not automatically determine the outcome.
Who should obtain a missing copy, and who pays?
The conveyancers should agree a practical route based on the information needed, access to the records and any contractual commitments. If the buyer’s representative can retrieve an adequate public document, demanding that the seller obtain the same copy may add little.
Where a paid archive search, replacement certificate or further professional investigation is proposed, establish its purpose and cost first. The parties may negotiate who pays. A request does not, by itself, establish that the seller must fund it.
However, refusing to obtain evidence does not oblige the buyer to accept unresolved risk. The seller and buyer may need to consider timing, further investigation or revised terms with their advisers.
Does indemnity insurance remove the need for documents?
Insurance should follow identification of the risk. Depending on its terms, it may address specified financial losses associated with enforcement. It does not create an approval or certify the quality of construction.
Before making an approach to an authority about potentially unapproved work, discuss the proposed enquiry with the conveyancer. The nature of contact can matter to insurance eligibility or conditions. Do not assume that reading existing public records and asking an authority to investigate a possible breach have identical consequences.
The buyer’s mortgage lender remains part of the decision
The buyer’s conveyancer must check the instructions applicable to the mortgage, including relevant general and lender-specific requirements and offer conditions. A proposed document-sharing procedure does not authorise the firm to disregard those instructions.
For an earlier transaction, today’s wording may not establish what the lender required then. Our article on historical lender requirements concerning missing planning permission explains why the date matters.
What should be clear before exchange?
The file and advice to the buyer should explain what work is involved, which records have been checked, what remains uncertain and how the proposed approach addresses that uncertainty. Any lender response, survey concern or insurance limitation should be recorded.
Resolving the present transaction is also an opportunity to preserve the evidence for the next sale. A buyer should retain the documents and explanation rather than assume the same issue will never arise again.
Missing paperwork holding up your sale or remortgage?
If the works predated your purchase, your original conveyancing file may explain what was investigated and what you were told. When I Bought helps you explore those questions.
Explore missing Building Regulations problems →
Concerned about planning permission instead? Read the planning permission guide .
Missing paperwork or a later lender objection does not, by itself, establish that the original conveyancer was at fault.
This article discusses a consultation draft and practical conveyancing issues in England and Wales. Planning and building control rules differ by jurisdiction and date. Obtain advice on the particular property and transaction.