Any experience with retroactive permits in LA City?

[Tim The Enchanter]

Anyone have experience with retroactive permits in LA City? My subject is in LA City (Woodland Hills) and shows as 1,493 SF per taxman and Realist. But, it is just over 3,900 SF and the owner tells me he is a contractor and there are no permits for the additions, or the complete remodeling of the house, he says up to code. It looks good, nice place, but, who knows what lurks unseen.....

Call is in to the client about it. Meanwhile I'm wondering if someone has dealt with this in LA City specifically. Any ideas what it might cost to get permitted, assuming it's all good like he says? I'll guess it varies a lot. Building and Safety seems to be pretty lax about unpermitted work. The web site says there were 2 investigations of construction without permits in 2010, both show closed, and they give no details.

I'll not mention here the 30' x 40' metal work shop, or several other sheds that are small enough to not need permits, but have electric and plumbing, no doubt unpermitted. Oops.

I'm thinking it will need an EA or need to be subject to permits being issued and finalized on the house at least. I've seen lots of unpermitted work, but this takes the cake.

Good times.

 

[CANative]

Did you ask him why he didn't get permits? It's bizarre that a "contractor" would not get permits even for his own property.

 

[Tim The Enchanter]

Did not think to ask why. I would think he would have been smarter to get permits for the GLA, and skip permits for smaller things that would go by unmentioned.

I'd guess the answer would be the expense (but he said he spent $600,000) or maybe he just doesn't want to submit to the government repression. I don't wanna go there, lol.

 

[HF Mudd]

Did you ask him why he didn't get permits?

I've given up asking people why they do what they do (or don't do what they don't do, as the case may be).

 

[CATaxAssessor]

Contractors tend to be the worst offenders of individuals building additions with no permits. I have seen this too many times. You should talk to the Assessor's Office, I guarantee they will be interested in somebody who spent 600K on a additions/major remodel.

 

[CANative]

He'd have to be pretty stupid to think he's going to avoid re-setting his base year due to new construction. I've worked a lot of cases where our client received a huge supplemental bill for years of escaped taxes.

But I suspect that's probably the reason rather than what I was originally thinking - doing things that are not one of the permitted uses.

Typically I come across on the forum as ignoring permits. But the scope of this project would give me pause and I'd do what I could to get to the bottom of it before proceeding.

 

[Doug DeMars]

What a Maroon!

This reminds me of the time I went to inspect a place in Livermore and was surprised to find a pool in the back yard. A VERY VERY nice pool (75K+ or so). I double checked the tax records...no pool...that's not unusual but it's usually there...especially since it was at least 5 years old...so I was a bit surprised the assessor didn't have it noted yet. It turns out the owner of the house was a pool contractor...trying to avoid taxes. I made a EA about it being retrospectively permitted...then strongly encouraged the owner to get it on the books.

I'm also reminded of not too long ago of a modest addition in an incorported city in Contra Costa county. I made few phone calls to the building department and got the impression that the "retrospective" permit fees were very reasonable...$1500 bucks comes to mind.

I'm also aware of some scenarios where completed bathrooms had to be torn back to the studs (in select areas/walls) to check to see if the plumbing and electrical is right. These owner/contractors are not doing themselves any favors by overlooking the permit process.

 

[Terrel L. Shields]

Easier to ask forgiveness than to ask for permission

 

[Tim The Enchanter]

He'd have to be pretty stupid to think he's going to avoid re-setting his base year due to new construction. I've worked a lot of cases where our client received a huge supplemental bill for years of escaped taxes.

I hadn't even thought of that, but my Dad had the idea when I was telling him about it. He should have at least got the footprint permitted imho. Seems like getting permission could be cheaper in the end than forgiveness.

There was a case in I think Acton a couple years or so ago, LA County ended up tearing down his whole unpermitted place. I forget if he ended up with jail time or not.

 

[23Degrees]

I once had an assignment where a good portion of the house had been retro permitted. Realtor said it was a nightmare but they got it done. I know that there are few lawyers in LA county that deal a lot with the issue, mostly as it pertains to garage conversions, either retro-permitting the space as GLA or conversion back to parking - they might have an idea.

This one might have some insight:

[url]http://www.illegallaconversions.com/[/URL]