Neighbour wants to reroute our mains supply...who pays?

[yeast]

Hi
Our mains supply loops above ground to a connection on our neighbours house and from there above ground to the pole. The supply has been like this for at least 40 years with no problem.

Around 5 years ago UK power networks fixed a fault on the line and replaced the bracket and gubbins attached to my house. No comment was made about the arrangement by the engineers who visited, they just fixed the fault.

Anyway, neighbour is having work carried out on house and wants the supply to his house (and therefore the supply to our house ) moved, saying that UK power networks have told him that the arrangement we currently have is unusual or in some way wrong.

My question is, where do I stand here? Will I have to fork our for our supply to be rerouted or buried underground from the pole? Neighbour is happy for our cable to go under his land, but I really don't know where we stand. Oh, and I have got no spare cash anyway, so couldn't afford to pay anyway. Can he insist that our supply is disconnected from his house, leaving us with no power? Help!!

 

[flyingsparks]

If he wants to do this work and move the supply, tell him he pays for it. I certainly wouldn't.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Can he insist that our supply is disconnected from his house, leaving us with no power?

No.

Well - he can, I suppose, insist, but nobody will take any notice of him.

 

[JohnW2]

Can he insist that our supply is disconnected from his house, leaving us with no power?

No. Well - he can, I suppose, insist, but nobody will take any notice of him.

Does it not depend in part about what contracts or other agreements exist and what they say?

However, even if the legal position were such that the DNO had no right to be using the neighbour's house in relation to the supply to the OP's (in which case, maybe the neighbour could insist on its removal), one can but presume that the DNO would have to make some alternative arrangement for delivering electricity to the OP (and not at the OP's cost).

Kind Regards, John

 

[bernardgreen]

There are thousands of places where an overhead lands on one house and from there is extended to supply one or more other houses.

If your neighbour wants it moved then he pays for all the work. He may even be required to compensate you for loss of power if it lasts more than 48 hours ( not sure about it being 48 hours ).

That said the DNO may take the opportunity to upgrade the supplies to the houses by installing underground from post to houses. In which case they may pay for the work or accept a donation towards the cost. Your neighbour could reduce the costs by digging the trenches after consultation with the DNO If they do go underground make notes and photos of the route for future reference before digging deep or planting trees.

 

[ericmark]

My son has the same problem supply comes to his house and then to next doors house. He enquired about a meter change and a moving of the supply point to a outside box so meter can be read without assess to the house and also the removal of unsightly wires.

He was given a quote and assured his neighbours supply did not come from his house so very clear there is no wayleave or what ever it is called to take the power through his property.

In his case next door is unoccupied but that will likely make the problem worse as to replace next doors supply will likely mean the drive will need lifting if it matches my sons supply.

Clearly back in the year knock when the then council estate was wired some one too a short cut and instead of wiring to each house they wired them in pairs. But this was unofficial and the records do not show that was the method used.

I would suspect the DNO will need to foot the bill but as still to happen can't be certain on that. What I do know is my son does not want unsightly wires around the outside of his house he has gone to a lot of time and trouble to remove all wires from outside of house TV, Telephone etc and there is no way he will allow the one remaining to continue to be there.

I also can't see how next door can be given a bill for what was at end of the day a DNO error. I would be interested to hear what happens to you as this may give some idea of what will happen to my son.

 

[westie101]

Neighbour or DNO pays.

Permission, often verbal, will have been given to originally put the supply there and it is deemed to continue through sucessive owners.
If a request is made to move it the requester will usually be asked to pay. If thery refuse we would do the neccessary to maintain supply to the affected property, but do no work on the requesters house. (though if they are adamant we would suggest we could remove all our equipment thus leaving them without supply)
To make the DNO pay would require written notice that would be dealt with as written notice as per a written wayleave.
i.e. 6 months notice & six months following the expiry of that notice to do the work. we had one earlier in the week that as soon as the proceedure was explained backed down immediately

My son has the same problem supply comes to his house and then to next doors house. He enquired about a meter change and a moving of the supply point to a outside box so meter can be read without assess to the house and also the removal of unsightly wires.

A common method of providing supply and done with the permission of the original owners i.e. the council or on a private developement the builder.
There is no error on the part of the DNO or it's predecessors as that in both cases here is a common supply method.
However, often even if there is a written document these are not found by solicitors when property changes hands as most done know to look for them!!

 

[ban-all-sheds]

if they are adamant we would suggest we could remove all our equipment thus leaving them without supply

I like that,

 

[JohnW2]

Permission, often verbal, will have been given to originally put the supply there and it is deemed to continue through sucessive owners.

That makes sense, but I imagine that it can get legally complicated.

The overhead supply to my house makes extensive use of the walls of what is now my neighbour's house. However, when the supply was installed the two properties were one, so there would have been no need to seek any permissions. One wonders whether it occurred to the DNO to obtain that permission when the properties were split - it's very easy to imagine that the answer could easily be 'no'!

Kind Regards, John

 

[ban-all-sheds]

I believe you have access to a free family legal advice service?

I wonder if, if the cables were already there at the time of purchase, a new owner has to give permission, or if the DNO have to ask, or if the new owner is deemed to have given permission if he doesn't challenge the presence of the cables before purchase?

 

[dhutch]

There are thousands of places where an overhead lands on one house and from there is extended to supply one or more other houses.

If your neighbour wants it moved then he pays for all the work. He may even be required to compensate you for loss of power if it lasts more than 48 hours ( not sure about it being 48 hours ).

That said the DNO may take the opportunity to upgrade the supplies to the houses by installing underground from post to houses. In which case they may pay for the work or accept a donation towards the cost. Your neighbour could reduce the costs by digging the trenches after consultation with the DNO If they do go underground make notes and photos of the route for future reference before digging deep or planting trees.

Sounds right to me.

 

[JohnW2]

I believe you have access to a free family legal advice service?

In relation to some areas of law, yes. I have my doubts about this one, but I'll try when I have an opportunity!

I wonder if, if the cables were already there at the time of purchase, a new owner has to give permission, or if the DNO have to ask, or if the new owner is deemed to have given permission if he doesn't challenge the presence of the cables before purchase?

I don't know. As westie has said, if permission (even if only verbal) has been given by previous owners, it appears that the permission is deemed to continue through successive owners. However, it's less clear than there was originally no permission (and no need for permission). I would have thought that if a new owner doesn't volunteer permission (why should they?) and the DNO doesn't ask for permission, that there is no explicit permission in place. I therefore imagine that the main question is your last one, as to whether the failure to challenge the presence of the cables constitutes the giving of implicit permission. I'll see what I can find out.

Rights of neighbours to have service supply pipes, drains etc. running over/under neighbours' land (and to have access to those things for maintenance and repair), or have 'right of way' over neighbours' land is usually the subject of formal written agreements, and I've quite often had to sign such things at the time of property purchase (even though similar agreements have been signed by previous owners - so presumably not deemed to automatically continue through subsequent owners). However, FWIW, I don't recall ever having seen such a document in relation to electricity supplies.

Kind Regards, John

 

[bernardgreen]

Generally the owner of the property at the time that the electricity supply was connected gives consent for the service to be run. ( this can be the company that build the property ). The next owner can challenge the situation if there is no written and agreed way leave for the cable to cross their land and / or be attached to their building. But the costs involved with such a challenge tend to make buyers accept the situation.

 

[JohnW2]

Generally the owner of the property at the time that the electricity supply was connected gives consent for the service to be run. ( this can be the company that build the property ). The next owner can challenge the situation if there is no written and agreed way leave for the cable to cross their land and / or be attached to their building. But the costs involved with such a challenge tend to make buyers accept the situation.

That all makes sense. However, as I said, in my case the situation is more complicated. At the time the electricity supply was connected (presumably with implicit consent for cables to be attached to the property being supplied), there were no cables supplying any other property, since what are now two properties were then one. Only when the properties were split did it arise that cables supplying one property were (by virtue of the splitting) then attached to the walls of a different property - and I don't know (but doubt!) that any permissions were given or sought at the time of the splitting. Were your cottage and adjacent shop perhaps once a single property - in which case did any similar issues arise?

Fortunately, I get on well with my neighbour!

Kind Regards, John

 

[bernardgreen]

Were your cottage and adjacent shop perhaps once a single property - in which case did any similar issues arise?

The cottage and shop had one meter from an overhead TT supply landing on the front of the next but one property and strung along the wall. When the over head along the road was put underground cable at the landing point was simply re-routed down the wall to an underground joint on the new cable. The three properties served by the cable along the wall seem happy with the situation. A house nearby does have a cable landing on it's wall and then on to another house ( once two separate houses ) by a 20 metre span. When the house was sold the new owners did question this arrangement ( concern about the cable pulling out of the wall ) but discovered the situation was " well established " and would be difficult and expensive to change.

Fortunately my cottage had two consumer units ( one off peak ) fed by a four core mineral cable from two switch fuses at the meter in the shop so separating the shop and cottage was reasonably easy. I had a new supply laid in from the street behind the cottage ( cheaper than taking it from an underground joint to the road in front of the cottage ) One requirement was to ensure there was no possibility of any metallic connection between my "earth" ( PME ) and the shop's "earth" ( TT )