Neighbours extension and soak away drainage system

[mattylad]

The other extensions may also not go to the boundary because if they have gutters they would then overhang the neighbour - and they should not as this then prevent you from erecting a similar extension.

Point this out - that they must arrange their drainage to be wholly within their property - including where the water runs to as it must not run into your garden.

Something to consider and point out at the offset as once the all is up then its just tough.

 

[lisap]

On the plans it looks like its a straight wall at the side and then roof sope forward so not slope at sides, if that makes sense (!) so wonder if this means they wont have guttering on the side, however this doesnt explain where the downpipe is going. The plans dont have any measurements on so hard to tell true measurements

 

[lisap]

Just and update on whats happening now, thought it might be interesting to some! we wrote our concerns to the planners, even though most issues were for building regs not planning, and we heard the neighbours got told off for not filling in form correctly as there is a hedge and fence to be removed (not that this helps us but make us feel better they got something wrong again!!) The planners said there may be an issue with the soakaway as he has asked the advice of building regs and they say the pit has to be 5 to 10 metres away from any building. if the soakaway pit is where we think it is is isnt then 5m away. They said this then would cause implications.... its like a a 'du du durr' moment!! will have to wait and see...

thanks everyone for advice and support, as always!

 

[armouredsmiler]

Also not that the party wall act is only a optional act, IE it is not enforcable/mandatory only a suggestion by the government, so they don't have to pay for your solicitor if they don't agree to take out the act.


'Take a look at THIS - and the link to the explanatory booklet at the bottom of the page.[/quote]'

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Err.....

It's been 8 months. Do you think that nothing has happened in all that time?

 

[luisdesign]

And aside from the above... The party wall act is not 'optional' as you seem to suggest.

 

[armouredsmiler]

err, it is.

Just the same (as I have found out from Thames Water) as building over public sewers and manholes less than 130.

As per the party wall act leaflet by the government.........◦The Act contains no enforcement procedures for failure to serve a notice. However, if you start work without having first given notice in the proper way. Adjoining Owners may seek to stop your work through a court injunction or seek other legal redress.

See
http://www.hillingdon.gov.uk/article/9073/The-Party-wall-etc-Act-came-into-force-on-1st-July-1997
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa..._Wall_etc._Act_1996_-_Explanatory_Booklet.pdf

 

[luisdesign]

You have a dangerous misunderstanding of the act.
The act affords a person the right to carry out works on or near a party wall or structure only if they have notified other interested owners.
If you fail to serve notice you gain no legal right to undertake works affecting the shared structure.

The passage you quoted only confirms that the act itself does not contain any provision for enforcement of failure to notify.

The result is that enforcement happens when a neighbour experiences un-notified work that they do not agree with. In real terms this is supposed to help minimise cases going to court, because if the neighbour was not notified but is okay with the work then you can come to an agreement after the fact (rather than criminalise or increase the beaurocracy of the whole affair).

However, be under no mistake that you have no rights to carry out works on a party wall without having first served notice. If you do so, then not only are you opening yourself up for spurious claims from your neighbours but you will also be fully liable for the resulting legal cost of enforcement against you.

 

[armouredsmiler]

First of all I believe the act should be mandatory and enforcable by criminal law (that woulsd stop my neighbour in his tracks), it is weak as it stands.

No I don't have a 'You have a dangerous misunderstanding of the act.'

I am viewing this from the person who is not doing the extension/building work(IE me)

The 'act' has not added anything you couldn't do 'expensively' before (you could serve a injunction to stop work, you could take someone to court for criminal damage to your property.......).

I was pointing out that you cannot tell the neighbour/person building work/neighbour that they HAVE to follow/take out the 'party wall act', they can just ignore you (like our neighbour). If this is the case, then you have to go via the 'expensive' legal way of courts/solicitors, just as before 'the act' was ever here.

All it has done is the same as the 'traffic act' for using mobile phone whilst driving. There was already a traffic law called 'undue care and attention', all it has done is stop weasely lawers trying to get round some generic written laws.
So it spells it out in precise words (what was already covered in law) to the people who might have not understood what they could have done before the 'act'.


So the difference to following:
'However, be under no mistake that you have no rights to carry out works on a party wall without having first served notice. If you do so, then not only are you opening yourself up for spurious claims from your neighbours but you will also be fully liable for the resulting legal cost of enforcement against you.'

Neighbour does NOT enable the 'act', the court will want you to give evdience why a injunction should be served,
and before the 'act', the court will want you to give evidence why a injunction should be served.

Also noting has changed before and after the act came in force (everything after the injunction would be up to the expensive lawers & courts to decide), unless your on legal aid.

So, I don't see what the act has given extra to innocent neighbours of people building extensions who ignore the act? that wasn't avai;lable before the act.

I agree if the neighbour does follow the Act, then life and harmony is better since a third party decides on what fiar and not emptions.

I also have the same beef about the 'public' sewer and water companies they cannot 'enforce' people to notify them that they are building over a public sewer/manhole. I know I contacted Thames water about the same neighbour building over the public sewer and Manhole(as per the recent change to 'owner' of sewerage pipes), Thames said they could not enforce them to notify Thames about such work, but would chase them if they damage said pipes for the cost of repair (IE the same if they did notify them, except the neighbour does not have to pay the £153 odd pounds admin fee).

 

[dishman]

If your happy with the plans, they are clear and accurate and you are happy, then there should not be a problem.

If you are not or unsure then I suggest the party wall act may help.

One thing I would look at, is that if the wall is built on the boundary, then footings/foundations will most likely need to be dug on your side by 6+ inches. Some interpret the party wall act to only allow foundations on a neighbours side "only when necessary" (i.e. not just to get a bit more space).

Another consideration which your neighbour may not be aware of is gutter/eve overhang if it is a pitched roof. If the wall is up to/on the boundary, then there will defiantly be gutter overhang. This is not good practice and can store up issues for the future, even if there are none now. You should not allow any gutter overhang. So even if they are allowed (or you allow) foundations, they will still have to set it back to ensure the gutter is up to (not over) the boundary line.

I would suggest talking to your neighbour early, explain the party wall act to them, if they don't know about it already. It may prompt them to clarify everything with you. It is there to take pressure of both sides and if needed let an impartial surveyor ensure things are done properly.

There are up sides and downsides. Your neighbour may react badly as if you are trying to stop them doing it, but you should explain that it does not stop them from building, it just protects you both if anything goes wrong.

Basically your neighbour should serve a Section 1 Line of Junction notice 1 month before work begins. You have 14 days to either "agree" (in which case it is just a private agreement), "dissent" (disagree if you have concerns) with an agreed surveyor (if you get on and want to choose one surveyor), or "dissent" with your own surveyors each (this is much more expensive and usually pointless for small domestic extensions). The person building usually pays all the costs. An agreed surveyor usually costs £600-800. If you don’t respond after 14 days it is automatically assumed you disagree and you should get a surveyor.

In addition if any of your property is within 3 metres of their build they should also be serving a Section 6 notice (three metre rule). This enables you to be notified that their foundations may affect your property if their foundations are dug below yours.

Basically if you have concerns you should both agree on an impartial chartered surveyor (rics), and he will ensure the build complies with the law when building up to the boundary. It should protect you and them. It may only get messy if you do not get on and your get separate surveyors.

It is your right to get one if you want, but your neighbour needs to serve a party wall notice first. Wait until they do before your discuss surveyors etc.

It is best to clarify everything before work starts as it is much harder to undo after.

Good luck