Neighbours built over our property - need legal agreement

[Phil Pascoe]

Trigaaar - the cost should be all his.

 

[SurreyHills]

As others have said contact Building Control. If they advise that it should come down you can always approach your neighbour and offer a compromise - it can stay if he pays for your solicitor costs to put together some form of legal agreement that it is temporary and may need to be removed if you decide to sell you property and/or he sells his.

 

[Triggaaar]

Any chance of a photo?

Maybe.

Trigaaar - the cost should be all his.

No question. He'll either pay, or take it down. I'm not wanting to make money from it or be a pain to the neighbours, but I'm also not wanting to be stuck with it with no choice.

As others have said contact Building Control. If they advise that it should come down you can always approach your neighbour and offer a compromise - it can stay if he pays for your solicitor costs to put together some form of legal agreement that it is temporary and may need to be removed if you decide to sell you property and/or he sells his.

That's exactly what I'm after.

And I'd like planning for an extension at some point (even more reason not to fall out). I could go for planning, and then once I have it point out the Planning/Building control have told me their work should come down (and follow your advice).

 

[mind_the_goat]

This sounds like an agreement that would have to be assigned to the property so any new owner would be aware of it. Sound like a minefield if you try to do it without professional legal advice.

 

[cambournepete]

I would also imagine if the wall has been built sited in the centre of the footing to spec that those footings also extend on to you land by more than the overhang of the gutter.

I've just had another look - I don't know if they had many footings to do, as they (mostly) built on top of an existing wall.

In which case I'd be worried about the depth of the footings and their ability to hold the new wall.
Out neighbour in the UK had a single storey extension built and the foundations had to be 6' deep. I think they have to be strong enough to take two storeys (in case they want to expand upwards later).

Talk to building control and planning.

 

[Jake]

This is a party wall issue at heart. You might get some help from the council on br or pp but you might well not.

 

[Triggaaar]

I would also imagine if the wall has been built sited in the centre of the footing to spec that those footings also extend on to you land by more than the overhang of the gutter.

I've just had another look - I don't know if they had many footings to do, as they (mostly) built on top of an existing wall.

In which case I'd be worried about the depth of the footings and their ability to hold the new wall.

I can't see them extending up later, it's a mansion.

This is a party wall issue at heart. You might get some help from the council on br or pp but you might well not.

I was thinking it's like party wall, and architects deal with that sort of stuff.

 

[Triggaaar]

Any chance of a photo?

Here you go.
The original spec was for it to be glass. When they rendered it and put the lead over our side, I asked if they would paint the render white (so there's more light on our side, as their wall is south facing) and they said they would. Recently when I asked, they said they weren't going to bother, as it would need maintaining.

 

[Doug B]

Whilst not as bad as I thought it would be I would definitely want something sorting with that straight away, give it a couple of years & at best your side of the wall will be badly stained & at worst the face of some of the bricks could be lost due to frost damage.

Plus it looks bloody awful :shock:

 

[nanscombe]

I may not be an expert but ...

Why couldn't that lead flashing be made into a "U" shaped channel / gutter and the water directed into their down pipe, or at least away from your wall?



At worst, remove the lead from "your" wall, it might be worth a bob or two. :lol:

 

[RogerP]

You could easily catch and tear clothing on that corner edge, also it looks just about child head/eye height. plus it looks the worst sort of amateur bodge job.

 

[defsdoor]

If the original spec for that wall was to be glass they have very likely breached planning consent. The council will have most likely insisted on it being glass to ensure you had enough light. If they said they would paint it and are now not bothering I'd suggest they are taking advantage of your (so far) good will.

That being said - I can't see that run off making much difference - theres very little rain likely to run down their wall onto the lead - most of the rain would be what hits it direct.

 

[RobinBHM]

If the wall straddles the boundary, then I think it is a party fence wall. I would have thought any alteration would have required a party wall notice being issued.

Also if the neighbours foundations are within 3 metres of your house, this also requires a party wall notice if the neighbours extension footings are deeper than your house footings (I think?).

Party wall agreements, I don't think are council issues. Im not sure if this issue contravenes any planning or building regs. Certainly there are building regs guidelines for dealing with with discharging rainwater -not onto a neighbours land! Any rain hitting the side of the extension can only end up your side.

In reality I dont think anybody thought about the problem of weathering the small gap between the extension and the garden wall, I expect the builder came up with that as a solution later on -and an obvious place to stop the rendering and hide light weight blocks below. Its certainly an eyesore for you and not an acceptable solution. You should have been consulted before constructing, as a matter of courtesy if nothing else.

If a gap of a 100mm or so was left, this could just have been left open and a French drain or sloping concrete with a gully constructed so any water would run away. I have done this on similar projects.

 

[Triggaaar]

If the original spec for that wall was to be glass they have very likely breached planning consent. The council will have most likely insisted on it being glass to ensure you had enough light.

Although I never knew about it, they got planning for a Non Material Amendment.

If they said they would paint it and are now not bothering I'd suggest they are taking advantage of your (so far) good will.

Definitely.

That being said - I can't see that run off making much difference - theres very little rain likely to run down their wall onto the lead - most of the rain would be what hits it direct.

Yes I don't think there's much either. But I don't want it to be an issue in the future - eg, causing staining on our wall, or being a problem when we sell.

If the wall straddles the boundary, then I think it is a party fence wall. I would have thought any alteration would have required a party wall notice being issued.

Yep, but even with a party wall notice (which they didn't get) they shouldn't be sending anything over to my side,

If a gap of a 100mm or so was left, this could just have been left open and a French drain or sloping concrete with a gully constructed so any water would run away. I have done this on similar projects.

I don't think they could have easily done that, due to they way it was before they did any work - there used to be a glass wall there, presumably with block below.

 

[Jake]

There should have been a party wall agreement on the capping over and drainage off the party wall, but I doubt that the result would have been a requirement to drain towards their side in that situation. The detailing could be a lot more attractive and some sort of more designed drip detail would have been good so less just runs down the wall but the picture isn't anything like as bad as I imagined it would be. Ugly, but not exactly actionable. However, the lack of a party wall agreement gives you some leverage though to get what improvements you want. But, it's difficult to enforce if no notice is served in the first place as the remedy is an injunction (completely impractical £££££££££). So while you can grandstand a bit about it, be aware that you can't push it too far as when it comes to it it is unlikely you would actually do anything.

 

[Triggaaar]

There should have been a party wall agreement on the capping over and drainage off the party wall, but I doubt that the result would have been a requirement to drain towards their side in that situation.

Really!? You sound very confident, but I find that extremely hard to believe. I don't see how a council can demand that you let the neighbours use your property.

But, it's difficult to enforce if no notice is served in the first place as the remedy is an injunction (completely impractical £££££££££). So while you can grandstand a bit about it, be aware that you can't push it too far as when it comes to it it is unlikely you would actually do anything.

If a neighbours tree branch comes over my fence, I can cut it and pass it back. If push came to shove, I'd do the same with the lead.

 

[Baldhead]

[/quote]If a neighbours tree branch comes over my fence, I can cut it and pass it back. If push came to shove, I'd do the same with the lead.[/quote]

I am not 100% certain but if a neighbours tree branch comes over your fence, yes you can cut it back to the boundary, but you cannot simply pass it back, my understand of the law is you must ask if they want the cutting, they can refuse, and if so you must dispose of the branch yourself. If you simply put it back into their garden in theory you are fly tipping.

We have had problem neighbours for years, the information I have given above comes from a legal forum I have used in the past.

HTH

Baldhead

 

[Jake]

There should have been a party wall agreement on the capping over and drainage off the party wall, but I doubt that the result would have been a requirement to drain towards their side in that situation.

Really!? You sound very confident, but I find that extremely hard to believe. I don't see how a council can demand that you let the neighbours use your property.

It's nothing to do with the council. The Party Wall Act gives neighbours statutory rights to do things to party walls including a party fence wall like that, subject to serving notices and going through the resolution procedures (or reaching agreement). So if they had gone through the proper procedure, you'd have been given a notice and then either a joint surveyor or a surveyor for each party would have reached a decision and made a binding award. The purpose is to stop neighbours preventing development, while controlling how the development affects those neighbours. The neighbour could have have applied to take down that wall completely and rebuild it as the wall for his extension and would almost certainly have been given permission to do that. I doubt (that's hardly certainty) that surveyors would think it reasonable to make the top of the party fence wall drain towards the extension wall - the vertical wall won't add much to the water coming off the top of the wall especially as the gutter overhangs it. You've have always had the water coming off the top of the wall, or half of it. So there's not much difference.

 

[Stimpi]

It does not matter about verbal agreements less than 12 years old.
Your boundary is a line of no thickness which goes up to infinity to space and goes downwards the same unless there is a mining or services wayleave.
What is on your side can be removed by you as long as you do not damage it and you must return it to is owner.
Contact Building Control send a solicitors letter Monday morning.

 

[Triggaaar]

It's nothing to do with the council. The Party Wall Act gives neighbours statutory rights to do things to party walls including a party fence wall like that, subject to serving notices and going through the resolution procedures (or reaching agreement). So if they had gone through the proper procedure, you'd have been given a notice and then either a joint surveyor or a surveyor for each party would have reached a decision and made a binding award. The purpose is to stop neighbours preventing development, while controlling how the development affects those neighbours. The neighbour could have have applied to take down that wall completely and rebuild it as the wall for his extension and would almost certainly have been given permission to do that. I doubt (that's hardly certainty) that surveyors would think it reasonable to make the top of the party fence wall drain towards the extension wall - the vertical wall won't add much to the water coming off the top of the wall especially as the gutter overhangs it. You've have always had the water coming off the top of the wall, or half of it. So there's not much difference.

I am surprised by your opinion, that wasn't how I thought it worked. I've used party wall agreements on things like loft extensions, but I can't see why a neighbour would ever have to take your excess water, when it would be normal for you to just extend a few inches less and take it yourself. I've built close to party walls myself, I wouldn't have expected to be able to do that. Although it's not much water, I don't see why I should have it on my path. I'll ask my architect at some point, as he deals with party walls, and see what he says.

It does not matter about verbal agreements less than 12 years old.
Your boundary is a line of no thickness which goes up to infinity to space and goes downwards the same unless there is a mining or services wayleave.
What is on your side can be removed by you as long as you do not damage it and you must return it to is owner.
Contact Building Control send a solicitors letter Monday morning.

I don't want to cause trouble on Monday, I'd rather apply for our own extensions etc first.