Invasion of airspace

[HS]

Have looked all over the www for info on this one without success.

Situation is this. Neighbour's existing extension (two storey, flat roof) is built right up to my boundary (bottom of my garden, side of his property). Fine so far. Neighbour has applied for a loft extension which will see his hipped (pitched) roof extended over his (flat roof) extension. Fine up to a point, as a hipped roof is visually more attractive. However, because the existing wall is built right on the boundary, the soffits, eaves and guttering of the extended hipped roof will project into my airspace.

Spoke to the planning officer handling the application, wondering if they had overlooked the fact that my airspace was to be invaded. Was told that this is not a planning consideration. Any objection to the application on these grounds would not be considered.

Was told further that this is a matter between me and my neighbour to sort out -if the neighbour goes ahead and builds in accordance with the planning permission granted by the council, I have to take legal action against him.

Can this be correct?? My neighbour needs to observe the requirements of the Party Wall Act, but how can the planning people approve such a thing in the first place? (All the more extraordinary since a couple of years ago when I built my own extension, I was required to set it back from my boundary so that the eaves and guttering did not project over the pavement!)

Any and all input from your fine brains would be appreciated.

HS

[Daytona]

Can't help, but the Boundary Problems website is good for this sort of problem. Link on my webpage

Daytona

[Old Bill]

Well, this happened to a good friend of mine who was the person having the new extension built. When the potential intrusion was pointed out, he had to have the building put on hold while the plans were altered to keep the extension wholly within his boundary. Cost a packet. Why can't the roof of the extension be set back enough so everything is on his side? If the neighbour won't play ball you could threaten to apply for permission to build right up to your side of the boundary which would block his new soffit etc. The other problem for him is if it does spread over your side, he will have to ask for access to clear any blocked gutters etc While this cannot reasonably be refused, a lot a damage could be caused by rainwater until it is convienent for you to allow access :-)

[Mike Taylor]

Your BCO was wrong Your neighbour can only build on his side of the boundary and for technical purposes the boundary goes vertically down and up form the ground. The foundations have to be on his property so does any overhang, gutters, tiles, window catches etc. You need to go backto your BCO and check the plans of your neighbour's extension then talk to the BCO.

[Lobster]

I agree entirely; but surely this is a Planning issue, nothing to do with Building Control?

David

[PeteM]

HS posted

This is true. While it sounds odd, the reasoning is as follows: You think (rightly) that your neighbour can't do this without your permission, because it's your land. But actually it often happens that people apply for planning permission related to land that isn't theirs. The most common example is when a developer wants to buy land to build on, but won't do it unless he knows he can get planning permission: so he has to apply for then permission *before* he buys the land.

So from the planning officer's POV, ownership of land is irrelevant. All they are required to do is look at the *planning* (ie public interest) aspects of the building.

Right. But that would be messy. If you really don't object too much to his plans, one solution is to say to your neighbour, "This is my land, you don't have the right to build this, and I'll sue you if you do it without permission. However, if you agree to pay me X thousand pounds in advance, and Y hundred pounds a year afterwards, then I'll grant you rights to do it."

[Peter]

It is a 'trespass' issue which you have to handle yourself and may also be a planning issue in that planning consent may be required for the encroaching extensions and depending on planning laws, the Council may not be permitted to give consent for such a trespassing item unless the other owner agrees. Hence you may be able to get the council to deny the consent. However you may also need to take action yourself.

The property owner owns the air space and the space underneath the ground, although many laws allow ocupancy by others e.g. aeroplanes flying over. A neighbour also has temporary access rights (AFAIK) for boundary wall maintenance. There may also be 'party wall' agreements which should be part of title deeds.

Having said that, if your neighbour encroaches on your air space he is potentially in big trouble, especially if he has been warned. Your remedy is to require the encroachments to be removed. If there has been an encroachment for decades (especially where both properties have changed hands in the meantime), it may be that as a matter of Equity - a Court may adjust the boundary.

The first thing to do is to advise the neighbour in writing that you consider his extensions will encroach and hence be a trespass - send by registered mail or personally deliver it (with a friend). Ask for an acknowledgement that there will be no encroachment.

If no acknowledgement, bite the bullet on money and get a solicitor to send a similar letter - it will be money well worth spent. I won't mention the next stage, I doubt it will be necessary.

[Jeff]

AIUI - the Party Wall Act allows part of the footings to be on the neighbours property in order to build a wall upto the boundary

Regards Jeff

[Broadback]

If this is true, and I am not disputing it, why has a chap I know had his planning permission refused three times by Stretford because of possible encroachment onto his neighbours land? Finally he had to get a boundary surveyor in to mark the boundaries.

[Jeff]

I am in the process of building up to the boundary and was told by the planning officer that the gutters etc could not overhang the boundary, there are some round here that are built with a wall higher than the gutter height so you end up with a valley where you gutter should be. ( there has got to be a name for this ? )

Regards Jeff

[Doctor Evil]

A few eves hanging over your property by a few inches and the likes way high up does not affect you in any way. In fact, if it is done properly it would make the pace look good. Ever tried being a decent neighbour.

_________________________________________ Usenet Zone Free Binaries Usenet Server More than 120,000 groups Unlimited download

to open account

[Doctor Evil]

And the side of his wall is heavily stained and you are the only one who looks at it, as it is out of view of him. Being a good civilised neighbour helps for all parties

_________________________________________ Usenet Zone Free Binaries Usenet Server More than 120,000 groups Unlimited download

to open account

[Doctor Evil]

If the overhangs are ugly and obtrusive, you could knock them down as they are being built and give the materials back to him. It should not come to this as a talk with the neighbour will bring up good results usually. If you think it is ugly, get him to put nice soffits, barge boards, etc.

_________________________________________ Usenet Zone Free Binaries Usenet Server More than 120,000 groups Unlimited download

to open account

[Hugo Nebula]

On Fri, 4 Mar 2005 19:31:32 -0000, a particular chimpanzee named "Mike Taylor" randomly hit the keyboard and produced:

Two points:

1. The OP only talked about Planning, not Building Control.

1. There is no such prohibition in the Building Regulations about building over boundaries. There are requirements relating to fire spread and combustible materials on or near the boundaries, but it's not for the BCO to determine where they are. IANAL, but AFAIK any matters of trespass, etc., are civil matters.

[Hugo Nebula]

On Sat, 5 Mar 2005 11:56:41 -0000, a particular chimpanzee named "Jeff" randomly hit the keyboard and produced:

Parapet.

[Doctor Evil]

So, if the intrusion is ugly, out of character, etc, you just knock it down as it is being built over the property line and give them the materials back. They will soon change their tack.

_________________________________________ Usenet Zone Free Binaries Usenet Server More than 120,000 groups Unlimited download

to open account

[Doctor Evil]

A house that has an end gable wall higher than the roof and follows the pitched roof line and is higher by about 6 inches all around, looks good. Some railway cottages had this sort of arrangement..

_________________________________________ Usenet Zone Free Binaries Usenet Server More than 120,000 groups Unlimited download

to open account

[hsREMOVECAPS]

I don't entirely disagree with you, although the overhang will be about twenty inches and you have incorrectly presumed that I have a problem with my neighbour. On the contrary...

However I am concerned firstly with the principle that the Planning authorities can seemingly permit a structure which could give rise to future legal actions between the applicant and his neighbours. Secondly I am thinking of the (distant?) future when the planning rules may permit development of a building abutting on to the neighbour's property - what happens then?

By the way thank you, one and all, for your valid contributions - most interesting and useful.

HS

[Ian Stirling]

"I agree to pay X the sum of one pound a year, for the right to construct a portion of a roof overhanging Xs property, as shown in diagrams A,B,C Any subsequent modifications to the structure will not exceed indicated lines on the diagrams, or X is entitled to remove either any violating portions, or the structure as a whole up to the property line, at my cost."

?

[Broadback]

The other, possibly major problem will be if you come to sell the house. Friendly arrangements are all well and good while the friends remain a) Friendly. b) Next door neighbours. I have certainly seen major problems in cases such as this. It cost my son in law a lot of money and agro to sort one out. Even now after settlement there is a nasty taste remaining.