Roof - whose side is it?

[romic]

I live in a mid terrace house which is on a slope. The houses in the terrace are stepped up about 2 feet above each other. This means that there is about a 2 feet piece of wall between my (lower) neighbour's roof and my roof. The wall is my part of the house and means that the upper two feet of my loft wall is exposed to the elements.

I am going to have my roof renewed and I also want to have the wall re-rendered. When it is raining with the wind blowing hard on my wall, my neighbour has problems with some rain running down from the wall and into his loft. I don't know what the seal is between my wall and his roof - if it is flashing, or just a cement fillet at the base of the wall.

Who would be responsible for repairing the seal - my neighbour or myself?

I assume if it is just a cement fillet, then it would be repaired as part of the rendering work. If it is flashing, I don't know if it would or not.

My neighbour is happy to pay for the work to be done if it is his responsibility. Likewise, I'm quite happy to pay for it if it's my responsibility.

Roger

[Laurence Payne]

You want a legal ruling, or common sense?

It's the joint between the two properties. You both get benefit. Split the cost.

Much rubbish is talked about this sort of thing, particularly in respect of fences between properties. You're fortunate to be on amicable terms with your neighbour.

[george (dicegeorge)]

Get a copy of the deeds.

But when the deeds are a bit blurry like mine are how do we go about amending them more precisely, (if both parties want this done) without paying lawyers megabucks?

[g]

[Laurence Payne]

Which are highly unlikely to go into detail regarding who owns roof flashing at the junction with the adjoining property.

You don't. You rely on the common-sense principle that something of mutual benefit is a mutual responsibility. If a dispute arises, you just pay for it yourself. This will be considerably cheaper than any legal remedy.

[dennis]

I would want flashing.

You could just share the cost.

[romic]

Thanks for the comments on this.

There are different options:

1 I have the rendering done and pay for it myself as the rendering is of benefit to me. If his roof still leaks, it could be argued that it's his responsibility as it doesn't affect me 2 I have the rendering done and ensure flashing on his side is done at the same time and pay for all myself 3 I have all the work done and work out a cost for the flashing (if the cost is separate) and he pays for that.

I expect it will all depend on how much the work for the flashing will cost. Luckily I get on well with my neighbour, so we should be able to sort something out.

Roger

[Falco]

And just to add to the confusion:

Don't forget the Party Wall Act 1996 - before you start the rendering job!

As a matter of interest, the wall above your neighbours roof belongs to you and you can do as you wish with it, but your neighbour can (with your permission - or on application to the court, without your permission) insert a lead flashing into your wall (at his expense, and to include making good any damage and later maintenance) to protect his property from damp penetration.

BTW, the Party Wall statement at the beginning is in fact a 'red herring' in this case, but any part of that wall below the neighbours roof-line will fall into that act.

In my opinion, it has to have flashing, so why not let him pay for the lead, the cutting out of the joints and the fitting of the lead - and you simply pay for the rendering? Job done and everybody satisfied!

Falco

[Dave Liquorice]

3 Seems the sensible and amicable approach. It might be worth getting your roofer to look at the state of your neighbours roof before work starts. There is little point in either of you spending a few hundred quid on nice new lead flashing is the roof needs to be stripped and replaced.

There is such a bit of law called the Party Wall Act. I suspect you really don't want to go digging through that unless you want to feed a lawyers family for a year or two...

[Robert Laws]

What makes you think it is your wall? Surely this is a party wall. isn't it just teh uipward continuation of the wall that separates the two houses further down?

The boundary plane runs up the middle of it. Surely the repointing and flashing on your neighbours side of the party wall is the responsibility of your neighbour. You are responsible for those things on the wall of the next house up.

Robert

Robert

[romic]

Swings and roundabouts I suppose. Faulty rendering could cause problems for me if water decided to seep through the exposed wall, whereas a faulty seal affects him.

When my other adjacent neighbour's roof was re-tiled, they rendered the wall my side.

Having looked at the seal on that side, it would appear to be just a cement fillet. Looking at the neighbour's side, that just appears to be a cement fillet as well, which will be replaced when the rendering is done. I've spoken to him and he's happy with that to be replaced and no flashing. I've got a roofer coming round at some point to give an estimate for the work, so we'll see what he says.

Roger

[Dave Plowman (News)]

There could and should be soakers underneath which aren't visible. That's not to say there are - plenty of cowboys leave them out.

Cement fillets always give problems since the roof expands differently from the wall causing them to crack. Remove them and use lead flashing. Sure it costs more but then a proper job usually does, initially.

[Chris George]

I agree with Robert I think the wall is a party wall up to its top regardless of who gets benefit or not

Party wall act should therefore (absent any more expert opinion) I suspect apply

Thus if you want to do the work - you pay and vice versa

Personally, I think the common sense approach of sharing has clear merit Chris

[Falco]

A party wall is defined as where two buildings abut it on either side - and the case of the OP, the wall that 'sticks' up above the neighbours roof level is *NOT* a party wall (because only *ONE* building is 'abutted' to that particular part of the external wall), and as this forms the end of his property (his roof covers it) then it belongs to him - and the Party Wall Act 1996 does not apply here (unless of course amendments have been introduced since I last involved with this quite some time ago).

IIRC, see the Party Wall Act 1996, S.20 (or thereabouts).

Only as far at it remains under the neighbours external roof line - see above.

As I said in my previous post, it is far simpler to get a reasonable agreement for the OP to pay for the rendering and for his neighbour to pay for the flashing materials and fixing of them.

But as Dave Plowman (News) said, "There could and should be soakers underneath which aren't visible" - and these will extend up the external wall for a short way - and would be covered with the new render (mixed with a waterproofer) and a 'bell drip' formed to push the rain away from the wall and onto the roof over the top of the soakers (presuming that these are actually fitted).

All good fun eh?

Falco

[romic]

Having had a look at the wall from the front of the house where there is less of the original rendering left, it does indeed look like there is some type of flashing that is fitted, going from the wall to under the tiles - presumably this is what you mean by soakers. If so, then the new rendering should sort the problem out and reseal everything.

Roger