Legal question - party wall shenanigans

[teddysnips]

My third and final post of the day!

As I may have mentioned elsethread, I've recently moved into my new house, = which is a small Victorian detached cottage in town. There are plans to bu= ild on the adjacent "yard" (actually a back garden currently used as a car = park) and, from what I make out of the plans (which aren't very well drawn = in my opinion), the new house will be physically joined onto the two houses= it sits between, thus at a stroke turning my house from a detached house i= nto an end-of-terrace. I've been reading on the Party Wall Act but I can't= seem to discover if I'm obliged to agree to this happening, or if I can si= mply refuse them permission to do this. If I AM obliged to do this, can I = insist on any provisions (such as underpinning, sound-proofing etc.) as the= house that's being proposed is not for the owner to live in but to sell or= , judging by the area, to let?

[Phil]

which is a small Victorian detached cottage in town. There are plans to build on the adjacent "yard" (actually a back garden currently used as a car park) and, from what I make out of the plans (which aren't very well drawn in my opinion), the new house will be physically joined onto the two houses it sits between, thus at a stroke turning my house from a detached house into an end-of-terrace. I've been reading on the Party Wall Act but I can't seem to discover if I'm obliged to agree to this happening, or if I can simply refuse them permission to do this. If I AM obliged to do this, can I insist on any provisions (such as underpinning, sound-proofing etc.) as the house that's being proposed is not for the owner to live in but to sell or, judging by the area, to let?

I'd repost this to uk.legal.moderated (don't cross post as it will be dropped)

[Kevin]

which is a small Victorian detached cottage in town. There are plans to build on the adjacent "yard" (actually a back garden currently used as a car park) and, from what I make out of the plans (which aren't very well drawn in my opinion), the new house will be physically joined onto the two houses it sits between, thus at a stroke turning my house from a detached house into an end-of-terrace. I've been reading on the Party Wall Act but I can't seem to discover if I'm obliged to agree to this happening, or if I can simply refuse them permission to do this. If I AM obliged to do this, can I insist on any provisions (such as underpinning, sound-proofing etc.) as the house that's being proposed is not for the owner to live in but to sell or, judging by the area, to let?

What does / did your solicitor have to say about it? It would be nice to think he'd asked the seller about such matters. Until you know what's already been agreed, I don't think there's much you can do, apart from perhaps asking the LA about planning permissions for the site.

[tim.....]

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You are obliged to enter into a party wall agreement with him

This should be drawn up in a way that protects all of your interests, though I can't see that underpinning is one of them

tim

[Bill Wright]

Does your property have rights of access for the maintenance of your side wall? I had a customer years ago who was able to insist on a narrow gap between the buildings because that right existed. Also, where exactly is the boundary relative to your wall? It might not be exactly where your wall is. My friend had a similar thing to this and the boundary (as defined by two fixed points 30m apart) did not run along the house wall but was at a very shallow angle to it, leaving a wedge shaped bit of ground varying in width from an inch to 6 inches along the side of the house. The neighbour couldn't claim they'd had the use of that area historically because it was just totally untended ground, with bits of brick on the ground that had demonstrably been there for 50 years.

Bill

[The Other Mike]

Just wonder what would happen if you had such a wall covered in Solar PV.

[RobertL]

d be drawn up in a way that protects all of your interests, though I can't= see that underpinning is one of them.

But they want to build a wall (with 1000mm+ foundations presumably) right n= ext to the OP's wall which, being victorian, probably has no foundations at= all. I think there is every chance that the PWA should specify underpinnin= g. It can also require that no load be put on the existign wall - i.e. th= eir structure must be self supporting. =20 IANAL Robert

[fred]

In article , The Other Mike writes

If the wall forms the boundary of your property you wouldn't have been allowed to it in the first place as the panels wouldn't be on your property, they would be overflying the neighbour's.

In theory you can't have anything on a boundary wall, not even a window, so if you ever have part of a plot of land to sell it's best not to mark the boundary with a wall but put it at least a meter away.

Not that any of this helps the o/p, the answer to that, I don't know.

[Tim Streater]

Having said this about the boundary wall ...

... you then suggest putting a meter on it!

[Man at B&Q]

------------------

Is he? I think the obligation is on the party doing the work. Where is the compulsion for the owner of the adjoining property? Yes, it would be foolish not to get a PWA.

MBQ

[Brian Gaff]

Should not this have shown up when a search was done, though?

Brian

[michael adams]

My third and final post of the day!

As I may have mentioned elsethread, I've recently moved into my new house, which is a small Victorian detached cottage in town. There are plans to build on the adjacent "yard" (actually a back garden currently used as a car park) and, from what I make out of the plans (which aren't very well drawn in my opinion), the new house will be physically joined onto the two houses it sits between, thus at a stroke turning my house from a detached house into an end-of-terrace. I've been reading on the Party Wall Act but I can't seem to discover if I'm obliged to agree to this happening, or if I can simply refuse them permission to do this. If I AM obliged to do this, can I insist on any provisions (such as underpinning, sound-proofing etc.) as the house that's being proposed is not for the owner to live in but to sell or, judging by the area, to let?

What you haven't confirmed is that your property definitely ends at the wall. Only that the other party may be acting on the assumption that it does, without actually checking.

It's conceivable that just so to cover such eventualities it was sometimes the practice to extend a property by a small amount onto any adjacent empty land. As has been pointed out elsewhere. As you've recently bought your house, the solicitor you employed when buying the property should be able to check this for you from the plans. If your property does end at the wall the very fact that they didn't point out this possibility to you - and the fact that planning permission must have already been granted for the adjacent land doesn't appear to reflect very well on them.

The solicitor's primary duty is to protect your interests not simply to fill in the correct forms.

michael adams

...

[Brian Gaff]

I'm not so sure about that, as down the road from me, a single dwelling owner successfully stopped a developer who owned the adjacent plot from making his house into a semi detached one about fi ve years or so back.

Brian

[Onetap]

On Tuesday, November 27, 2012 1:32:45 PM UTC, tim..... wrote: =20

You both are, but often it doesn't happen.

Go see a properly qualified RICS surveyor, who will take on the responsibil= ity for ensuring the structure does not damage your property. The side doin= g the work pay the bill under the PW Act. You need to serve the documents o= n the other side so that they don't crash ahead without approval.

He may be able to advise you whether you can object to the application or = whether you need legal advice.

The planning application will result in your being flooded with offers fro= m "Party Wall Surveyors". Do not sign any agreements with them, they are th= e scum of the earth and most have no qualifications.

[fred]

Not sure if that's been established yet, it may be a wall close to the boundary but not a boundary wall. As others have said, get the deeds/registered plan out and check.

I'll claim coordination rather than literacy problems, I end up having to retype half my the-s to replace teh-s.

[harry]

hould be drawn up in a way that protects all of your interests, though =A0I= can't see that underpinning is one of them.

next to the OP's wall which, being victorian, probably has no foundations = at all. I think there is every chance that the PWA should specify underpinn= ing. =A0 It can also require that no load be put on the existign wall - i.e= . their structure must be self supporting.

I agree with that. There was a recent thing on the TV where a complete building fell down due to excavations next to it. The usual thing is to insert a row of minipiles next to the existing building to prevent collapse before excavations commence. Expensive, they might not want to do it. There should be an engineers report on ground conditions the OP should ask to see. His insurance company may be interested too.

[tim.....]

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

well yes the party doing the work has to draw up the agreement

but my point is the law requires the OP, in principle, to agree to it, he can't say "no I'm not going to agree to that so you're now not allowed to do the work"

tim

[Tim Streater]

But I see no reason that you have to agree to an agreement that someone else has drawn up. You negotiate the terms [1], then you sign.

[1] A principle that seems to escape those in the public sector.

[michael adams]

As I may have mentioned elsethread, I've recently moved into my new house, which is a small Victorian detached cottage in town. There are plans to build on the adjacent "yard" (actually a back garden currently used as a car park) and, from what I make out of the plans (which aren't very well drawn in my opinion), the new house will be physically joined onto the two houses it sits between, thus at a stroke turning my house from a detached house into an end-of-terrace. I've been reading on the Party Wall Act but I can't seem to discover if I'm obliged to agree to this happening, or if I can simply refuse them permission to do this. If I AM obliged to do this, can I insist on any provisions (such as underpinning, sound-proofing etc.) as the house that's being proposed is not for the owner to live in but to sell or, judging by the area, to let?

...

Googling The Party Wall Act

The person intending to carryout the work must serve a written notice on the owners of the adjoining property at least two months before the intended start of the work to every neighbouring party giving details of the work to be carried out. Each neighbouring party should respond in writing giving consent or registering dissent - if a neighbouring party does nothing within 14 days of receiving

---------------------------------------------------------------- the notice, the effect is to put the notice into dispute.

--------------------------------------------------------

No work may commence until all neighbouring parties have

------------------------------------------------------ agreed in writing to the notice (or a revised notice).

----------------------------------------------------

's a Union Jack on the page so presumably this applies to the UK. Sometimes you can go to quote legislation from the Web only realise at the last minute it applies only to New South Wales, or the State of Nevada.

If you do a bit more checking I think you'll find you're entitled to hire your own surveyor and solicitor - especially if they're digging foundations and that the other side, the ones doing the building, have to pay all your costs. Apparently there are solicitors who specialise in this field, and they can maybe get you out of the hole the last solicitor appears to have landed you in.

michael adams

...

[GB]

The OP does not have to agree to anything. The developer is allowed, subject to planning permission, to build a new, self-supporting wall on his land. This wall can be touching the OP's wall, but not keyed into it. In practice, there needs to be sufficient room between the walls to allow maintenance, and I believe that is a planning issue. Alternatively, the two walls can be joined, so there is no need for maintenance.

The PWA has nothing to do with any of this. It simply requires that the OP's property is not affected by the works.