Help with difficult neighbours and Party Wall Act

[Arrivalist]

I’ve never understood the desire to get every last inch/mm out of a property at the expense of neighbourly harmony.

Far better, imho, to build slightly smaller with a good design and internal layout than try to maximise the space to its absolute limits.

[Slow.Patrol]

One of the tings that attracted us to our current home was that it is slap bang in the middle of the plot.

We had friends who had a side wall that abutting the neighbour's garden. It was part of a barn conversion with solid walls. The neighbour then decided to fix a trellis to the wall and grow climbing plants up the wall. Our friends couldn't access the wall or even see it. The first they knew was when they had damp penetrating their house.

The neighbour was really obstructive and it took a few letters from surveyors and solicitors for her to remove the trellis.

[QuickQuack]

Karlsruhe said:

Just to be clear. I am more than happy to have further conciliatory meetings with the neighbours to find suitable compromise! When I handed in the notice I spoke to the neighbour and went through the plans. I have also had a further meeting with neighbour and daughter and I set this up with the builder so that they could both ask questions etc. My intention is to facilitate further meetings if need be.

The property we live, in to accommodate the second storey at the rear will be a dormer and the new roof will be raised 50 cm to accommodate this. The front roof will be the same existing height. From the front it will still occupy the same amount of land as ultimately it is an L shaped extension whereby the garage wall (at the boundary as per original build) will be longer and taller at the rear. From a vantage perspective looking from the top of the street it will still appear as a bungalow- certainly not a monstrosity! Also on our street there have been another 3 properties that have been extended considerably- it's not a precedent.

The distance between both properties to the boundary wall is circa 2 metres. I accept and understand the neighbour not giving me access if that is where I stand from a legal perspective (but wanted to check this), no issues (although admittedly not ideal for obvious reasons). It was just the daughter's insistence that I cannot build the extension as per plans, despite approval which flummoxed me.

You may need to be even more conciliatory and consider a compromise with your plans. The daughter is 100% correct, I'm afraid. If you want to build a new party wall astride the boundary, then you must have written consent of the adjoining neighbour. If you don't have written consent, it doesn't matter what planning permission you have, it doesn't matter what planning drawings have been approved, you can't build it. That's the legislation - Party Wall etc Act 1996 and HERE for the explanatory booklet . In such cases, the party wall must be built wholly on your land. You can potentially have planning consent for land you don't own. It doesn't give you the right to just plough in and build stuff without the consent of the landowner.

Also beware that any guttering, soffits, fascias etc., may not protrude into your neighbour's property over the boundary. That may have been a/the reason why they objected in the first place; it could stop or reduce the future development potential of their property if they allowed you to build astride the boundary, particularly when any roof furniture and structures are added above the wall itself. Plus, then they wouldn't be able to extend to the boundary without converting the properties to semi-detached from their current detached status and they would need to keep 2-3 ft within their boundary, and lose that from their development.

Think about it from their perspective - why should they allow you to do something which will potentially disadvantage them/their property in the future? This won't be just about the present time, it will be about what can happen years down the line, even when they're selling the property. Small things like this make a property less attractive to a family than another one without a neighbour right on the boundary without restricted development potential. These are all things you consider when you start thinking about objecting to such a request or agreeing to it. Conversely, you should also think about the impact of your extension and your request on your neighbours before you give them notice and speak to them.

[addey]

Quite a few of you referencing the party wall act keep saying "if you want to build astride the boundary...." but as far as I can see that's not the OP's intention? He has said he plans to build up to the boundary line? I know nothing about this stuff so no idea if that actually changes anything.

I'd say go for it, what if the OP relents and builds 3 feet from the boundary, then a few years down the line the neighbour (or a future neighbour) decides to build right up to the boundary on their side?

[Mr Pointy]

addey said:

Quite a few of you referencing the party wall act keep saying "if you want to build astride the boundary...." but as far as I can see that's not the OP's intention? He has said he plans to build up to the boundary line? I know nothing about this stuff so no idea if that actually changes anything.

I'd say go for it, what if the OP relents and builds 3 feet from the boundary, then a few years down the line the neighbour (or a future neighbour) decides to build right up to the boundary on their side?

I don't think the OP has said if he is building up to the boundary or across it - although there would/might still be the issues of projecting foundations & guttering.

I wonder if the OP has looked at the guidance on line as it seems to offer a lot of information:

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/prevent...

[ClaphamGT3]

Hi. Chartered Building Surveyor here and one of my areas of specialisation is party walls.

A lot of good advice has already been given, which I won't rehearse. As a guiding principle, it is worth remembering that the act exists to protect the developing party's rights to develop and to protect the adjoining party's rights to avoid injury to their interests.

As others have said, appoint a party wall surveyor and follow the process as they advise. Remember that you, as the developing party, will be liable for the costs of the adjoining party's PWS, subject to reasonableness. Leave the professionals to work up the PWA and don't get involved with your neighbours over it

[dickymint]

Mr Pointy said:

addey said:

Quite a few of you referencing the party wall act keep saying "if you want to build astride the boundary...." but as far as I can see that's not the OP's intention? He has said he plans to build up to the boundary line? I know nothing about this stuff so no idea if that actually changes anything.

I'd say go for it, what if the OP relents and builds 3 feet from the boundary, then a few years down the line the neighbour (or a future neighbour) decides to build right up to the boundary on their side?

I don't think the OP has said if he is building up to the boundary or across it - although there would/might still be the issues of projecting foundations & guttering.

I wonder if the OP has looked at the guidance on line as it seems to offer a lot of information:

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/prevent...

OP's first post says "we are building up to the boundary line."

[Gareth79]

OutInTheShed said:

cayman-black said:

I wonder how many neighbours fall out over planning permission a lot I should imaging some having every right and others just being ridiculous.

I wonder how many fall out with their architects etc.....

A friend fell out with theirs during a (large) loft conversion after the architect seemingly (somehow) didn't include the steelwork height in the headroom calculations. The solutions results in either having the steels protruding from the roof (I can't remember how that worked) or remove the roof, build the walls up and then replace the roof. The latter was chosen, but only after negotiating with the architect's insurer, meanwhile the builder went missing and they had to find somebody else to finish it, and they had a tin roof on the house for a year.

[Mr Pointy]

dickymint said:

OP's first post says "we are building up to the boundary line."

But what about the foundations?

[Elysium]

Mr Pointy said:

dickymint said:

OP's first post says "we are building up to the boundary line."

But what about the foundations?

Eccentric?

[Mandat]

Mr Pointy said:

dickymint said:

OP's first post says "we are building up to the boundary line."

But what about the foundations?

Foundations can reasonably project over the boundry line, into the neighbours land, as long as the projections are below ground level.

Alteratively, eccentric foundations can be used, if possible.

[Mr Pointy]

Mandat said:

Mr Pointy said:

dickymint said:

OP's first post says "we are building up to the boundary line."

But what about the foundations?

Foundations can reasonably project over the boundry line, into the neighbours land, as long as the projections are below ground level.

Alteratively, eccentric foundations can be used, if possible.

As I read it if the foundations are to cross the boundary then it can only be with the agreement of the neighbour which the OP seems unlikley to get so they would need to be non-normal & if that means they go deeper than those of the neighbour then he might hit the 3m issue.

[Mandat]

Mr Pointy said:

As I read it if the foundations are to cross the boundary then it can only be with the agreement of the neighbour which the OP seems unlikley to get so they would need to be non-normal & if that means they go deeper than those of the neighbour then he might hit the 3m issue.

That's not correct. Projecting foundations can extend into the neighbours property without requiring the neighbour's consent, as long as the foundations are below ground level.

[Vasco]

ClaphamGT3 said:

Hi. Chartered Building Surveyor here and one of my areas of specialisation is party walls.

A lot of good advice has already been given, which I won't rehearse. As a guiding principle, it is worth remembering that the act exists to protect the developing party's rights to develop and to protect the adjoining party's rights to avoid injury to their interests.

As others have said, appoint a party wall surveyor and follow the process as they advise. Remember that you, as the developing party, will be liable for the costs of the adjoining party's PWS, subject to reasonableness. Leave the professionals to work up the PWA and don't get involved with your neighbours over it

Quite - isn't that where it now goes ?

[Griffith4ever]

SmoothCriminal said:

Always puzzles me why people buy single story bungalows which there aren't a great deal of and then add second stories to it.

I thought the whole point of a bungalow was to be single story.

People have been " bungalow gobbling " for decades. They were built for older people, on larger plots (bjg front garden too usually). Older people die, younger people buy and increase its size, still having a big enough plot remaining.

My village is full of them and they are slowly being converted one by one.

[981Boxess]

I could have written your post. Before I even drew up any plans I had a friendly chat with my neighbour, explained what I had in mind and he said he had no problem with it at all. Plans were drawn up and sent in, then the objections started from 'someone', I couldn't work out who because it couldn't have been my neighbour because he had no problem with anything - right? Wrong, said neighbour was objecting and because all his objections were done so they were not visible I didn't know who. I then did a request through the freedom of information act and it didn't take long reading the heavily redacted documents that it was 100% him. It turns out he objects to just about anything that goes into planning in our area and he is well known to the council. We then had a 'chat' about everything, the cat was out of the bag, he was then free to be as difficult as possible and the next thing was the party wall issue.

Now as any party wall surveyor will tell you they work for the wall and not either party involved. You don't have to have one at all if as neighbours you work through it but obviously in my case that wasn't going to be. So although you can have just one PWS that acts for both parties (cheaper and easier) we ended up with two seperate PWSs and as I had to pay for both anyway my neighbour chose one that charged big bucks probably thinking he would take his side, no problem, thems are the rules. That actually worked in my favour because as his PWS wanted to do the minimum to earn the most he didn't take any time wasting nonsense from my neighbour. My advice would be get 2 PWSs and do not talk to your neighbours at all, let the PWSs get on with it, they speak the same language, have heard it all before and just want to get on with their work.

On the wider issue of building up to the boundary. Depending on your build, what you want, room sizes etc consider if you actually need to go right up to the boundary. Leaving a gap has all sorts of advantages from what your house looks like from down the road to getting access to the side for maintenance. Imagine what the buyer of your house if one day you move on will see when he walks up to it and consider that. What if someone buys your neighbour's house and does the same as you, you could then have noise issues you could have avoided. Sometimes less is more, in my case because of space that wasn't an option so I made sure there were no gutters that side that I would need to access etc.

Good luck with your neighbour, I have a great relationship with mine now after our 'chat' the few words he aims in my direction are very well chosen

[paulrockliffe]

QuickQuack said:

paddy1970 said:

Under the Party Wall etc. Act 1996, you are correct that there is no automatic right to erect a new wall astride the boundary without the adjoining owner's consent. According to section 1, which governs "New Building on Line of Junction," building owners must seek permission from adjoining owners if they intend to construct a new wall across the boundary line. The consent is necessary to ensure that both parties agree to the construction. If the adjoining owner objects to a wall being built astride the boundary, the new wall must be constructed entirely on the building owner's land.

Regarding access, section 8 (Rights of Entry) permits entry to adjoining land only after appropriate notice is given to the adjoining owner and occupier. The 14-day notice period applies unless an emergency arises, and it is an offence to obstruct someone legally entitled to enter under the Act.

However, statutory rights of access under the Act are strictly limited. They do not cover new walls unless consent has been obtained. Therefore, an adjoining owner is under no obligation to provide access for the construction of a new wall on the builder's property if they have formally objected to a shared wall across the boundary.

In summary, the Party Wall Act does not provide a legal basis for forcing access or the right to build a new wall astride the boundary without the adjoining owner's consent.

Thank you very much for confirming that I wasn't being an idiot.

You're both talking about a new Party Wall, but the OP was clear that there is an existing Party Wall, so you need to consider further whether what the OP is proposing would constitute a new wall under the Act or not before relying on that section.

[Elysium]

paulrockliffe said:

QuickQuack said:

paddy1970 said:

Under the Party Wall etc. Act 1996, you are correct that there is no automatic right to erect a new wall astride the boundary without the adjoining owner's consent. According to section 1, which governs "New Building on Line of Junction," building owners must seek permission from adjoining owners if they intend to construct a new wall across the boundary line. The consent is necessary to ensure that both parties agree to the construction. If the adjoining owner objects to a wall being built astride the boundary, the new wall must be constructed entirely on the building owner's land.

Regarding access, section 8 (Rights of Entry) permits entry to adjoining land only after appropriate notice is given to the adjoining owner and occupier. The 14-day notice period applies unless an emergency arises, and it is an offence to obstruct someone legally entitled to enter under the Act.

However, statutory rights of access under the Act are strictly limited. They do not cover new walls unless consent has been obtained. Therefore, an adjoining owner is under no obligation to provide access for the construction of a new wall on the builder's property if they have formally objected to a shared wall across the boundary.

In summary, the Party Wall Act does not provide a legal basis for forcing access or the right to build a new wall astride the boundary without the adjoining owner's consent.

Thank you very much for confirming that I wasn't being an idiot.

You're both talking about a new Party Wall, but the OP was clear that there is an existing Party Wall, so you need to consider further whether what the OP is proposing would constitute a new wall under the Act or not before relying on that section.

Karlsruhe said:

For context the existing garage is already on the boundary wall line and we are looking at increasing both height and length of the wall to accommodate the L shaped extension as we are having a dormer and larger kitchen and living area.

[LuckyThirteen]

Why not just offer them financial compensation?

Offer them £400/week while works are ongoing. 2 years max for you.....

[dickymint]

LuckyThirteen said:

Why not just offer them financial compensation?

Offer them £400/week while works are ongoing. 2 years max for you.....

£41600 quid are you the neighbour