Party Wall Advice - Notices
So what are the rights of an adjoining owner who has just received a
Notice with regards proposed works to be undertaken by his neighbour
('the building owner)'? Can he simply refuse to allow the works to go
ahead?
The answer to that is not as straightforward as it may first appear. Listed below are various possibilities:
Q 1) The building owner has served notice to build an extension with the wall to be built wholly on the building owner's land but has stated in his notice that the foundations will straddle the boundary line. The adjoining owner is concerned about damage to the lawn of his back garden should the proposed wall be built.
A 1) The adjoining owner cannot prevent the wall being built wholly in the building owner's land, however he can usually insist that the foundations do not straddle the boundary line but rather, are constructed as 'eccentric' ones wholly on the land of the building owner. Only where the building owner can show that 'concentric' foundations, are necessary (which they are generally not, given the minimal loading involved with the construction of a ground floor extension), would this be allowed.
(Note: even with 'eccentric' foundations there will likely be damage to the adjoining owner's lawn and it will be for the parties to agree a compensation amount to reimburse the adjoining owner for his loss. If the parties cannot agree, the Surveyor(s) can be asked to make a determination.)
Q 2) The building owner has served notice to excavate within 3 m of the adjoining owner's foundations and to a deeper level to the foundations. The adjoining owner is concerned this will cause his building to subside.
A 2) The adjoining owner cannot prevent the building owner from undertaking such excavations but can insist on having his foundations underpinned before the works commence. If the building owner refuses to do so, the Surveyor(s) can be called upon to make a determination as to whether underpinning is necessary - usually with reference to an engineer's report.
(Note: underpinning of foundations can result in home insurance premiums rising for the adjoining owner. The adjoining owner my therefore be entitled to compensation from the building owner).
Q 3) The building owner is converting his loft space and the proposed work involves inserting heavy beams into the party wall. The adjoining owner is concerned that this could lead to failure of the party wall with resultant damage to both properties.
A 3) The adjoining owner cannot prevent the building owner from undertaking the works but can insist that an Award set out a methodology describing how the works can be undertaken so as to avoid damage occurring.
Q 4) The adjoining owner has previously raised a flank wall wholly on his side of his land to enclose on a rear extension. The building owner now proposes to enclose on this existing flank wall when building his own extension and has served notice of such.
A 4) A wall which is wholly on the land of one person is not a party wall but a private wall. The Party Wall Act does not have any provisions for serving Notice in order to make use of a private wall belonging to someone else. Such a Notice is therefore not valid. However, the parties are free to come to any agreement as a private matter between themselves to allow the use of such a wall - but such agreements are 'outside' of the Party Wall Act. The reasons why such permission may not be forthcoming are: noise transmission through the neighbour's wall could cause nuisance; once the wall is being used as a separating wall between two extensions it becomes a 'Party Structure' over which the neighbour has rights. Hence, if the Building Owner later decides to remove both flank walls of the extension he will by definition be removing the Party Structure and could have to pay the adjoining owner compensation for the nuisance.
Q 5) As per Q1 above, but with a slight difference. Say, the building owner has served notice to build an extension with the wall to be built half on the building owner's land and half on the adjoining owner's land i.e. straddling the boundary line. The adjoining owner is concerned about the loss of land in his garden if the building owner has his way.
A 5) Whether or not the building owner has a right to build a wall in this position will depend on whether there is an existing wall there or not. Where there is an existing garden wall built straddling the boundary line, the building owner also has the right to build a wall straddling the boundary line. The adjoining owner can later make use of this wall to enclose on an extension they later build but they would have to compensate the building owner for half the cost of the flank wall they are enclosing on. (We will explore this scenario in more detail in a subsequent post).
Q 6) My neighbour is constructing a basement using reinforced concrete pins and has served notice requesting permission to install 'special foundations'. What is this and can I withhold permission?
A 6) 'Special Foundations' are foundations that rely on steel rods for their structural rigidity. The Party Wall Act views this foundation type as particularly intrusive and without the adjoining owner's permission the building owner may not build using such 'special foundations'. Modern day 'special foundations' are unlikely to be intrusive yet the rules remain the same as when they were written.
The answer to that is not as straightforward as it may first appear. Listed below are various possibilities:
Q 1) The building owner has served notice to build an extension with the wall to be built wholly on the building owner's land but has stated in his notice that the foundations will straddle the boundary line. The adjoining owner is concerned about damage to the lawn of his back garden should the proposed wall be built.
A 1) The adjoining owner cannot prevent the wall being built wholly in the building owner's land, however he can usually insist that the foundations do not straddle the boundary line but rather, are constructed as 'eccentric' ones wholly on the land of the building owner. Only where the building owner can show that 'concentric' foundations, are necessary (which they are generally not, given the minimal loading involved with the construction of a ground floor extension), would this be allowed.
(Note: even with 'eccentric' foundations there will likely be damage to the adjoining owner's lawn and it will be for the parties to agree a compensation amount to reimburse the adjoining owner for his loss. If the parties cannot agree, the Surveyor(s) can be asked to make a determination.)
Q 2) The building owner has served notice to excavate within 3 m of the adjoining owner's foundations and to a deeper level to the foundations. The adjoining owner is concerned this will cause his building to subside.
A 2) The adjoining owner cannot prevent the building owner from undertaking such excavations but can insist on having his foundations underpinned before the works commence. If the building owner refuses to do so, the Surveyor(s) can be called upon to make a determination as to whether underpinning is necessary - usually with reference to an engineer's report.
(Note: underpinning of foundations can result in home insurance premiums rising for the adjoining owner. The adjoining owner my therefore be entitled to compensation from the building owner).
Q 3) The building owner is converting his loft space and the proposed work involves inserting heavy beams into the party wall. The adjoining owner is concerned that this could lead to failure of the party wall with resultant damage to both properties.
A 3) The adjoining owner cannot prevent the building owner from undertaking the works but can insist that an Award set out a methodology describing how the works can be undertaken so as to avoid damage occurring.
Q 4) The adjoining owner has previously raised a flank wall wholly on his side of his land to enclose on a rear extension. The building owner now proposes to enclose on this existing flank wall when building his own extension and has served notice of such.
A 4) A wall which is wholly on the land of one person is not a party wall but a private wall. The Party Wall Act does not have any provisions for serving Notice in order to make use of a private wall belonging to someone else. Such a Notice is therefore not valid. However, the parties are free to come to any agreement as a private matter between themselves to allow the use of such a wall - but such agreements are 'outside' of the Party Wall Act. The reasons why such permission may not be forthcoming are: noise transmission through the neighbour's wall could cause nuisance; once the wall is being used as a separating wall between two extensions it becomes a 'Party Structure' over which the neighbour has rights. Hence, if the Building Owner later decides to remove both flank walls of the extension he will by definition be removing the Party Structure and could have to pay the adjoining owner compensation for the nuisance.
Q 5) As per Q1 above, but with a slight difference. Say, the building owner has served notice to build an extension with the wall to be built half on the building owner's land and half on the adjoining owner's land i.e. straddling the boundary line. The adjoining owner is concerned about the loss of land in his garden if the building owner has his way.
A 5) Whether or not the building owner has a right to build a wall in this position will depend on whether there is an existing wall there or not. Where there is an existing garden wall built straddling the boundary line, the building owner also has the right to build a wall straddling the boundary line. The adjoining owner can later make use of this wall to enclose on an extension they later build but they would have to compensate the building owner for half the cost of the flank wall they are enclosing on. (We will explore this scenario in more detail in a subsequent post).
Q 6) My neighbour is constructing a basement using reinforced concrete pins and has served notice requesting permission to install 'special foundations'. What is this and can I withhold permission?
A 6) 'Special Foundations' are foundations that rely on steel rods for their structural rigidity. The Party Wall Act views this foundation type as particularly intrusive and without the adjoining owner's permission the building owner may not build using such 'special foundations'. Modern day 'special foundations' are unlikely to be intrusive yet the rules remain the same as when they were written.
BH Party Wall Surveyors
is a London-based party wall surveying company offering advice and
party wall services to building owners and adjoining owners. Readers
should always take their own professional advice and not rely on the
information provided here particularly given that no two situations are
identical. www.bhpwsurveyors.co.uk
