PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING
Hello Forumites! In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non-MoneySaving matters are not permitted per the Forum rules. While we understand that mentioning house prices may sometimes be relevant to a user's specific MoneySaving situation, we ask that you please avoid veering into broad, general debates about the market, the economy and politics, as these can unfortunately lead to abusive or hateful behaviour. Threads that are found to have derailed into wider discussions may be removed. Users who repeatedly disregard this may have their Forum account banned. Please also avoid posting personally identifiable information, including links to your own online property listing which may reveal your address. Thank you for your understanding.Public Sewers in Garden
Options
Comments
-
It usually means that. Depending on the size of the foundations here, they might be considered to put an extra loading on the sewer, but as my post indicated, it's unlikely.build over means what it says, you build something which cannot easily be dug up because it's an enclosed building.
In any event, the solicitors involved aren't qualified to decide, nor would they normally visit the property, so I'm wondering where the OP's got this idea from, unless it's for the kick-back.
0 -
Thanks all.
It really does seem to be a grey area. I think I might try getting a friend to call Thames Water and see what is said.
I can't imagine a Solicitor is qualified to make the decision but I had hoped they would have seen this situation before and be working in our interest... naive, maybe.0 -
if you read the link i posted you will see that it now not allowed to have manholes inside buildings any more. A conservatory is a building in that context. Naturally that was not the case in the past and I, for example, decided against a property where the entire downstairs had been made open plan: conservatory, kitchen and dining area. As it was a repossession there was no floor covering so, aside from the obvious freezing cold nature of such an open expanse, I also had a lovely view of the manhole sitting in the middle of the conservatory and, like the poster above, the thought of "eruptions" directly in to the kitchen and thence onwards to the rest of the downstairs saw me exit stage left, rapidly.Rosy_Apple wrote: »:eek:
That is vile. I think manhole covers are quite common in gardens though so I will hope that is a rare case!
That was a build over.
The terraced house I subsequently purchased has public sewers running under under the concrete footpath running across the width of all 6 houses which provides the path to each person's back door. Not a build over.0 -
This doesn't seem any different from our estate , where some houses have manholes on their drives. Some are tarmac drives , as laid by the builders,while others, like us, have replaced this with brick or slabs.
We had a problem, with blocked drains, which rods traced back to next door, where it turned out that extension builders had allowed rubble to fall into the drain when adding a downstairs toilet.
The, then, neighbours at first refused us access to look down the manhole, but the water company, said that they could be refused ,even if they wanted to dig up the drive.
They sent an inspector who demanded that the builders return and remedy the situation.0 -
A build over agreement is for foundations that could interfere with the sewer. It forms part of building regulations when building an extension. You don't get a build over agreement finalised without building regs and you don't get building regs without the initial agreement.
I have never and would never apply for a build over agreement for a patio. It does not require building regs. How deep are these 'foundations'? It sounds like what I would call a 'slab', not a foundation but you aren't said how deep they are or even why this has come to your solicitor's attention?
I certainly would not be offering buyers an indemnity policiy for building over something which has not been built over to an extent where it could potentially interfere with the sewer pipes.
Accessing the drains to replace them would be a case of lifting the patio, not demolishing an extension which holds value and is an integral part of the house. TW would have a legal right to access them - trying to gain access through an extension is a little different to lifting a patio!
I am heavily inclined to agree with the vendor's solicitor, that your solicitor is going over the top.
What I don't know the answer to is whether Thames Water would replace a patio that they lifted but that isn't what the indemnity would be for, is it? You can ask TW directly what happens in that case as it will be something they deal with on a daily basis. My experience of other utilities is that they replace what was there before they started digging (in our case, block paving).
You can ask TW whatever you like if you aren't giving specific addresses. I think that would be an idea as we probably aren't to lay your mind at rest entirely.Everything that is supposed to be in heaven is already here on earth.
0 -
freeisgood wrote: »Another word of warning, we knew someone who had a property with the man holes in a conservatory in the back of the property, there was a blockage and the whole thing full of raw sewage exploded into their property/garden. I don't need so say anymore.
That is why build over agreements exist.
Conservatories don't require building regulations usually, but if you are building near to a sewer, which you clearly would be when enclosing a manhole in a building that requires foundations, you should have a BO agreement. The BO would require you to move the location of the manhole to outside the property, or at the very least block it up if you can prove that you can provide adequate rodding access and are lucky enough to have the neighbours' manholes nearby.
No property built to building regulations standard would now be allowed to have a manhole inside it. That hasn't always been the case through.Everything that is supposed to be in heaven is already here on earth.
0 -
Rosy_Apple wrote: »Thanks all.
It really does seem to be a grey area. I think I might try getting a friend to call Thames Water and see what is said.
I can't imagine a Solicitor is qualified to make the decision but I had hoped they would have seen this situation before and be working in our interest... naive, maybe.
You can call them if you aren't specific.
A large number of Solicitors know very little indeed about building regulations. Whenever they aren't sure, they'll just pretend to know, be adamant and sell an indemnity policy to cover their own backside.Everything that is supposed to be in heaven is already here on earth.
0 -
Doozergirl wrote: »A build over agreement is for foundations that could interfere with the sewer. It forms part of building regulations when building an extension. You don't get a build over agreement finalised without building regs and you don't get building regs without the initial agreement.
I have never and would never apply for a build over agreement for a patio. It does not require building regs. How deep are these 'foundations'? It sounds like what I would call a 'slab', not a foundation but you aren't said how deep they are or even why this has come to your solicitor's attention?
I certainly would not be offering buyers an indemnity policiy for building over something which has not been built over to an extent where it could potentially interfere with the sewer pipes.
Accessing the drains to replace them would be a case of lifting the patio, not demolishing an extension which holds value and is an integral part of the house. TW would have a legal right to access them - trying to gain access through an extension is a little different to lifting a patio!
I am heavily inclined to agree with the vendor's solicitor, that your solicitor is going over the top.
What I don't know the answer to is whether Thames Water would replace a patio that they lifted but that isn't what the indemnity would be for, is it? You can ask TW directly what happens in that case as it will be something they deal with on a daily basis. My experience of other utilities is that they replace what was there before they started digging (in our case, block paving).
You can ask TW whatever you like if you aren't giving specific addresses. I think that would be an idea as we probably aren't to lay your mind at rest entirely.
Thank you for all of your help.
The honest truth is that I don't know how deep the foundations are and I am not entirely sure how the whole thing came to my Solicitor's attention. Although, I think it must have been because there were pictures of the manholes in our building survey (which they have a copy of).
The Solicitor had suggested that the indemnity policy would cover any charges Thames Water passed onto us for having to lift the patio to get to the sewers. I am not sure about whether they think it would cover making good the patio after.
I will give Thames Water a call.
Thanks again.0 -
So I gave Thames Water a call and she said she wasn't sure and would need to check... then she asked for my name and I panicked and said not to worry actually.
Not my finest moment and I am still none-the-wiser! The Solicitor really has made me incredibly nervous around these insurance policies.0 -
Doozergirl wrote: »A large number of Solicitors know very little indeed about building regulations.
They also tend to know very little about drains and sewers
Have you actually established that these manhole covers are on public sewers? Just because there is a manhole, which may be for a drain, doesn't mean it is a public sewer.
My own experience, which was some years ago so things might have changed, is that 'building over' only relates to structures which are not readily removable to gain access to the sewer if it needs repair work. Digging through a patio to gain access to a pipe wouldn't be any different to digging through a driveway.
The thing that will upset water companies is if you cover a manhole, for example with paving slabs, even if the slabs aren't fixed in place with concrete. Locating a buried manhole, especially in an emergency is not an easy job, and due to the liabilities of flood damage, the water companies will want to be able to do that very quickly.
Another factor is the change in working techniques over the years. Unless the sewer is very shallow, then these days it is likely a repair will be carried out by a technique that doesn't involve digging - digging holes is fraught with health and safety issues, and the material dug out has to be disposed of which means landfill tax. A deepish public sewer will often be repaired by relining or 'pipe-bursting' from the nearest manhole. It is quicker and cheaper to do it that way, so digging up people's patios and driveways will be the last option chosen in many circumstances.
You also need to consider the cost of the work required. Assuming it was necessary to break up the patio to get to the sewer then £400 is going to cover a good proportion (perhaps all) the additional cost of the work that Thames Water may need to do in future because of the patio. You could pay out £400 to insure against a theoretical risk of work being done at some point in the future which may cost less than you are paying to get the insurance. (obviously you need to weigh up these risks when you make a decision)
The things I would do are:
1) Establish ownership of the drains/sewers (the local authority should have this information if the solicitor doesn't, and if they don't I would be considering changing solicitor!)
2) Find out the size of the pipe and the pipe depths (as above)
If the pipes are public sewers (owned by TW) and they are more than 5" (125mm) in diameter and are more than about 2 feet (600mm) deep then you will need to contact TW to confirm the situation if you remain concerned.
If they aren't owned by Thames Water then they probably belong to the house (and possibly neighbour) so you can lay whatever patios, paths, drives etc you like over the top of them. (but please keep the manholes clear
) "In the future, everyone will be rich for 15 minutes"0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 343.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 250.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 449.7K Spending & Discounts
- 235.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 608.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 173.1K Life & Family
- 247.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards