Sewer in back garden instead of front road

lincroft1710

Yes, your circumstances are different, "my" sewer only serves a few houses.

A 3 metre conservatory would only leave you 5m garden length - marginally longer than the current Ford Mondeo. It would take up nearly half the garden length.

In 35 years in a property related profession I saw many extensions which completely destroyed the relationship between house and plot. Most people buy a house for what is there rather than what could be and if they're looking to extend they're going to want/need a garden longer than 8m.

when we bought the house we had a pic of plots and we chose the house due to the nice garden with the room to build on

But unless the builder verbally (or preferably in writing) stated that you could build an extension, you've still got the house you agreed to buy, same type, same number of beds, same size garden. This is where your problem will lie in trying to obtain compensation - you haven't actually lost anything tangible.

Jackie235

This is from the northumbrian water guidance notes for new sewers:

Design layouts for mains and services will generally be prepared on the basis that the apparatus will be
installed within land that is to be formally adopted as public highway and maintained as such by the Local
Authority.
Where a service verge/strip is to be provided and is to be adopted the developer must guarantee the
company rights of user and access until such times as formal adoption takes place. The erection of
buildings, walls or fences and the planting of trees, shrubs, hedges etc. within the service verge is
prohibited. Each purchaser must be advised accordingly and an appropriate covenant must be included in

the subsequent conveyance of the property.

None of us were told about the sewer in our gardens - surly this is enough to make them take notice of me?

Also if we did want to put a 3 meter conservatory in the garden (which would not be too big for the garden which is 8 meters by 9 meters wide) this is northumbrian waters info regarding it:

NWL is strongly opposed to allowing the
construction of any building over or close
to a public sewer. This is both to ensure
that access to the sewer is not adversely
affected and to protect the sewer and the
building from possible damage to each

other.


So with this info, and the plans that were amended by removeing the sewers from the maps and the fact the land regisrty doc shows the easement strip to be in the front street do i have a case for compensation against the builder - i'm certainly not just going to sit back and sign my garden away to them?

Imp

Jackie235 wrote: »

Design layouts for mains and services will generally be prepared on the basis that the apparatus will be
installed within land that is to be formally adopted as public highway and maintained as such by the Local
Authority.
Where a service verge/strip is to be provided and is to be adopted the developer must guarantee the
company rights of user and access until such times as formal adoption takes place. The erection of
buildings, walls or fences and the planting of trees, shrubs, hedges etc. within the service verge is
prohibited. Each purchaser must be advised accordingly and an appropriate covenant must be included in

the subsequent conveyance of the property.

If the highlighted word above were not included in the guidance, then I think you might have a case. With it there,, I can't see that you have a case.

As a note, it is far, far better to have your sewer adopted, rather than leaving it unadopted. If it remains unadopted and fails, then you could be responsible for its repair and maintenance.

Jackie235

Each purchaser must be advised accordingly and an appropriate covenant must be included in the subsequent conveyance of the property.

This was not disclosed until 6 months after purchase

Imp

Jackie235 wrote: »

Each purchaser must be advised accordingly and an appropriate covenant must be included in the subsequent conveyance of the property.

This was not disclosed until 6 months after purchase

You are taking that sentence out of context; it should be read in conjunction with the previous sentences, i.e. each purchaser should be advised that they should not build walls or plant shrubs etc. in the service verge. (Where verge is the verge of the adopted highway).

Jackie235

Imp wrote: »

You are taking that sentence out of context; it should be read in conjunction with the previous sentences, i.e. each purchaser should be advised that they should not build walls or plant shrubs etc. in the service verge. (Where verge is the verge of the adopted highway).

Im sorry but you are wrong, this sentence refers to the fact that if the service aparatus is contained in the garden and there is to be a deed of grant of easment on the sewer then: Each purchaser must be advised accordingly and an appropriate covenant must be included in the subsequent conveyance of the property the fact that there was to be an easement grant for the sewer should have been advised during the conveyace - not 6 months later. It is all worded in the application to addopt a sewer. Im not being funny but where do you get your opinion on this from? are you a conveyancing solicitor- I am not by any stretch of the imagination,but 2 and half years i now have read alot about drains, sewers, easements, etc
you will be telling me next I wont have enough room in my garden for a Mondeo, I park my Mondeo on the drive like normal people!!!!

lincroft1710

you will be telling me next I wont have enough room in my garden for a Mondeo, I park my Mondeo on the drive like normal people!!!!

I wasn't suggesting you should park a car in you back garden (although there are hundreds of thousands of properties with rear access only parking) just indicating length of garden remaining if you built a conservatory.

do i have a case for compensation against the builder - i'm certainly not just going to sit back and sign my garden away to them?


Last things first - you're not "signing your garden away" just allowing the sewer pipe to run under your land and the water authority permission to enter on to the land for any necessary repair/maintenance (a very rare occurrence). By not agreeing to the easement you could be cutting off your nose to spite your face.

As I said in my original post trying to value the difference between 2 exactly identical properties where one has potential for an extension and one hasn't is very, very difficult. A chartered surveyor (not an estate agent) could provide you with such a valuation but his fee will be several hundred pounds.

I would expect the builders would say that they sold you a house and garden with no implied possibility of using the garden for any other purpose. A garden is what you bought, not a future site for an extension.

If there is a common law expectation that one should be able to build an extension in one's garden then this may help you. But I don't know of one.

As you refer to your "conveyancer" he may not be the person to advise if litigation is practicable. Litigation is expensive especially if you lose and have to pay other side's costs. Have you approached or considered approaching a suitably qualified solicitor who could dispassionately advise on the merits of your case? Don't use a "no win, no fee" firm.