Boundary wall problems

cyclonebri1

Ok, not yet a head to head but I think I am running into problems.

We are rebuilding the boundary wall between my property and my neighbours above.

We live on a steep hill, our drive is about 4 ft average below that of the above property.

It also slopes steeply downwards towards the road.

The existing retaining wall is jerry built, ie, poorly constructed, but has stood for an est 50 years, but over the last 2 years has gained in lean and water penetration so this year we decided to rebuild, been avoiding this for 13 years.

It is 30 mtrs long

So started to rebuild wall after removing the sub standard foundation.

Build line is exactly to the height change on my side, ie, I am starting the wall at the existing boundary line on my side

I have put a weeping drain up to the outer foundation wall to prevent water/hydraulic build up behind the wall. This runs the length of the wall and ends 2 mtr short of the road.

A lot of water is being discharged through the neighbours front gate/passage and runs 30 yds down the kerb before discharging to the road drain.

I have seen several other neighbours looking at this as after heavy rain it flows heavily for hours.

The crunch is that the neighbour had a large extension built a few years ago, the rainwater and the patio are drained down a pipe that runs parallel to my wall and ends in a soakaway about 2/3 of the way down the wall.

So in effect the soakaway is now discharging down my weeping drain and ending down the road rather than seeping through my wall.


Sorry for the long post but trying to get all the background in.


Question time;

Given the height of the wall what is a reasonable width of bottom wall width that would be "normal"?
I ask this as at sometime the neighbours ground level had been raised and covered the point at which the wall narrowed to 1 block thick so effectively they were planting over the wall, had an issue explaining this to them.


Is a soakaway right up to a 4 ft high retaining wall acceptable practice???


Whose responsibility is the water discharge?? Remember it's my drain pipe sat over my foundations but on their side

I will call in at building control tomorrow as it could become an issue but in the meantime any ACCURATE advice would be welcome, ;)

Mojisola

Have you taken any professional advice about rebuilding the wall?

A retaining wall is not something to mess about with unless you know what you're doing.

cyclonebri1

I do know what I am doing and I am a professional, so is my builder.
This is not a question about building a retaining wall, just where it can be built and the effect on previous miss doings by others, but the legal side is the issue.

I need to know whose's responsibility is the water discharge given all the info I have presented.

Without offence to the previous poster of course.

iamcornholio

cyclonebri1 wrote: »

but the legal side is the issue.

I've only skimmed the long post but here goes

If the wall is owned by you and on your side of the boundary then what goes on on the other side is nothing to do with you. You need to design your wall to deal with any damp ground, and any drainage arrangement on the neighbouring ground

A landowner is required to deal with any natural water run-off to their property, but a person cannot direct water onto another property via a drain or downpipe. A neighbour can however direct water along a boundary.

With regards to "your drainpipe on their side" then I can't see how you can prevent this being used, as it is on the neighbours property and he could require you to remove it if he wants to. Just because you put it there does not grant you any drainage rights

Mojisola

cyclonebri1 wrote: »

I do know what I am doing and I am a professional, so is my builder.

cyclonebri1 wrote: »

Given the height of the wall what is a reasonable width of bottom wall width that would be "normal"?

Shouldn't a professional builder know things like this?

cyclonebri1

Mojisola wrote: »

Shouldn't a professional builder know things like this?

That's the issue, he didn't expect to find a soakaway, only constructed 3 years ago, right up to the boundary, and since it's a garden wall in effect it doesn't come under building regs so there has been no involvement. That will change today as I fully realise this needs doing correctly.

IamcornH, the question really is about where the boundary is bearing in mind it's my wall but I am at the low side so effectively part of my boundary is at the high level, ie, it's a retaining wall so isn't a thin line, it has width, how much width bearing in mind it needs substantial footings is another question.

My land drain pipe sits on the footings and runs the length of the wall but runs at a lower level than the soakaway so is effectively draining that under wet conditions. The water then seeping from their side of the wall into the roadway.

The wall was 3 bricks thick originally at the base, we have followed the exact original line in the rebuild.

Of course it's an old house and the boundary is unmeasurable from the deeds so I was asking what would be condidered an expected width at the base.

There is approx 50" of high ground from their house to my side of the wall.

Anyway as said off to get advice from the borough, don't need any problems with this.

Incidentally there is already a discharge pipe from their property that is now under their patio. This runs through out wall and into a grate connected to the main sewer. Now I know this isn't correct but I can acept that if it means water that by passes the surface pick up does not get trapped behind the wall.

iamcornholio

cyclonebri1 wrote: »

Of course it's an old house and the boundary is unmeasurable from the deeds so I was asking what would be condidered an expected width at the base.

The boundary will be determinable, and will be along the ground surface and then go vertically up and down.

If your existing foundations cross the boundary line - ie a thicker foundation onto the neighbouring land, then you may well have gained an implied easement for them. But once removed you will not have the right to put new foundations in the same place

And you also need to determine if this is actually a Party Fence Wall under the Party Wall Act, and if so and the Act applies, then you will need to follow that

cyclonebri1

iamcornholio wrote: »

The boundary will be determinable, and will be along the ground surface and then go vertically up and down.

If your existing foundations cross the boundary line - ie a thicker foundation onto the neighbouring land, then you may well have gained an implied easement for them. But once removed you will not have the right to put new foundations in the same place

And you also need to determine if this is actually a Party Fence Wall under the Party Wall Act, and if so and the Act applies, then you will need to follow that

Whoa, I think that is over my and anyones head.

As I said the boundary in such a case cannot be determined???

Yes of course the boundary goes up and goes down but, by definition cannot be a line of no thickness, it has to have substance? yeah. ie if it is my boundary and is my responsibility it must lie on my property?
Get my issue.

And to add further to what you have said we are now 50% completed so the original wall still half stands and the new wall likewise, so what price the bold last statement?

Hope this is coming over as a none understanding or rational reasoning rather than me not agreeing with posters;););)and I didn't get to building control today. Monday now.

mikey72

What does the open discharge end of the drain look like? Is it on their land, and will it need maintaining?

cyclonebri1

We started building the wall from the front of the property at which point the levels of the neighbours gate and my drive are the same.

The drain, perforated 100mm, stops about 2 metres short of the gate and is simply open ended but at this point under about 250mm of hardcore/and decorative gravel, ie it's buried at foundation level and was stopped at a point were any water collected could dissipate away. I now seeps out under the concrete at the gate. It was felt that as there was little difference in property height at this point the wall load was much less and didn't need further drainage

Problem arose when 10mtrs back up the hill I found the soakaway which went to explain why the excavation was so wet.

Again the drain was just to protect from collected water behind the wall but now collects from the soakaway.

Don't get me wrong when it rains it's not obvious, it doesn't rush out, but it continues to seep for a day after it's stopped raining as you would expect.

Have on of those family legal protection policies with free helpline, I'll try that later.

The builder isn't really aware of this yet as we were rained off mid week and I haven't talked in detail, but I think it's going to need another soakaway at lower level than the wall nearer their gate to take to overflow, luckily it's just gravel over hardcore.

iamcornholio

cyclonebri1 wrote: »

Whoa, I think that is over my and anyones head.

Yes of course the boundary goes up and goes down but, by definition cannot be a line of no thickness, it has to have substance?

and I didn't get to building control today. Monday now.

Its pretty straightforward

A boundary does have no thickness. It is a concept not a physical object

A boundary is two-dimensional - it has length (along the garden) and height (up to space, down to the earth's core) but no thickness

People tend to put things on the boundary to mark it, but those things are not the boundary. Likewise a boundary is not owned, but the things on the boundary are owned - and can be owned by either party or jointly

And building control have nothing to do with this