Party wall dispute, advice pls!!!!!

cyclonebri1

teneighty wrote: »

I suspect it is not but as I have not been involved with the project and we have very little information it would be unwise to make rash assertions. That will not help the OP.

The fact remains that the Party Wall Surveyors are treating it as such so for the time being the OP has play them at their own game.

Yes, exactly, that was my point too, the OP is being fleeced by some chancer preying on the general public by ambulance chasing any snippet of info they gain whilst working under the shroud of the party wall act.

It's plain wrong.

cyclonebri1

jonnyb1978 wrote: »

Part wall act is what it says. To do with walls and walls only.

..."The act is very clear about what owners or tenants may do to their side of a shared wall and what is not allowed. Painting, decorating, and adding shelves to party walls is permitted, while any major construction or changes to the structural components without an agreement from the other party is not allowed...."

I guess painting is outside the party wall act then, so your surveyors can be told where to go!!

As a point of fact and for info only as it doesn't apply here, that statement isn't exactly true. It actually extends down in a vertical line at the boundary, so it prevents undermining.
It also comes into effect when there isn't even a wall present.

Also think about what you've said about hanging brackets etc on a party wall.

Imagine the situation where a neighbours garage is right up to the boundary and your side is free access, do you have the right to hang your ladder on his wall? don't think so.

Pedantic?, yes, but it needs to be kept in mind, disputes have started over these things

ILW

probably simpler just to buy a bigger house.

mart.vader

Shay's_mum, What you said in your post #24 is probably about right.

I tried to go via the PW book with mine, but realised that the PWA is very badly written and some (most) PW surveyors just exploit that. In my case the PWS had been "instructed" by the managing agents for the neighbour's property. The PWA doesn't cover that - it only allows the adjoining property owner to do this. As the adjoining owner denies that he is the owner (presumably for tax avoidance reasons) and I didn't engage with the PWS and my extension is now finished, and there's been no further communication from anyone about the PW side of things. All I have now is the dispute with the builder !

In your case, I don't know. What would happen if you told the PWS that your builder will settle the costs of the paint splashes when the job is finished ? and then told the builder to just carry on with the work ?

Leif

cyclonebri1 wrote: »

My point is that by warning the neighbour they had notified of a risk, the onus on the OP is then not to go ahead until that risk is removed.

The fact that the builder has informed his insurer is normal advice from any insurance policy if there is risk of a claim. and so is the challenge to any claim against them.

Anyway, lets hope it doesn't end in claim/counter claim.;)

Are you a lawyer?

jonnyb1978

cyclonebri1 wrote: »

As a point of fact and for info only as it doesn't apply here, that statement isn't exactly true. It actually extends down in a vertical line at the boundary, so it prevents undermining.
It also comes into effect when there isn't even a wall present.

Also think about what you've said about hanging brackets etc on a party wall.

Imagine the situation where a neighbours garage is right up to the boundary and your side is free access, do you have the right to hang your ladder on his wall? don't think so.

Pedantic?, yes, but it needs to be kept in mind, disputes have started over these things

Not much bothered but the fact the Act itself states drilling for raw plugs for shelving etc if minor work, is exempt providing it will not alter the structural integrity of the wall or cause damage to the neighbours side.

Guess you better contact the Department for communities and local government to alter the Party wall act 1996

The Act also says an external wall of a building is not a party wall if it has been built up to the boundary but not astride it. So in your example the neighbours garage is not even a party wall.

Page 4 and 10 of the Act explanatory guide

jonnyb1978

Page 10 of the Act explanatory booklet

keystone

You two are at cross purposes. If, as Cy suggests, that a neighbours wall is close to the boundary but does not cross it then it isn't a party wall and you would need his permission to drill into it or paint it or do whatsoever.

Back on topic though:

My feeling is that the neighbour has to be considered for contributory negligence if his car got paint on it as a result of parking it where he did because:

a) He either parked it there deliberately with a view to getting some "damage" in order to be able to instigate a claim or;

b) He was just being awkward and trying to frustrate the completion of the works or;

c) He's just plain stupid.

Cheers

jonnyb1978

keystone wrote: »

You two are at cross purposes. If, as Cy suggests, that a neighbours wall is close to the boundary but does not cross it then it isn't a party wall and you would need his permission to drill into it or paint it or do whatsoever.

Back on topic though:

My feeling is that the neighbour has to be considered for contributory negligence if his car got paint on it as a result of parking it where he did because:

a) He either parked it there deliberately with a view to getting some "damage" in order to be able to instigate a claim or;

b) He was just being awkward and trying to frustrate the completion of the works or;

c) He's just plain stupid.

Cheers

Yes I agree with you. But not sure why is Cy bringing in examples of non party walls which has nothing to do with the thread.
I stated that you can drill, paint or replaster etc your side of a party wall without an agreement in place providing there is no structural element to it or likely to damage the wall on neighbours side. That still stands.

And yes the neighbour has brought this on themselves for just being pigheaded and stupid

cyclonebri1

Leif wrote: »

Are you a lawyer?

No, just like you I have an opinion.

But then again, unlike you, I realise they are just that, opinions, they are like !!! holes, everyone has one.:p;)