Party wall dispute, advice pls!!!!!

Leif

cyclonebri1 wrote: »

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;)

Quite the opposite, but I do get p1ssed off with continually being 'corrected' by you and talked down to in a patronising manner. Your user name should be Mr Know It All, given the petty mindedness of some of your posts. (Some are informative. The condescending 'corrections' to my posts are annoying. ) In this case the legal people have basically said what I said, and that is what matters to the OP.

Oh and twice now you have said you will pm me, and don't. What's with that little game then? Is it some weird wind up?

shays_mum

mart.vader wrote: »

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 ?

Already told them it will be sorted, they still went ahead & contacted PW surveyors, who are having a field day authorising premium replacements cars, professional jet washes etc etc bills getting larger

shays_mum

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

Was told to move car just the other day, did for half hour, then moved it back!!, their drive can easily accommodate 3 cars. Think they are a chancer, but to our faces sweet as pie. Seriously they are really stressing me out

shays_mum

Sorry not been around to answer for abit, this has bought about a flare up in my condition, not to mention really peed me off, esp when your doing it all by the book. Am getting letters/calls/emails from the PW surveyor demanding money & still awaiting the call from my legal home insurance team so see where i stand .
Thanks for all your thoughts/advice, it will put to good use!. Will update as it happens.

keystone

shays_mum wrote: »

Was told to move car just the other day, did for half hour, then moved it back!!,

Well imagine my surprise!

Cheers

jonnyb1978

I would still send a letter to ask them for proof. Ask them the extent of damage etc
And also an official harrassment letter. They have not proved nothing therefore can not demand money if they can not prove your liable.

keystone

The PW Surveyor is operating outside his scope if he is awarding for inconvenience as inconvenience is not quantifiable. He is not allowed to do that. If you have paid his fees anyway how can he be claiming those as part of the award he is trying to make. I still think the neighbour is partially responsible for the paint being on the vehicle as is further evidenced by post 64.

Whilst they may turn out to be a toothless wonder perhaps a call to these people to seek advice might be in order. They seem to offer a mediation service and thats probably what's needed to put this on the correct track.

Cheers

shays_mum

keystone wrote: »

The PW Surveyor is operating outside his scope if he is awarding for inconvenience as inconvenience is not quantifiable. He is not allowed to do that. If you have paid his fees anyway how can he be claiming those as part of the award he is trying to make. I still think the neighbour is partially responsible for the paint being on the vehicle as is further evidenced by post 64.

Whilst they may turn out to be a toothless wonder perhaps a call to these people to seek advice might be in order. They seem to offer a mediation service and thats probably what's needed to put this on the correct track.

Cheers

Funny you just posted keystone, just came across this!, thanks though am going to call them asap
http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2013/mar/14/home-extensions-plans-party-wall

shays_mum

jonnyb1978 wrote: »

I would still send a letter to ask them for proof. Ask them the extent of damage etc
And also an official harrassment letter. They have not proved nothing therefore can not demand money if they can not prove your liable.

I will leave this to my legal team, still got to live there after all this. Its more a case of the pw surveyors here & not the neighbour so much i think!, though they are chancers, they are actually going after the builder & not me?!.
*confused*!!

jonnyb1978

shays_mum wrote: »

I will leave this to my legal team, still got to live there after all this. Its more a case of the pw surveyors here & not the neighbour so much i think!, though they are chancers, they are actually going after the builder & not me?!.
*confused*!!

I meant letter to the surveyors not neighbours. I dont understand why are they contacting you for money if they are after the builders? Therefore your involvement should be minimal.....we seem to be going round in circles now!!