Public Sewers in Garden

Rosy_Apple

Hi all,

I was wondering if anyone had any advice as I am going round in circles on this one.

We are about to exchange (pending a few final issues being ironed out, including this one).

The house is Victorian and hasn't had any extensions. There are three manhole covers on the patio of the house. The patio has a concrete foundation with slabs laid on top.

Our Solicitor has advised that because of the concrete foundation over the sewers (not the manhole covers) we need to buy Sewer Indemnity Insurance in case the water company ever need access to the sewers.

The Vendor's Solicitor has said that this isn't necessary as the manhole covers are accessible. Also, they didn't lay the concrete foundation for the patio they just changed to patio slabs instead of decking. Therefore, their understanding is that they didn't need 'build over' permission.

I am not entirely sure who is right and reading the Thames Water online documentation isn't making anything much clearer. If we do need to buy sewer indemnity insurance then I would like the vendor to split the cost with us, however, their Solicitor is refusing on the basis that it isn't required in the first place.

I know if we contact Thames water to ask then we won't be able to take any indemnity insurance out!

Any thoughts would be much appreciated.

Ithaca

How much is the insurance? If it's less than £100 and you were aiming to split it with the vendor you might want to ask whether £50 is worth holding up the final part of a sale (presumably) worth several hundred thousand pounds.

We had a similar situation with an indemnity for some mis-typed title deeds. Both sets of solicitors were equally adamant that it was needed (ours) and wasn't needed (vendors'). In the end we decided to pay the £200 ourselves to get the sale done rather than spend 6 weeks exchanging solicitor letters.

As it turned out our vendors put £200 in cash through our letter box shortly after completion as they felt it should have been them paying but their solicitor wouldn't have it.

Davesnave

You are leaving out the most important thing: the cost of the indemnity insurance. Chances are, it won't be much in the context of buying a house.

Technically, the previous owners, or their predecessors, have built over a sewer without asking for permission, so they may have been reckless, depending exactly on when the concrete was laid.

So, in theory, the water authority could require you to remove the concrete, or charge you for removing it themselves, but in the real world, they probably wouldn't, unless it's built like an atom bomb shelter!

No insurance will protect you from the water authority entering your garden and digging up the public sewer, and that stands whether or not a build-over agreement is obtained. If they have to, they'll do it, but technology often provides a number of work-arounds.

Rosy_Apple

Ithaca wrote: »

How much is the insurance? If it's less than £100 and you were aiming to split it with the vendor you might want to ask whether £50 is worth holding up the final part of a sale (presumably) worth several hundred thousand pounds.

We had a similar situation with an indemnity for some mis-typed title deeds. Both sets of solicitors were equally adamant that it was needed (ours) and wasn't needed (vendors'). In the end we decided to pay the £200 ourselves to get the sale done rather than spend 6 weeks exchanging solicitor letters.

As it turned out our vendors put £200 in cash through our letter box shortly after completion as they felt it should have been them paying but their solicitor wouldn't have it.

Thanks Ithaca- the insurance is coming in at around £400.

I appreciate we may just have to take a view on this but equally wanted to understand who was right. Naturally, we want to avoid any unnecessary costs.

00ec25

build over means what it says, you build something which cannot easily be dug up because it's an enclosed building
https://developers.thameswater.co.uk/-/media/Site-Content/Developer-Services/Guide-to-building-over-or-near-a-public-sewer.ashx?la=en

a patio, even if laid on solid concrete, is not a build over since access to digging up the underlying sewer is not restricted in any way, shape, or form, it would merely need a man with a jack-hammer/breaker instead of a man with a spade

freeisgood

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.

Rosy_Apple

00ec25 wrote: »

build over means what it says, you build something which cannot easily be dug up because it's errrr a building
https://developers.thameswater.co.uk/Domestic-and-small-commercial/Building-near-pipes/Building-over-or-near-a-sewer/Do-you-need-approval

a patio, even if laid on solid concrete is not a build over since access to digging up the underlying sewer is not restricted in any way, shape, or form, it would merely need a man with a jack-hammer/breaker instead of a man with a spade

This is what I had thought- our Solicitor is adamant it did require build over approval though. Which is how I have ended up so confused.

Ultimately, £400 is not a lot of money in the grand scheme of buying a house but equally I would rather spend the £400 on something we want to buy if the insurance genuinely isn't needed.

Rosy_Apple

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.

:eek:

That is vile. I think manhole covers are quite common in gardens though so I will hope that is a rare case!

00ec25

Rosy_Apple wrote: »

This is what I had thought- our Solicitor is adamant it did require build over approval though. Which is how I have ended up so confused.

Ultimately, £400 is not a lot of money in the grand scheme of buying a house but equally I would rather spend the £400 on something we want to buy if the insurance genuinely isn't needed.

solicitors are not always correct on peripheral matters.... particularly if they get commission from the seller of an indemnity policy

I appreciate it would invalidate the ability to buy insurance, but in this case I really do think a simple call to the relevant water company would sort it out once and for all.

Rosy_Apple

00ec25 wrote: »

solicitors are not always correct on peripheral matters.... particularly if they get commission from the seller of an indemnity policy

I appreciate it would invalidate the ability to buy insurance, but in this case I really do think a simple call to the relevant water company would sort it out once and for all.

Thank you.

I had wondered whether to get a friend to ring Thames Water and just ask if they would need build over permission to lay a hypothetical patio (leaving the manholes uncovered). If they say no then all is well, if they say yes then we pursue the indemnity.

Maybe that is the easiest way.

davidmcn

I also wouldn't view a layer of concrete as "building over". Sewers tend to live under several layers of road, for example! Insurance seems pointless.