Another Party Wall Act question...

Mike_the_Boilerman

Good afternoon everyone. I have a party wall situation I think may fall outside the Party Wall Act but I'm not sure. Any experts here able to advise please?

A row of classic Victorian three-bed terraced houses houses was built around 1890. A few years later (1900-ish) the builder added to the terrace by building a further row of identical houses with the first additional house wall built right up against the end wall of the existing end terraced house, thus continuing the terrace.

So in the middle of the terrace there are two separately constructed end terrace houses hard up against each other with no gap, but not actually joined together either, other than by the flaunching on the tops of the matching and aligned chimneys.

Does this pair of end terrace walls touching each other still count as a party wall for the purposes of the Act?

Many thanks...

Doozergirl

I'd say no, they aren't sharing a wall, they are separate walls. If you took one down, the other should stand. In rule, perhaps that launching falls under the act, but anyone getting surveyors involved for that is nuts.

Mike_the_Boilerman

Doozergirl wrote: »

I'd say no, they aren't sharing a wall, they are separate walls. If you took one down, the other should stand. In rule, perhaps that launching falls under the act, but anyone getting surveyors involved for that is nuts.

So in your view, the subsequently exposed end wall, which will not be waterproof as it will have no weatherstruck pointing (as it was built hard up against the existing wall), is wall owner's problem and they would have no claim against next door?

Thanks for your answer. Is this your professional opinion or are you a layman?

I'm thinking perhaps I should be asking this on a legal board!

DaftyDuck

Doozer is a very experienced builder(ess) manager(ess) and knows her building - and probably law - several times better than I.

I am a layman(man). I have bought many properties, and sold quite a few too. I try to maintain excellent relationships with neighbours, whether buying, living, selling, or letting.

I would want to share, even if not equally, the costs of repointing that wall. I would consider it my responsibility, as I've introduced a problem that was not of their making.

I have no idea what the legal stance would be.

Doozergirl

Party walls cross boundaries. They afford support and protection between two parties. If I take something from a party wall, it would need to be ‘cut’ in my view - that tends to be the term we use to decide on site.

I own a building company and have experience of party wall matters and providing documentation towards awards. I’m not exactly a layperson but I’m certainly not a Party Wall Surveyor who will very quickly give you a yay or a nay and write a letter to the other party letting them know too.

This sounds like something that you should involve one in just to nip it in the bud, either way.

Doozergirl

I’m in a hurry but I have a bit more to say, lol! What’s the story, exactly? Are you demolishing an original house?

Was there an award when the new house was built?

Mike_the_Boilerman

Doozergirl wrote: »

I’m in a hurry but I have a bit more to say, lol! What’s the story, exactly? Are you demolishing an original house?

Was there an award when the new house was built?

Not sure what you mean by 'an award'. The newer house was built 118 years ago!

The story is relatively trivial. The neighbour is planning to demolish their chimney leaving our currently semi detached chimney exposed and unstable (according to their builder). I disagree and think our chimney is structurally fine so see no point in demolishing it at the same time as suggested, but their proposal seems set to cause us some significant expense and hassle not of our making, regardless.

Their tack is that that their work might make our chimney fall down, but that's going to be our problem not theirs, because their builder says we have a dodgy old chimney anyway. I think our chimney is structurally fine but the newly exposed brick face will need pointing and some flashing installed at the roof line, which they are unlikely to be willing to pay for. Which is fair enough if the true position is this is our responsibility, but had it been a single solid party wall, I think the position would have been different, hence my enquiry. So it's perhaps rather unfortunate the adjoining wall between the houses happens to have been built as it is.

I am as much interested in the principles involved here as I've never encountered such a situation before. Demolishing our chimney at the same time is probably the pragmatic course of action but we would feel bounced into unnecessary (to us) expense. I think the bottom line is they want to demolish their outside chimney and want us to do the same to ours so the shared cost is reduced, but for some reason don't feel able actually to say so directly.

Doozergirl

It doesn’t sound that simple at all. Photos would help as I’m finding the detail of it hard to picture. I did picture a more recent infill development rather than than another Victorian house!

118 years it really could be providing support - houses move and lean and Victorian houses are actually not very well built at all in the inside, often made with a muddle of brick and rarely pointed. I can imagine it being perfectly possible that it has become a party wall over time.

I think I would engage a structural engineer to come and have a bit of a look at what is planned.

G_M

Depends what work is planned. eg

Excavation within 3 or 6 metres of a neighbouring building(s) or structure(s), depending on the depth of the hole or proposed foundations (see paragraphs 28 to 30).

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/523010/Party_Wall_etc__Act_1996_-_Explanatory_Booklet.pdf

Doozergirl

G_M wrote: »

Depends what work is planned. eg



https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/523010/Party_Wall_etc__Act_1996_-_Explanatory_Booklet.pdf

Not excavating. The building of next door was more pertinant than the demolition. It’s why I asked if there was an initial award, before understanding how old it is.

Lacuna

As described, this is not a party wall issue. The external walls of a chimney stack are not even 'party' when it is built on top of a party wall (although any withy between neighbouring flues would be). Here, where the stacks are independent, the Party Wall etc. Act does not apply. The condition of the concealed face of your stack is your responsibility.

Your neighbour cannot force you to do anything to it and neither can their builder use your roof/airspace to enable them to demolish their stack without your agreement, which is a private matter. Bear in mind though that what goes around comes around. If you need to repoint, your builder will need access to next door's airspace. It might be best to have their builders repoint it to avoid duplicating scaffold costs.