Party wall Act and Right of Way

beaker141

fezster wrote: »

Great advice from Doozergirl, which you should follow. Make sure the builders are aware of the possible dispute and plan accordingly to ensure the work is completed asap.

Do it on a Saturday :-)

teneighty

Benjamin, it really doesn't look very professional if you are going to spam internet forums. By all means give advice but do it anonymously.

Out of interest what are your thoughts on the need for a Section 6(1) Notice for a garden shed?

zaqxsw

Thanks - I am new and didn't know how this worked. I've changed my details so I am now anonymous. In the end, I just hope to give occasional advice that helps as I have the experience to do so. Thanks for the feedback though.

My thoughts on a Section 6(1) Notice for a garden shed are as follows:
Section 20 of the Act does not define a structure though there is a clue in the definition of a party structure:

“party structure” means a party wall and also a floor partition or other structure separating buildings or parts of buildings approached solely by separate staircases or separate entrances;

If it is a standard timber garden shed with a value of a couple of hundred pounds, I would say you do not need to serve a notice. This is for two reasons:

1. It isn't a structure within the meaning of the Act
2. It is disproportionate to do so.

If notice were served and the neighbour appointed their own surveyor, fees could be £2,000. This is not right and the Act was not intended to work in this way. You can't pay £2,000 to protect an asset worth £200. That being said, the argument would really be whether the shed constitutes a structure. I would suggest that a structure needs to be more permanent.
For example, a timber boarded fence is not notifiable, but a brick wall is. I use this logic with a timber structure i.e. it is not subject to the act just like a fence is not.

I also think it is important to take a view. Where there is a grey area, common sense should be applied.

The Act is often misused by surveyors giving advice which fills their pockets with money.

teneighty

Welcome back, hopefully you will stick around and provide much needed advice, unlike all the others who just try to promote their own firm then disappear after 2 or 3 posts.

I agree with your interpretation of the shed, it wasn't an abstract question, that is the issue with the OP. A disgruntled neighbour is trying to use the presence of a garden shed on a concrete base to extort considerable benefit even though they intend to dissent to the notice and appoint their own surveyor. So the OP gets the double whammy of additional surveyors fees and the cost of replacing the neighbour's fence for something that is highly questionable whether the Act actually applies.

Doozergirl

Woohoo! A real life, helpful party wall surveyor!

Come, stay!

zaqxsw

I think the OP should establish who ‘owns’ the passageway. If access is required for the build, then this is non-negotiable if it is exercised via section 1 or 6 (building up to boundary / excavation).
In my opinion, the Act would not apply to the timber shed.
The OP may still have access rights and should liaise with the owner as opposed to an interested party.
If the difficult neighbour does own the passageway then the OP would need to decide whether to invoke the Act. Where the Act is not so clear, I recommend using it to one’s advantage (and the Act is often not clear).

Where do I find posts on party wall forums? I am keen to help people in difficulties from time to time. I am new and find it hard to navigate this site.

The Act should not be used by neighbours to make life difficult for someone wishing to build.
The Act should also not be unnecessarily invoked if it does not apply, as the associated fees will be hefty, and for a process that is actually pointless.