Neighbours installed windows into a boundary wall

Andy_L

https://www.primrose.co.uk/garden-screening-c-318.html

TELLIT01

We're in England so I don't know if the same rules apply, but when we had an extension built, the small windows in the wall facing the neighbour had to be obscured glass and non-opening.


Also, there is nothing to stop you standing something in front of those windows to obstruct any view if they are clear glass.

Rusty_Shackleton

I honestly can't believe anyone is allowed to stick windows into a boundary wall, obscured or otherwise... Stick a fence or something in front of their windows and paint it whatever colour you like. Best of all, it means they'll have spent all that money to achieve nothing!

Unfortunately your neighbours sound like ar**holes, treat them with the contempt people like that deserve.

womble12345

I would buy something like this and stick it in front of the window and grow a nice climbing plant in the pots at the side to obscure the ugly wall.



You get a nice bench that isnt attached to the wall so you are totally within your rights to do it.

cannugec5

womble12345 wrote: »

You get a nice bench that isnt attached to the wall so you are totally within your rights to do it.

That looks great and very practical.

I was beginning to think that I was being awkward for not offering to pay for my neighbours house to be painted, but now I see others are getting it from my perspective. So thank you.

Diana2014

I entirely agree with the last other contributor's post.

As you're in Scotland, anything that this (Scots-born but) English-qualified lawyer says will only be useful as an analogy, but down here I'd want to know what contract, lease or other document gives your neighbours the right of access which they have so lavishly abused. A right of access to maintain the wall would not, in England, extend to using the neighbouring property to make major structural changes to the wall like inserting windows into it - the adjoining owner would need your express permission for that.

You might need to check whether your dratted neighbours have any rights to light that limit what you can do alongside their wall but it's not usually as much of a right as laypeople think! There would have to be very specific (and legally enforceable) provision for that written into the legal title to their house, I would think.

We'd also have the protection of the party wall legislation, which I think covers all walls which are on, or form, boundaries between properties in different ownership and require the owner who wants to do the building work to pay the cost of all parties' surveys and of setting up a formal written party wall agreement in advance of any work being done.

It would not here be possible to get planning permission to put in windows directly overlooking a neighbour's private space which weren't obscured and non-openable.

We'd also have four years from the date of the objectionable construction to challenge any lack of planning permission and could use judicial review (which has to be initiated within only 3 months of the decision being challenged) to challenge any wildly inappropriate planning decision - but I really don't know if there's a Scots equivalent to JR. If there was no decision but there should have been a planning application, of which you should have been notified - but there wasn't - then it would be a planning enforcement issue and the four-year time-limit would apply in England.

I suggest that you look for a Scots-qualified lawyer who really knows the Scots planning and legal rights regimes. There's a Scots version of Citizens' Advice, isn't there, to start off with? That should have an encyclopaedic, if fairly basic, knowledge database even if the adviser isn't a specialist - and they should have better ways to refer you to appropriate specialist lawyers, if absolutely necessary, than you can get otherwise. (When I worked for the CAB down here, 25 years ago, their systems were at least at that level; they should if anything be better now.)

By the way, lawyers do perceive a substantive difference between 'illegal' (which implies civil and perhaps also criminal liability) and 'illegitimate', which is more like being morally wrong. We split linguistic hairs for a living, after all.

cannugec5

Diana2014 wrote: »

I entirely agree with the last post.

As you're in Scotland, anything that this (Scots-born but) English-qualified lawyer says will only be useful as an analogy, but down here I'd want to know what contract, lease or other document gives your neighbours the right of access which they have so lavishly abused. A right to maintain the wall would not, in England, extend to making structural changes to the wall like inserting windows into it - the adjoining owner would need your express permission for that. This is what I believed - that there is a difference between maintenance and structural change. We were simply informed - by the builder - that it was happening
We'd also have the protection of the party wall legislation, which I think covers all walls which are on, or form, boundaries between properties in different ownership and require the owner who wants to do the building work to pay the cost of all parties' surveys and of setting up a formal written party wall agreement in advance of any work being done.

It would not here be possible to get planning permission to put in windows directly overlooking a neighbour's private space which weren't obscured and non-openable.The builders told us the windows MUST open to allow escape in the even of a fire. I am not sure how they were meant to escape through the pre-existing velux rooflights! We'd also have four years from the date of their construction to challenge any lack of planning permission. That is interesting. Thanks.

I suggest that you look for someone on the Scots side of the border who'd know about the Scots planning and legal rights regimes. There's a Scots version of Citizens' Advice, isn't there?Yes. I think we need to contact them.

By the way, lawyers do perceive a substantive difference between 'illegal' (which implies civil and perhaps also criminal liability) and 'illegitimate', which is more like being morally wrong.

Thank you for your very helpful reply.
We will look into this further.

a.turner

Diana2014 wrote: »

I entirely agree with the last other contributor's post.

As you're in Scotland, anything that this (Scots-born but) English-qualified lawyer says will only be useful as an analogy, but down here I'd want to know what contract, lease or other document gives your neighbours the right of access which they have so lavishly abused. A right of access to maintain the wall would not, in England, extend to using the neighbouring property to make major structural changes to the wall like inserting windows into it - the adjoining owner would need your express permission for that.

You might need to check whether your dratted neighbours have any rights to light that limit what you can do alongside their wall but it's not usually as much of a right as laypeople think! There would have to be very specific (and legally enforceable) provision for that written into the legal title to their house, I would think.

We'd also have the protection of the party wall legislation, which I think covers all walls which are on, or form, boundaries between properties in different ownership and require the owner who wants to do the building work to pay the cost of all parties' surveys and of setting up a formal written party wall agreement in advance of any work being done.

It would not here be possible to get planning permission to put in windows directly overlooking a neighbour's private space which weren't obscured and non-openable.

We'd also have four years from the date of the objectionable construction to challenge any lack of planning permission and could use judicial review (which has to be initiated within only 3 months of the decision being challenged) to challenge any wildly inappropriate planning decision - but I really don't know if there's a Scots equivalent to JR. If there was no decision but there should have been a planning application, of which you should have been notified - but there wasn't - then it would be a planning enforcement issue and the four-year time-limit would apply in England.

I suggest that you look for a Scots-qualified lawyer who really knows the Scots planning and legal rights regimes. There's a Scots version of Citizens' Advice, isn't there, to start off with? That should have an encyclopaedic, if fairly basic, knowledge database even if the adviser isn't a specialist - and they should have better ways to refer you to appropriate specialist lawyers, if absolutely necessary, than you can get otherwise. (When I worked for the CAB down here, 25 years ago, their systems were at least at that level; they should if anything be better now.)

By the way, lawyers do perceive a substantive difference between 'illegal' (which implies civil and perhaps also criminal liability) and 'illegitimate', which is more like being morally wrong. We split linguistic hairs for a living, after all.

There were no objections when I applied.

cannugec5

a.turner wrote: »

There were no objections when I applied.

When you applied - what did you apply for? I am told planning permission was not required therefore we had no opportunity to object.
Was it also a boundary wall in your case?