neighbours huge decking

AdrianC

unforeseen said:

vitaweat said:

AdrianC said:

carefullycautious said:

I must admit I have never seen anything like this. Why is the decking so high, have you lovely views if higher up? I would show this to planning dept and see what take they have on this before approaching this neighbour.

Looks like that's continuing the ground level at the top of the garden, while the actual ground drops steeply.

Again - if that decking has been there for a decade, and the main difference is the removal of a fence from it, then the planners can't do a sausage...

The OP states that the decking has been erected since they bought the house 18 months ago.

No, the op stated that the POOL with its surrounding decking has been there 10 years. The only new thing is a solid covering over the pool effectively. 

Exactly. The structure has been there all along.
All that's happened is that the pool and fence have been removed (no PP needed), and some more boards added to the existing structure to cover the hole left by the removal of the pool (no PP needed).

jungle_jane

Oh my word this is incredibly similar to an issue we have with our grabby neighbour - only he has erected a structure on a piece of land overlooking my garden that he doesn't even own!  We are going to address with by building our whole garden up a few feet and then erecting a shed and large fence.  Obviously not practical for you but also just to say i feel the pain of stolen privacy and aggressive, controlling behaviour by someone taking what is not theirs to take.

Davesnave

AdrianC said:

unforeseen said:

vitaweat said:

AdrianC said:

carefullycautious said:

I must admit I have never seen anything like this. Why is the decking so high, have you lovely views if higher up? I would show this to planning dept and see what take they have on this before approaching this neighbour.

Looks like that's continuing the ground level at the top of the garden, while the actual ground drops steeply.

Again - if that decking has been there for a decade, and the main difference is the removal of a fence from it, then the planners can't do a sausage...

The OP states that the decking has been erected since they bought the house 18 months ago.

No, the op stated that the POOL with its surrounding decking has been there 10 years. The only new thing is a solid covering over the pool effectively. 

Exactly. The structure has been there all along.
All that's happened is that the pool and fence have been removed (no PP needed), and some more boards added to the existing structure to cover the hole left by the removal of the pool (no PP needed).

I think covering the pool is an addition to the structure, so it would need planning permission if it is more than 0.3m above ground level. If it isn't an addition, what is it?

macman

OP, I too am rendered speechless by your photo. That's not decking, it's a watchtower.
Just bear in mind that once you formalise your complaint by reporting it to the LA, then you will have to declare the dispute when you come to sell the property. But, then again, I can't imagine anyone buying it with that degree of intrusion anyway, so I guess you have nothing to lose. 

unforeseen

Playing devil's advocate here. 

The only material change from the OP's POV is that there is now no fence on the neighbour's decking. The decking was there beforehand surrounding the the pool anyway so they would have been using that to sit/stand on. 
In fact, changing the pool to decking is a bonus for the OP. They now have the whole decking to sit at rather than just the edge. Less likelihood of them looking into OP's garden as the photo shows, especially since the fence has been removed.

 There is now  an enormous decked area the same height as our wall so when anyone stands on it they have a full view into all of our bedrooms. 

They could do that before, nothing has changed. Now they don't have a fence to lean on when they do it. 

Davesnave

unforeseen said:

Playing devil's advocate here. 

The only material change from the OP's POV is that there is now no fence on the neighbour's decking. The decking was there beforehand surrounding the the pool anyway so they would have been using that to sit/stand on. 
In fact, changing the pool to decking is a bonus for the OP. They now have the whole decking to sit at rather than just the edge. Less likelihood of them looking into OP's garden as the photo shows, especially since the fence has been removed.

 There is now  an enormous decked area the same height as our wall so when anyone stands on it they have a full view into all of our bedrooms. 

They could do that before, nothing has changed. Now they don't have a fence to lean on when they do it. 

All irrelevant IMO. They have added to the decking and the result isn't for us to evaluate. That job falls to the planning dept.

carefullycautious

Davesnave said:

carefullycautious said:

Another thing to be wary of is planting trees parallel to the boards as she may say you are attempting to block any view she may have.

  What a very appropriate user name!

The OP doesn't want to 'block the view,' they want to regain their privacy. Talk about putting a negative spin on things!

1. I understand entirely what the OP is trying to do however, it could be misconstrued as Tit for Tat and that is  not what she wants to portray if she is getting professionals involved as they will quickly lose interest in assisting her if they find that both are as bad as each other.
2. I was not trying to put a negative spin on anything only trying to let op see it from another perspective. 

Davesnave

carefullycautious said:

Davesnave said:

carefullycautious said:

Another thing to be wary of is planting trees parallel to the boards as she may say you are attempting to block any view she may have.

  What a very appropriate user name!

The OP doesn't want to 'block the view,' they want to regain their privacy. Talk about putting a negative spin on things!

1. I understand entirely what the OP is trying to do however, it could be misconstrued as Tit for Tat and that is  not what she wants to portray if she is getting professionals involved as they will quickly lose interest in assisting her if they find that both are as bad as each other.
2. I was not trying to put a negative spin on anything only trying to let op see it from another perspective. 

Given that planting trees and growing them tall is unlikely to happen quickly, it's my assumption, and that of many others, that the OP will explore other options before doing anything to change the physical situation which we see now.

It may well be that the planning route will not yield the result hoped-for. In that eventuality, the only other options would be to 'block the view' or accept the status quo.You can think of this as tit for tat if you wish, but I prefer to see it as maintaining a reasonable level of privacy.

unforeseen

Davesnave said:

unforeseen said:

Playing devil's advocate here. 

The only material change from the OP's POV is that there is now no fence on the neighbour's decking. The decking was there beforehand surrounding the the pool anyway so they would have been using that to sit/stand on. 
In fact, changing the pool to decking is a bonus for the OP. They now have the whole decking to sit at rather than just the edge. Less likelihood of them looking into OP's garden as the photo shows, especially since the fence has been removed.

 There is now  an enormous decked area the same height as our wall so when anyone stands on it they have a full view into all of our bedrooms. 

They could do that before, nothing has changed. Now they don't have a fence to lean on when they do it. 

All irrelevant IMO. They have added to the decking and the result isn't for us to evaluate. That job falls to the planning dept.

True but ops complaint was that he/she was now overlooked more which is not the case. 

rach_k

unforeseen said:

They could do that before, nothing has changed. Now they don't have a fence to lean on when they do it. 

The neighbour would have to be unusually tall to lean on the 6 foot fence that was on the decking before...