Easements

AdrianC

sallylightFoot said:

AdrianC said:

Will it make a big difference to how wet your field is or is not if this soakaway is one side of the fence or just the other side?

Of course it will. As I stated previously all the other houses around discharge into their own gardens. We live in a zone 3 flood area with clay soil and consequently any water discharge, however small makes a difference. They ought to contain it in their own boundaries like everyone else.

How deep is the impermeable boundary between the two plots...?

I assume there is one, because otherwise the water in the earth on their side will simply migrate through the boundary into the earth on your drained side, and out of your land drain... won't it...?

princeofpounds

sallylightFoot said:

I guess my main worry is if there is a loophole in the law where they can just say it's been doing this  since 1967 so we have a right to keep it discharging there!

It wouldn't be a loophole. It would be... an easement by prescription. And in fact there is no argument that they have been doing this for long enough to qualify. So that's why you have to focus on the other criteria.

Putting aside the legal side of things - for wildlife purposes soggy land is not that bad. Indeed whilst it may not look as nice as a meadow, it is probably far more ecologically diverse and wetlands are an even rarer habitat (90% has been lost supposedly). 

greatcrested

You say that you are happy with the location and use of the septic tank on your land.

However, by building an extension the neighbours will be increasing the load on that tank (assuming the extension includes one or more bedrooms). I raise this again because Building Control will need to sign off their sewage arrangements to support the new extension. Under the new rules, a septic tank cannot discharge to a watercourse ie the field drains, so new arrangements will be needed.

Your cooperation with this could be combined with a discussion/agreement regarding the surface water discharge.

AdrianC

princeofpounds said:

Putting aside the legal side of things - for wildlife purposes soggy land is not that bad. Indeed whilst it may not look as nice as a meadow, it is probably far more ecologically diverse and wetlands are an even rarer habitat (90% has been lost supposedly). 

I am more amused than I probably should be by the fact that this (absolutely accurate) comment was followed by one from GreatCrested.

greatcrested

Minutes would not be happy there. They need an actual pond with a minimum depth rather than just boggy land....

sallylightFoot

greatcrested said:

You say that you are happy with the location and use of the septic tank on your land.

However, by building an extension the neighbours will be increasing the load on that tank (assuming the extension includes one or more bedrooms). I raise this again because Building Control will need to sign off their sewage arrangements to support the new extension. Under the new rules, a septic tank cannot discharge to a watercourse ie the field drains, so new arrangements will be needed.

Your cooperation with this could be combined with a discussion/agreement regarding the surface water discharge.

Thank you greatcrested, this is something we have thought about but  are not sure if we can do anything as they have a legal Covenant on the field.

Since 1967 to 2018 there has been three separate owners, all three were single elderly and lived alone. It is a two bed bungalow, and now the current owners, who are in their 20s with a new baby,  want to add an extension adding a further bedroom, study, changing room, extra 2 showers, 2 sinks and 2 toilets.  They have already added an impermeable patio (cira 20sq m) onto the side of the bungalow, so have already reduced their garden area.

It is certainly something we will be discussing with them in the future.

greatcrested

sallylightFoot said:

greatcrested said:

You say that you are happy with the location and use of the septic tank on your land.

However, by building an extension the neighbours will be increasing the load on that tank (assuming the extension includes one or more bedrooms). I raise this again because Building Control will need to sign off their sewage arrangements to support the new extension. Under the new rules, a septic tank cannot discharge to a watercourse ie the field drains, so new arrangements will be needed.

Your cooperation with this could be combined with a discussion/agreement regarding the surface water discharge.

Thank you greatcrested, this is something we have thought about but  are not sure if we can do anything as they have a legal Covenant on the field.

Yes but what is the exact wording of the covenant? Does it permit

* a septice tank only? (this will be non compliant with BRs so will not get sign off)

* a septic tank plus drainage field? (this will probably be non compliant with BRs, given the soil type/water table, so will not get sign off)

* a septic tank discharging to the watercourse? (this will be non compliant with BRs so will not get sign off)

If no changes were being made, the existing septic tank arrangement could continue legally and under the covenant.

But because of the changes they are making, the septic tank must be brought up to current (very spcific) standards, which will almost certainly not be covered by the terms of the covenant. So:

What is the exact wording of the covenant?

sallylightFoot

greatcrest, the exact wording of the covenant is:

".......Full right and liberty at all times to maintain and use the said drain pipes leading from the said bungalow to the said septic tank free and uninterrupted passage or conveyance of sewage water from the said bungalow to the said septic tank but NOT FOR ANY OTHER PURPOSE WHATSOEVER.  

Full rights and liberty at all times to maintain and use the said line of drain pipes leading from the septic tank to the said field drains for the free and uninterrupted passage or conveyance of surplus water from the said septic tank to the said field drains but NOT FOR ANY OTHER PURPOSE WHATSOEVER…..”  

You are right that I doubt they would pass BR these days as the water table is almost up to ground level many times throughout the year.  I think this also shows he (the seller of the land who made the covenant) did not want surface water discharging into the field, as it was at that time an agricultural field used for cattle.  As I said they have opened a can of worms.....

greatcrested

Well that worked fine back in the day. And would continue to work if no changes were made.

But toilet to drain to septic tank to field drain will never get BR sign off for any new installation today.

So the covenant will have to be re-negotiated to take account of whatever new installation the neighbours will have to put in place (probably a treatment plant as it sounds like a drainage field won't work).

And as part of that negotiation, you discuss the roof water too.

But you'll need to make sure that Building Control are properly infomed. Sometimes they take things for granted/on trust. Also may depend if the Local Authority do the certification, or an authorised private building controller....

Rural_Puppy

It may be possible that it is a "combined" septic tank, ie one that also has ground water passing through it. 
Our rather elderly ST is like that. We are upgrading our drainage and changing where the surface water goes, and installing a bigger ST, but it could be that the reason your field is so wet is because either the tank needs desludged and / or the surface water drains go through it.
Some questions you might ask your neighbours:
1. When did they last empty the ST?
2. Where does their surface water drain to? If they don't know you could suggest they try a dye test in the system.
3. What upgrades are they planning to the drainage to ensure it complies with current BR when the extension is built.
Best of luck!
Ps you may wish to reconsider the name you are using to post, as it looks very like it could be your real name. You may prefer to use an internet handle instead. Many here do!