Further issues raised by buyer re drain and build over agreement

verytired11

My buyer has sent via the agent the following request.  The agent says it can all be dealt with by indemnity:
"The rear drain that re-enters the house does so because the main drainage pipe was built over by the extension. The homeowner at the time should have procured a Build Over Agreement from the local water company. I have alerted my solicitors to request this and inspect it to ensure that no regulations have been/are breached in the construction of the extension. If the vendor is able to provide these, it would expedite matters. If they are not available, then this should be requested from the local water company, along with a release of liability for potential repairs, prior to exchange. The water company will likely want to do an assessment of the state of the drain as well to confirm that they will be responsible for any future repairs."
The extension in question was built by the previous owners and I have provided the buyer with the building regs certificate they gave us at the time, so we know it complied.  However, we weren't given any build over agreement and this never came up when we bought the house.  I don't really want to get the water company involved at this stage as it could open a can of worms.  I certainly don't want them coming to inspect the property.  I am also not entirely clear what the buyer means by a release of liability for potential repairs.  Can anyone shed any light on any of this?  

Irishpearce26

So when was the extension built? If it was pre 2011 and has build reg sign off then nothing to worry about as it will be covered by the utilities policy. However if it was build post 2011 with no build over agreement DO NOT GET IN TOUCH WITH THE UTILITY COMPANY as this will void any indemnity cover. They could even demand the structure is removed. Indemnity cover for this will likely cost anywhere between £30-£70 (from experience) and is transferable between each owner of the house.

Doozergirl

How old is the house and how old is the extension? 

A building control completion certificate suggests that it complied with the rules in force at the time.  Houses built after 1936 have only needed build over agreements since 2011 when water companies adopted a lot of previously private drains.  

verytired11

Irishpearce26 said:

So when was the extension built? If it was pre 2011 and has build reg sign off then nothing to worry about as it will be covered by the utilities policy. However if it was build post 2011 with no build over agreement DO NOT GET IN TOUCH WITH THE UTILITY COMPANY as this will void any indemnity cover. They could even demand the structure is removed. Indemnity cover for this will likely cost anywhere between £30-£70 (from experience) and is transferable between each owner of the house.

Thanks that's really helpful - it was built back in about 1996.  When I saw what he said in the email i did ring the agent in a panic telling him to tell the buyer not to contact anyone.  I really hope he did this - although it seems from what you say that even if he did it wouldn't matter as its pre 2011.  He is a troublesome buyer.

verytired11

Doozergirl said:

How old is the house and how old is the extension? 

A building control completion certificate suggests that it complied with the rules in force at the time.  Houses built after 1936 have only needed build over agreements since 2011 when water companies adopted a lot of previously private drains.  

Thanks, that's what I thought.  The house is victorian and the extension was built in about 1996.  I have always assumed the drain to be my responsibility and never thought anything about it - does it sound to you as if the drain is privately owned by me?

Section62

verytired11 said:

Thanks, that's what I thought.  The house is victorian and the extension was built in about 1996.  I have always assumed the drain to be my responsibility and never thought anything about it - does it sound to you as if the drain is privately owned by me?

It depends whether it serves more than your property - if it is shared then it will be a public sewer and a build over agreement would have been needed.

For clarity, a build over agreement was needed before 2011 where the works affected a public sewer, this wasn't a new requirement introduced in 2011.  What changed in 2011 was a whole load of private drainage became public sewers, meaning the requirement for a build over agreement was extended to them.

verytired11

Section62 said:

verytired11 said:

Thanks, that's what I thought.  The house is victorian and the extension was built in about 1996.  I have always assumed the drain to be my responsibility and never thought anything about it - does it sound to you as if the drain is privately owned by me?

It depends whether it serves more than your property - if it is shared then it will be a public sewer and a build over agreement would have been needed.

For clarity, a build over agreement was needed before 2011 where the works affected a public sewer, this wasn't a new requirement introduced in 2011.  What changed in 2011 was a whole load of private drainage became public sewers, meaning the requirement for a build over agreement was extended to them.

Thanks.  I have no idea whether it is shared or not, but assume it isn't given that building regs signed it off at the time.  It's a surface water drain so assume it just goes under the house and connects up with the drains at the front of the house.

Doozergirl

You need to work out if it is only yours.  You think it is simply the down pipe for your own house?  

You need to open any manholes and work it out. 

If it is only yours then no build over agreement would ever be needed.  If it is shared and Victorian, then it may well have needed agreement but this is old news now. 

The buyer can satisfy themselves with a drain survey and you can offer an indemnity.  

verytired11

Just an update on this issue.  I asked to see extracts of the surveyor's report which the buyer has now sent.  In it the surveyor advised the buyer that no build over agreement was required! Yet the buyer had written to me saying that the survey had said I should have got a build over agreement and was quite aggressive about it 😮 The surveyor simply said he should check there was building regs - the buyer had already seen the building regs certificate at that point.  It has annoyed me a lot that he is trying to get money off for something that is not an issue and he knew it wasn't an issue.  It seems the buyer's solicitor is also fed up of him as they sent further queries today with an apology and more or less saying there was no need to answer the queries but the buyer had insisted that they ask the questions.  Anyway, it has made me more likely to push back on the other matters in the survey as he is clearly trying to get every penny he can from me.
Edited to add: it wasn't even me who did the extension (which he knows) so I am not sure why he is saying I should have got the certificate anyway, that's the bit that felt aggressive.

Section62

verytired11 said:

Thanks.  I have no idea whether it is shared or not, but assume it isn't given that building regs signed it off at the time.

Building Regs sign off can happen whether or not the pipe is shared/not-shared or private/public, so that isn't a very good indicator.

From a BR perspective the only concerns are whether or not the pipe is adequately protected, that the building structure isn't compromised by the presence of the pipe, and that steps have been taken to prevent harmful/nuisance leakage of gases from the pipe into the building. All apply equally regardless of ownership of the pipe.

verytired11 said:

In it the surveyor advised the buyer that no build over agreement was required! Yet the buyer had written to me saying that the survey had said I should have got a build over agreement and was quite aggressive about it 😮 The surveyor simply said he should check there was building regs - the buyer had already seen the building regs certificate at that point.  It has annoyed me a lot that he is trying to get money off for something that is not an issue and he knew it wasn't an issue.

Notwithstanding the buyer seems to have been a bit economical with the truth, as a general point I wouldn't rely on a surveyor's opinion about whether a build over agreement was required or not.

As with gas and electrics, they aren't drainage experts and would usually recommend further investigation of the drains, rather than offering a definitive opinion. Although it is relatively easy to confirm a pipe is shared, confirming that a drain isn't shared usually needs a CCTV survey, which is beyond the scope of a normal homebuyer survey.

The buyer/surveyor would have been quite fortunate to be in a position where the surveyor could lift a manhole cover and confirm non-shared drainage (considering the type of property).