Can neighbour ask us to move a retaining wall?

arielsmelody

Well, I've decided that we are not going budge on the wall being rebuilt along the existing line, which means that the actual boundary line runs down the centre of the wall. I'm going to accept that we pay & take responsibility for the wall which I know some posters said was mad. My logic is that we are the higher house and it's 'our' boundary line on the deeds. I could argue it but the risk is l lose and waste time/money. Also most of the disruption of rebuilding is on our side so I want to have control over that process. If it's rebuilt properly now, it should last for years.

Thank you to everyone for your comments!

Section62

arielsmelody said:

I'm going to accept that we pay & take responsibility for the wall which I know some posters said was mad. My logic is that we are the higher house and it's 'our' boundary line on the deeds.

I don't think anyone said 'mad', just unwise without appreciating the consequences.

For the benefit of anyone in a similar position reading this thread in the future, the logic you are using is wrong - and based on incorrect/misleading 'advice' given in the thread, in particular by a poster who has now shown on multiple threads that they have a very flawed understanding of property law and process.

Also bear in mind if you take 'ownership' of the wall then the neighbour can rightly insist you put the whole of your wall on your land.  Taking ownership and insisting the wall isn't moved are conflicting objectives.

arielsmelody said:

Also most of the disruption of rebuilding is on our side so I want to have control over that process.

Are you sure? Unless you are having the wall piled, most of the work usually has to be done on the lower side of the wall. As I said on page 1, the foundations will also usually extend into the neighbour's land. Has the neighbour agreed to this? Will they kick up a fuss if your contractor makes a mess of their garden and driveway?  Once you've agreed the wall is yours and you will deal with it, the neighbour will have you over a barrel.  Have you budgeted for the potential of a landscaper of choice for the neighbour, plus a new driveway?

If you believe that taking control of the process will make life easier for you then I have grave doubts that will happen.

arielsmelody

Thank you but I think you are overstating the case. The foundations will extend mainly under our land, so it's our patio that gets dug up. The neighbour is resigned to some disruption and to agree access to builders - the new wall benefits him as well. We have mutually agreed on a conractor and what will be built. If he fusses about the posn of the wall he will delay everything and lose our goodwill, and it is certainly not black and white that he would win since the wall has been in place for 50 years. So in the balance that's what I've decided.

Section62

arielsmelody said:

Thank you but I think you are overstating the case.

Given the thread started with "Can neighbour ask us to move a retaining wall?" and this isn't yet agreed, and the neighbour appears willing to go back on what he has previously agreed, then I don't feel it is an overstatement of the case.

But ultimately it is your decision on how to proceed. We can only offer advice based on our experience and the limited facts shared in any thead.

I hope the neighbour now accepts having your wall on his land and is true to his word going forward.

markin

At least get it in writing, or it could become a nightmare if either side has to sell.

Bendy_House

arielsmelody said:

Well, I've decided that we are not going budge on the wall being rebuilt along the existing line, which means that the actual boundary line runs down the centre of the wall. I'm going to accept that we pay & take responsibility for the wall which I know some posters said was mad. My logic is that we are the higher house and it's 'our' boundary line on the deeds. I could argue it but the risk is l lose and waste time/money. Also most of the disruption of rebuilding is on our side so I want to have control over that process. If it's rebuilt properly now, it should last for years.

Thank you to everyone for your comments!

Tsk, you just show me who said you'd be 'mad' on here, and I'll sort them oot for ye, pal.

Ok, I did say you'd be slightly 'nutty'... :-)

This has obviously got to be your call. What I find galling in situations like this, is that one side 'presumes' far too much (I'm referring to your neighbour...), and this 'entitled' manner then becomes an assertive way to get more than they are entitled to, or deserve. And, even then, they aren't actually grateful.

Ariel, this is the situation:

1) IF the current wall is on your neighbour's side of the boundary line, then it's theirs. And it appears to be.

2) IF this wall was built by your neighbour's builder, then it's doubly-theirs. And it appears to have been.

3) REGARDLESS of ground levels - who may or may not have excavated or built-up land on either side - after 50+years, you have an 'easement' on that wall, and the status quo has been established. Ie - THEY, with the wall that is on THEIR side, have held your ground back for 50+ years, so you are now ENTITLED to have your ground held back by a wall on THEIR land in perp.

4) I am not claiming the above as 'fact' - you'd need to have it legally confirmed - but I would bet (as a non-betting fellow) a pretty sizeable sum on it being correct.

So, based on that, all you actually need to do is wait for that wall to collapse, and then take legal action against your neighbour.

I am not suggesting you do this, of course, but I am trying to get across to you what the actual situation here almost certainly is. And that your neighb needs a metaphoric slap in the face with the carp of reality.

At the very least, your neighbour should acknowledge the true situation, show some humility, and be falling over themselves to compromise. Because, they are almost certainly deluded about the facts, and if they aren't made to confront 'reality', they will likely just grudgingly and grumblingly and - in their hapless minds - 'generously' accept a border-straddling 'compromise' with you. That they will, forever, moan about in private.

Or, worse, they do actually know the facts, but are 'trying it on'.

Phew.

But, as I say, this has to be your call.

You may actually find - when the current wall is dismantled - that it isn't single-brick skin after all, but that, under your soil, there is a second skin. I mean, a waist-high, single-skinned retaining wall is unlikely to have lasted 60 years!

Personally, I'd want the neighb to acknowledge the situation before then agreeing a way forward. It should be as simple as, "The current wall is on your land, yes? Cool. So, it's your wall, yes? Good. And it's been holding back my land for ~60 years, yes? Excellent. In which case it needs to continue to do so. If you don't agree with this, please ask your solicitor for confirmation, and then we'll talk about it again."

Once some humility/contrition is shown, you can then discuss a way forward, but I think that for you to take on the full cost of dismantling, removing, and rebuilding this wall, regardless of how much ends up straddling the boundary - is nuttily generous of you. They seem to think that you are taking the mick, whereas they are the ones doing so. Unless they are put in the position of having to clarify this, then they will likely always be 'grudging', and not 'grateful' - as they should be. They should contribute towards the cost, and be completely accepting that at least half remains inside their boundary.

And you get this in writing before you remove a brick.

But it your call.

FreeBear

Bendy_House said: They should contribute towards the cost, and be completely accepting that at least half remains inside their boundary.

A properly engineers and constructed retaining wall is expensive. It is not something that I would personally pay for, and it shouldn't be the OP footing the bill (if the wall is owned by the neighbour).