Neighbours gutters

gorbalsgerry

Bendy_House said:

I'm not sure actual damage/water penetration has occurred yet?

But, overflowing gutters almost always do cause issues, and in any case it's just 'wrong'!

Gerry, I think I would tackle this on the basis that the neighbours were looking for a solution, and perhaps 'innocently' thought, "What difference does it make - in this terrace, there's only one DP for 7 houses at this end, and only one per 5 houses on t'other - what does it matter if that is swapped 5 to 7 instead!"

The main issue why it's not acceptable is the way the whole content is sent down a focused short DP in to your gutter - just no way will that not cause literal issues. But even tho' there might be a solution involving running it in a more controlled way into 'your' set of 5 houses, this should be 100% off the table. For a start, I think there's a good chance that even your side will need to add/modify their shared system at some point, perhaps with deepflow guttering, or an additional or wider DP. Almost certainly, weather systems are going to become more extreme. So, if they moot any 'tweak' that still sends any water to 'your' side, say a categoric 'Non'. Explain that 5 houses to one DP is already at capacity, and will only become more so as weather systems likely deteriorate.

So, "I totally understand what it is you were trying to do, and I know you have problems with what you have on your side, and - tbh - I doubt that a single DP will be good enough in the future even if it's all kept cleaned. Sorry, but our 5 houses are only just coping as it is, and every time it rains water does now gush over the guttering because of the extra flow from your side. I don't like to do this, but I do need to put you on notice that damage will, almost certainly, be caused to my, and possibly my RH neighbour's, houses, and it will have to be paid for by you, as I have now told you that there is a problem - I really have no option. You do understand, don't you? I really hope you can sort this before any damage occurs..."

Don't be side-tracked by any discussion or argument, the "Oh, it only overflows once in a while!" or "You've only got 5 houses on your side - it ain't fair..." or "Who's going to pay to put it right?!" Just let them have their say, and repeat, "If it isn't put back the way it was, it will, almost certainly, cause damage. And you know this. So I will - sorry - have no option but to claim. And it will be successful. If water gets inside my house, you could easily be looking at £housands... You do understand, don't you?" Or, put it in the form of a question that you DO expect an answer to - repeat it if necessary! "You cannot expect me to let my house be damaged by the changes you have made to the guttering, and just accept it?!"

You can also suggest the correct path - they need to oblige the owner of the blocked gutter and/or DP to have it cleaned, but this should be a shared cost between 7 houses - they all benefit. If any are council owned, get on to them and tell them the difficult situation you are in, trying to get some folk to act. They will hopefully do the donkey work for your neighbs.

First move, I'd suggest - find out if any are council owned, and call them up.

I think I've asked - do you have LP on your house insurance? If not, add it on renewal - it's ideal for sorting out issues like this.

Sadly Bendy I've not got Legal Protection on my insurance but will be adding it. I have contacted my local Councillor this morning to see if they can help in anyway. I have also got a copy of my title deeds today which seem to say that the 7 neighbours on left should always be feeding into the DP that is supplied for them and the 5 houses on the lower part of the terrace should feed into DP supplied for them. 

Bendy_House

I hope they realise they NEED to do the right thing, before it has to get heavy.

DanDare999

Bendy_House said:

I hope they realise they NEED to do the right thing, before it has to get heavy.

You're against the OP taking direct action, but how long do you suggest they let this situation carry on? Surely the OP has a duty to minimise any damage to their home. It doesn't seem right as you say putting the neighbour on notice (if that is a legal term) waiting for £1000's of damage to be caused and having a cast iron chance of winning in court. 

If I were in the OP's position I'd be giving them a set time to sort it before I'd divert or cap the pipe. 

Bendy_House

Yes, a set time as part of the PON is a good idea.

But, then what? 

DanDare999

Bendy_House said:

Yes, a set time as part of the PON is a good idea.

But, then what? 

That's what I asked. Sitting back and allowing the damage to be caused because you say the OP will win in court isn't a good idea. The OP needs to take positive reasonable steps to protect their property. 

Bendy_House

DanDare999 said:

Bendy_House said:

Yes, a set time as part of the PON is a good idea.

But, then what? 

That's what I asked. Sitting back and allowing the damage to be caused because you say the OP will win in court isn't a good idea. The OP needs to take positive reasonable steps to protect their property. 

Like what?

DanDare999

Bendy_House said:

DanDare999 said:

Bendy_House said:

Yes, a set time as part of the PON is a good idea.

But, then what? 

That's what I asked. Sitting back and allowing the damage to be caused because you say the OP will win in court isn't a good idea. The OP needs to take positive reasonable steps to protect their property. 

Like what?

Can't you read? Divert or cap.

Bendy_House

DanDare999 said:

Bendy_House said:

DanDare999 said:

Bendy_House said:

Yes, a set time as part of the PON is a good idea.

But, then what? 

That's what I asked. Sitting back and allowing the damage to be caused because you say the OP will win in court isn't a good idea. The OP needs to take positive reasonable steps to protect their property. 

Like what?

Can't you read? Divert or cap.

I can read.

And what would diverting or capping do?

DanDare999

Bendy_House said:

DanDare999 said:

Bendy_House said:

DanDare999 said:

Bendy_House said:

Yes, a set time as part of the PON is a good idea.

But, then what? 

That's what I asked. Sitting back and allowing the damage to be caused because you say the OP will win in court isn't a good idea. The OP needs to take positive reasonable steps to protect their property. 

Like what?

Can't you read? Divert or cap.

I can read.

And what would diverting or capping do?

I'll let you work that one out.

Bendy_House

DanDare999 said:

Bendy_House said:

DanDare999 said:

Bendy_House said:

DanDare999 said:

Bendy_House said:

Yes, a set time as part of the PON is a good idea.

But, then what? 

That's what I asked. Sitting back and allowing the damage to be caused because you say the OP will win in court isn't a good idea. The OP needs to take positive reasonable steps to protect their property. 

Like what?

Can't you read? Divert or cap.

I can read.

And what would diverting or capping do?

I'll let you work that one out.

Create a risk of causing damage to the neighbour's property, for which Gerry would be liable?

Did I get it right? I did, didn't I?