Buying New House - Shared Sewer under property extension.

CrazyE

Hi all,

So we have found a house that we fell in love with and our offer got accepted STC. The house was built in the 1930s and had an extension added in 1996. We received the survey results from our solicitors today and we had an amber warning "The public sewer map included indicates that there is a public sewer, disposal main or lateral drain within the boundaries of the property."



So it looks like it run under the extension that was added. Now I am currently unaware if there is build over permission granted or if it applied since it was done in 1996 something I will ask our solicitors. 

My wife has her heart set on this property. Should I be seriously concerned about this? We are not planning any building extensions so my risk would be maintenance? Would it be better to walk away? Could we get an indemnity? 

Thanks,

FlyMeSomewhere79

I just had the same issue recently with the home I'm selling and I panicked but it's fine, somebody in the distance past extended my property and the manhole covers are under carpet in my utility room rather than outside, the laws on this changed since I bought it, we have no idea who did the extension or any documentation but know it was at least 24 years ago due to the newspaper under the carpet.

We've had to buy a £90 indemnity policy to protect our buyer, nobody has ever needed access to my manhole covers in decades and I doubt they ever will but the cover is there for my buyer just in case.

FlyMeSomewhere79

I think a hell of a lot of houses will have had build overs because back in the day it was allowed as only the householder needed access. They changed the rules in 2011 but they realise many houses can't do much about it now. They would have had alternative access when the sewers were private and must still have that access now. The likelihood of needing access must be incredibly slim.

Section62

CrazyE said:

Hi all,

So we have found a house that we fell in love with and our offer got accepted STC. The house was built in the 1930s and had an extension added in 1996. We received the survey results from our solicitors today and we had an amber warning "The public sewer map included indicates that there is a public sewer, disposal main or lateral drain within the boundaries of the property."

So it looks like it run under the extension that was added. Now I am currently unaware if there is build over permission granted or if it applied since it was done in 1996 something I will ask our solicitors. 

My wife has her heart set on this property. Should I be seriously concerned about this? We are not planning any building extensions so my risk would be maintenance? Would it be better to walk away? Could we get an indemnity? 

If the property is the one with the purple border then the layout shown on the plan would indicate the drainage is private rather than public, unless there is a connection to number 38 (or another property) which is missing from the plan.

You could ask the water company to verify the drainage is public, but they are likely to just look at the plan and say "yes" without actually checking on site.  This would also likely have the effect of invalidating any indemnity cover.

Personally I'd get a CCTV drainage survey done - this will have the effect of (a) confirming if other properties are connected (and therefore confirm what is public/private) and (b) give you information about the condition of the pipe and whether it passing under the property is likely to give you any headaches during your ownership.

If this is one half of a semi then it increases the probability that number 38 drains via the property you are looking at.

It would also be useful if you know more accurately when in the 1930's the property was built, as those built before October 1937 are likely to be 'Section 24' properties, whereas those built after may not be.

FlyMeSomewhere79

Section62 said:

CrazyE said:

Hi all,

So we have found a house that we fell in love with and our offer got accepted STC. The house was built in the 1930s and had an extension added in 1996. We received the survey results from our solicitors today and we had an amber warning "The public sewer map included indicates that there is a public sewer, disposal main or lateral drain within the boundaries of the property."

So it looks like it run under the extension that was added. Now I am currently unaware if there is build over permission granted or if it applied since it was done in 1996 something I will ask our solicitors. 

My wife has her heart set on this property. Should I be seriously concerned about this? We are not planning any building extensions so my risk would be maintenance? Would it be better to walk away? Could we get an indemnity? 

If the property is the one with the purple border then the layout shown on the plan would indicate the drainage is private rather than public, unless there is a connection to number 38 (or another property) which is missing from the plan.

You could ask the water company to verify the drainage is public, but they are likely to just look at the plan and say "yes" without actually checking on site.  This would also likely have the effect of invalidating any indemnity cover.

Personally I'd get a CCTV drainage survey done - this will have the effect of (a) confirming if other properties are connected (and therefore confirm what is public/private) and (b) give you information about the condition of the pipe and whether it passing under the property is likely to give you any headaches during your ownership.

If this is one half of a semi then it increases the probability that number 38 drains via the property you are looking at.

It would also be useful if you know more accurately when in the 1930's the property was built, as those built before October 1937 are likely to be 'Section 24' properties, whereas those built after may not be.

This seems to be going off the deep end, having just gone through this with my own property and looked into the regs, these are no longer private sewers.

The OP doesn't need to pay for CCTV surveys, the solicitors and the searches will tell him anything he needs to know. 

My house was built in 1959 and not once has any issue arisen, many houses will be in the same boat. His buyer may get asked to pay for an indemnity policy that's all 

Section62

FlyMeSomewhere79 said:

I think a hell of a lot of houses will have had build overs because back in the day it was allowed as only the householder needed access. They changed the rules in 2011 but they realise many houses can't do much about it now.

If it was allowed (without a buildover agreement) then it would have been because the drain was private and the responsibility of the property owner, and that local Building Control were happy with the access arrangement.

The water companies cannot do anything about it now because the effect of the 2011 wasn't retrospective - if someone built over their private drain prior to 2011 then that was their choice and there is no enforcement that can now be taken simply due to the drain becoming a public sewer.

FlyMeSomewhere79 said:

They would have had alternative access when the sewers were private and must still have that access now. The likelihood of needing access must be incredibly slim.

A lot of the time there was no alternative access, and in many cases any alternative access(es) have since been lost as well.  The likelihood of needing access depends on the condition of the sewer and what people put into the sewers (both vary over time).  There are some cases I know of where the sewer needs to be accessed a couple of times a month - and where the access point (inspection chamber) is inside someone's house the water company can obtain a warrant to gain access (if necessary).

As a buyer I'd hesitate to buy a property where the drains/sewers have no external access.  And an indemnity policy doesn't help much if someone has caused a blockage and the sewage is bubbling out of your toilet.

Section62

FlyMeSomewhere79 said:

Section62 said:

CrazyE said:

Hi all,

So we have found a house that we fell in love with and our offer got accepted STC. The house was built in the 1930s and had an extension added in 1996. We received the survey results from our solicitors today and we had an amber warning "The public sewer map included indicates that there is a public sewer, disposal main or lateral drain within the boundaries of the property."

So it looks like it run under the extension that was added. Now I am currently unaware if there is build over permission granted or if it applied since it was done in 1996 something I will ask our solicitors. 

My wife has her heart set on this property. Should I be seriously concerned about this? We are not planning any building extensions so my risk would be maintenance? Would it be better to walk away? Could we get an indemnity? 

If the property is the one with the purple border then the layout shown on the plan would indicate the drainage is private rather than public, unless there is a connection to number 38 (or another property) which is missing from the plan.

You could ask the water company to verify the drainage is public, but they are likely to just look at the plan and say "yes" without actually checking on site.  This would also likely have the effect of invalidating any indemnity cover.

Personally I'd get a CCTV drainage survey done - this will have the effect of (a) confirming if other properties are connected (and therefore confirm what is public/private) and (b) give you information about the condition of the pipe and whether it passing under the property is likely to give you any headaches during your ownership.

If this is one half of a semi then it increases the probability that number 38 drains via the property you are looking at.

It would also be useful if you know more accurately when in the 1930's the property was built, as those built before October 1937 are likely to be 'Section 24' properties, whereas those built after may not be.

This seems to be going off the deep end, having just gone through this with my own property and looked into the regs, these are no longer private sewers.

The OP doesn't need to pay for CCTV surveys, the solicitors and the searches will tell him anything he needs to know. 

My house was built in 1959 and not once has any issue arisen, many houses will be in the same boat. His buyer may get asked to pay for an indemnity policy that's all 

Having worked with drainage systems for many years I respectfully disagree with your opinion.  Getting a drainage survey done is likely to be the OP's best way of moving forward.

The searches will only provide the information which is recorded, which is only a small proportion of the complete public sewer network in private land. The records are exceptionally poor.

The solicitors will only comment based on the information they are given, in accordance with their (limited) knowledge. They often get it wrong.

It is true that the OP doesn't need to pay for a CCTV survey if the pipe is a public sewer (that cost would be borne by the water company) but if the OP doesn't take the initiative themself then the only way of getting a definitive answer on the public/private status of the drains on that property is to ask the water company to investigate (which they will be reluctant to do) and in doing so any indemnity cover would be invalidated.

The lack of an issue with your 1959 property (to the best of your knowledge, having only purchased relatively recently) has no bearing on whether or not the OP may have issues with the property they are looking at.

Albermarle

We had a side extension in 1996 where a garage had been, and the manhole cover is under the carpet in there.
The only issue was that at first there was a faint smell, but a plastic sheet under the underlay solved that.

FlyMeSomewhere79

Section62 said:

FlyMeSomewhere79 said:

I think a hell of a lot of houses will have had build overs because back in the day it was allowed as only the householder needed access. They changed the rules in 2011 but they realise many houses can't do much about it now.

If it was allowed (without a buildover agreement) then it would have been because the drain was private and the responsibility of the property owner, and that local Building Control were happy with the access arrangement.

The water companies cannot do anything about it now because the effect of the 2011 wasn't retrospective - if someone built over their private drain prior to 2011 then that was their choice and there is no enforcement that can now be taken simply due to the drain becoming a public sewer.

FlyMeSomewhere79 said:

They would have had alternative access when the sewers were private and must still have that access now. The likelihood of needing access must be incredibly slim.

A lot of the time there was no alternative access, and in many cases any alternative access(es) have since been lost as well.  The likelihood of needing access depends on the condition of the sewer and what people put into the sewers (both vary over time).  There are some cases I know of where the sewer needs to be accessed a couple of times a month - and where the access point (inspection chamber) is inside someone's house the water company can obtain a warrant to gain access (if necessary).

As a buyer I'd hesitate to buy a property where the drains/sewers have no external access.  And an indemnity policy doesn't help much if someone has caused a blockage and the sewage is bubbling out of your toilet.

But anybodies toilet could do that!! The location of the sewer is irrelevant. Your toilet in your house could do that.

My house is over 70 years old, no issues have arisen, the sewage people would have alternative access all those years ago otherwise the manholes in people's property couldn't have been private back then could they if they were needed by the sewage company as well.

I've been in this house over 16 years (why do you class this as recent?) and issues haven't ever existed, you are badly over exaggerating things and unfairly scaremongering. Why do you feel the need to sabotage house sales because you suffer sewer phobia! How many houses in the UK do you think have sewers running underneath them? Go on do your homework and tell us how many millions of lovely properties you are personally condemning as unfit to be sold because you don't like sewers? Add to that any house with a toilet that could back up for other reasons? Yep you've probably condemned near enough every house in the UK! 

The OP just needs to know what the solicitor and searches tell him. Houses with sewers underneath them get sold all over the UK every day. Or is it just manhole phobia that you suffer with.
 

FlyMeSomewhere79

CrazyE said:

Hi all,

So we have found a house that we fell in love with and our offer got accepted STC. The house was built in the 1930s and had an extension added in 1996. We received the survey results from our solicitors today and we had an amber warning "The public sewer map included indicates that there is a public sewer, disposal main or lateral drain within the boundaries of the property."



So it looks like it run under the extension that was added. Now I am currently unaware if there is build over permission granted or if it applied since it was done in 1996 something I will ask our solicitors. 

My wife has her heart set on this property. Should I be seriously concerned about this? We are not planning any building extensions so my risk would be maintenance? Would it be better to walk away? Could we get an indemnity? 

Thanks,

OP please listen to those if us that have personal experience rather than a guy that hasn't got any but just has an over the top grudge with sewers.

It's not an issue, it never has been and my buyers are still more than happy to make this their home. If you love that house don't let something so benign out you off - absolutely loads of people live in houses with build overs as it was such a normal thing for houses beyond a certain era.

Your solicitors will advise but neither my or my buyers solicitor saw any concern in it. I've had no issues in over 16 years of living here!

Section62

FlyMeSomewhere79 said:

But anybodies toilet could do that!! The location of the sewer is irrelevant. Your toilet in your house could do that.

The issue is time.  If a sewer has become blocked then the amount of time it takes to clear it will determine the amount of damage done to properties vulnerable to flooding.  An accessible manhole in the garden can allow the blockage to be cleared quickly, or for overpumping.  If the only manhole is 'somewhere' under a carpet (or more likely tiles/laminate these days) then it takes longer to get access and deal with the issue.  Rapid response is critical to minimising the damage done... which is why drainage companies get away with charging so much for 'emergency' responses 24/7.

In my view and experience, a property without easy access to shared drainage is high risk.

FlyMeSomewhere79 said:

My house is over 70 years old, no issues have arisen, the sewage people would have alternative access all those years ago otherwise the manholes in people's property couldn't have been private back then could they if they were needed by the sewage company as well.

I'm unable to respond to this point because I don't understand what you are saying in the BiB.  However, it does suggest you may not fully understand the history of responsibility for property drainage, and why this is important for housebuyers today.

FlyMeSomewhere79 said:

I've been in this house over 16 years (why do you class this as recent?) and issues haven't ever existed....

The house existed over 54 years before you moved in.  You can't claim "issues haven't ever existed" without knowledge of those previous 54 years.  I said "relatively recently" to reflect that fact.

Drainage issues aren't a constant, the situation changes over time.  You can't know there weren't any problems in the years before your ownership, and perhaps more importantly you cannot use past experience to predict there won't be a problem in the future.

The best guide to future risk is getting a CCTV survey done.  This is standard practice where there are queries over drainage issues.

FlyMeSomewhere79 said:

....you are badly over exaggerating things and unfairly scaremongering. Why do you feel the need to sabotage house sales because you suffer sewer phobia!

I neither have "sewer phobia" nor do I feel the need to "sabotage house sales".  Having visited many properties after they have been flooded by foul sewage I don't feel my comments regarding problems with access to drainage to be an exaggeration nor "unfairly scaremongering". If anything I chose to be measured in my responses given the OP has only limited information at this stage.

I'm offering advice to the OP based on my professional experience working with drainage systems.  And pointing out your one-off experience is unlikely to apply directly to the OP's situation.

This is a money saving site.  The advice I'm giving the OP is about letting them know there is a potential financial risk of proceeding with this purchase without getting a better idea of the situation with this drain/sewer.  If, utimately, they decided to pull out of the purchase because of drainage issues then they will be saving money.  Not because of anyone's "sewer phobia".

FlyMeSomewhere79 said:

How many houses in the UK do you think have sewers running underneath them? Go on do your homework and tell us how many millions of lovely properties you are personally condemning as unfit to be sold because you don't like sewers? Add to that any house with a toilet that could back up for other reasons? Yep you've probably condemned near enough every house in the UK!

At a guess a small decimal fraction of 1% of UK houses will have public sewers running underneath them (i.e. somewhat less than 0.5%).

And I would not "condemn[ these] as unfit to be sold", only advise a prospective purchaser to make sure ownership of the sewers is clearly understood and that the pipes are in good condition.  At present the OP doesn't have that information, hence my advice about a CCTV survey.

FlyMeSomewhere79 said:

The OP just needs to know what the solicitor and searches tell him. Houses with sewers underneath them get sold all over the UK every day. Or is it just manhole phobia that you suffer with.

As previously explained, the searches rely on poor quality records that are incomplete and inaccurate. The solicitors can only go on the information they are given.

In the OP's case they have an indication there is a pipe which might or might not be a public sewer under the house.  It would be sensible for them to get clarification on the status and condition of that pipe.

The hyperbole and ad-hom comments (e.g. "manhole phobia") in your posts are unhelpful and I would appreciate it if you would kindly stop doing that.