Neighbour refuses to share costs for boundary wall rebuild

Halloumi93

Firstly, sorry that this is really long. I want to give as much context as possible. Some of this I'm summarising from a detailed timeline I've written.

We bought a detached bungalow and moved to Scotland just over a year ago. The home report stated that the boundary walls were in a bad condition. The boundary walls surround the property and add character to the property.

A few weeks ago, during storm Kathleen, one of the boundary walls collapsed, around 6 meters. The debris fell into our neighbours garden. We offered to contact our insurance and look at quotes for rebuilding. It may be important to highlight that our neighbours are about to put their house on the market.

The insurance surveyor came round and said that the claim would not succeed and would be marked down as wear and tear. I accepted this, although, in my darkest hours, I feel like if an insurance company want to not insure something after the fact, perhaps they should have sent a surveyor round in the first place.

I got some quotes for the wall rebuild, the best being £3650. The quotes were just to replace the section that had fallen down. The entire boundary is in a bad state, but I didn't even bother to push a complete rebuild, or a rebuild + maintenance efforts on the rest.

Our neighbour then hired a skip without discussing with us (we would have offered to contribute) and loaded up the debris.

We then talked to him and he was suddenly quite rude. He confirmed we were 'Londoners' and then said he'd just lost a new house to 'Londoners'. He proceeded to tell us our roof slate was asbestos, that he'd helped the old owner cover over some of our other outside wall (not the boundary) with wood so knew how bad it was and that our house was made of the same material. He then said he didn't want a new wall, wouldn't look at quotes for one and he wanted a fence instead. We don't want a fence though as all the rest is wall, it's always been wall, and a fence in one bit would look really weird. Also we'd need to excavate the rest of the existing wall to get it removed anyway.

We see him and his son next time, they knock on our door. He still insists on a fence, I say that I still want to rebuild the wall. He says that he's looked at his deeds and it's solely my wall, so he won't pay for it as we own the wall, not him. I disagree with this and say it's definitely shared. He says well we're at a stalemate then, and I said well we are, but you are trying to sell your house. I also offered to at least look at fence quotes.

They then said that there is a part of the wall that is dangerous and they have kids round, they want my permission to knock that part down. I gave them the permission as I agree it was not safe and one of the builders had highlighted it as well. They then knock about 1.5 meters of wall down, including the pillar into our garden and actually laugh when I say I'm more than happy to help them clear the debris. So We've spent the past couple days moving that into the skip on our own (which is fine, but they did knock the wall into our garden and then not help clear up their own mess).

We were also talking to the son without the owner across the wall. The son was trying to sell us him installing a fence. As part of that he said we'd save on labour costs. But then he said he wouldn't have the expertise to excavate the rest of the wall (foundation, and about a foot of wall still sticking out) and that the fence was just a temporary solution.

We've now contacted our conveyancing solicitors for advice on the boundary, and they confirmed that it's absolutely a shared boundary wall and costs should be split 50/50.

So, my questions:
- Should I escalate this the insurance claim to the financial ombudsman? The wall was in a bad state, but it only went down when a storm hit it. The winds at the time were (just) above what is insurable (55mph constitutes storm, wind gusts recorded at 55.6mph)
- The walls have been standing a long time. The entire boundary is walled. The neighbours have lived there for 20 years and let them get into this condition. That part of the boundary acts as a bit of a wind tunnel and while the walls were in a bad state, I don't think they would have collapsed without some really high winds. I don't think their self declared temporary fence would survive anything like as long as a new wall. A new wall would be a proper permanent solution. Am I within my right to insist on a wall, and not a fence?
- What can be done to actually get their share of the money for this if I was just to go ahead with the rebuild?

Thank you in advance!

BarelySentientAI

Halloumi93 said:

- Should I escalate this the insurance claim to the financial ombudsman? The wall was in a bad state, but it only went down when a storm hit it. The winds at the time were (just) above what is insurable (55mph constitutes storm, wind gusts recorded at 55.6mph)

If, properly maintained, the wall would have withstood the storm but it didn't due to the 'bad state', I think the insurer has a fair argument that it isn't covered.

Halloumi93 said:

- The walls have been standing a long time. The entire boundary is walled. The neighbours have lived there for 20 years and let them get into this condition. That part of the boundary acts as a bit of a wind tunnel and while the walls were in a bad state, I don't think they would have collapsed without some really high winds. I don't think their self declared temporary fence would survive anything like as long as a new wall. A new wall would be a proper permanent solution. Am I within my right to insist on a wall, and not a fence?

You can build whatever boundary you want if it is entirely on your own land.

Halloumi93 said:

- What can be done to actually get their share of the money for this if I was just to go ahead with the rebuild?

Very little.  And if you build the wall you want entirely within your own land, they shouldn't be contributing anyway.

How are you so confident that they are actually required to share the cost of a wall?  That's quite specific for deeds.

Halloumi93

The deeds say the boundary walls are shared and we've confirmed this with our solicitors. The boundary wall is the boundary. 

Halloumi93

From our solicitors: "I have taken a look over your title deeds and I can confirm the south west boundary is common property. Your neighbour must maintain it with you at joint expense.  The same applies to the north east boundary." 

BarelySentientAI

Halloumi93 said:

The deeds say the boundary walls are shared and we've confirmed this with our solicitors. The boundary wall is the boundary. 

The boundary wall isn't the boundary.  It might be on the boundary, but that is different.  The legal boundary is almost always an infinitely thin imaginary line which may or may not match something physically there.

Do the deeds actually specify a wall?  That's less common than you would think.  If it just says, for example, "a boundary structure", then you couldn't insist on a wall (unless, as mentioned, you built it entirely on your side of the boundary).  A piece of string between tent pegs would be sufficient in many cases.

Halloumi93 said:

From our solicitors: "I have taken a look over your title deeds and I can confirm the south west boundary is common property. Your neighbour must maintain it with you at joint expense.  The same applies to the north east boundary." 

Then any alterations or replacements should be done with both parties agreement.  Unless there is something requiring a wall then you can't just insist on that.

swingaloo

Im confused as to how the neighbour can be responsible for sharing the cost on both sides of your property. 

theoretica

Sounds like

1) You are willing to pay half the cost of a wall, but not of a fence

2) They are willing to pay half(?) the cost of a fence, but not of a wall

3) They are trying to sell.

Seems that the results are either - A) they pay the whole cost of a fence, B ) you pay the whole cost of a wall, C) they sell as is and you agree to discuss the matter with new owners, who might also think a wall looks nice.

Very rarely do deeds specify what needs to be along a boundary.  A piece of string would probably meet the requirements in the deeds of marking the boundary.

Halloumi93

They're not responsible for both, they're joint responsible for the side that fell down. Our neighbours on the other side are responsible for that side