Septic tank (shared) upgrade - what would you do?

AJC211

You won’t believe this but….I’ve been invited to join their new system….so all three of us sharing a system in the property it’s currently in….exactly what I said at the very beginning 🤦‍♀️😂Might still go solo though as this whole experience has put me off sharing…

propertyrental

Amazing!

But don't cut off your nose to spite your face.

I understand your reticence, but a (3 way) shared system will be way cheaper than going solo.

Just make sure there is clear paperwork - a deed, registered against all 3 properties, clearly defining location of pipes and system, access rights (including emergency access to others' properties), cost sharing (installation, maintenance, replacement) etc

AJC211

propertyrental said:

Amazing!

But don't cut off your nose to spite your face.

I understand your reticence, but a (3 way) shared system will be way cheaper than going solo.

Just make sure there is clear paperwork - a deed, registered against all 3 properties, clearly defining location of pipes and system, access rights (including emergency access to others' properties), cost sharing (installation, maintenance, replacement) etc

It's a tough decision. I now feel like I've had experience of what happens when neighbours disagree, and it's been truly horrible. Also, my property has a lot of complicated 'bits and pieces' on its deeds already that my conveyancing solicitor when I bought the house said "would take some time to get through" (various other easements, rights of way, access rights, bits of land added here and there, access road moved etc etc), so to have one less 'snag factor' on the deeds when/if I sell the house could be something I'm very glad of in the future...So any extra spend will be considered an investment in the longterm value of the property (and my sanity). If it had been 3 months ago, I'd have just continued the status quo though...Tricky!

ThisIsWeird

AJC211 said:

It's a tough decision. I now feel like I've had experience of what happens when neighbours disagree, and it's been truly horrible. Also, my property has a lot of complicated 'bits and pieces' on its deeds already that my conveyancing solicitor when I bought the house said "would take some time to get through" (various other easements, rights of way, access rights, bits of land added here and there, access road moved etc etc), so to have one less 'snag factor' on the deeds when/if I sell the house could be something I'm very glad of in the future...So any extra spend will be considered an investment in the longterm value of the property (and my sanity). If it had been 3 months ago, I'd have just continued the status quo though...Tricky!

Pros and cons of agreeing - worth making a list?

A significant one would be that the easements in the deeds should remain unchanged. That should avoid a hugely complex and expensive situation.

And a third of a (larger) TP will still be a lot less than you having your own (smaller) one.

And no digging of your own garden.

And if you went with your own TP, you'd still have to allow No1's carp to flow through the original pipe under your garden.

And if you still say 'non' after they've finally seen sense, then - wow - you'll seriously pee them off :-)

In fact, you quite possibly cannot say 'no'. By that I mean, you can fit your own system if you like - no-one can stop you doing that - but your lovely neighbs will still retain all the rights outlined in their deeds; you cannot simply extricate yersel' from that. Soo, enjoy still paying for their system too...

As propertyrental says - nose, spite, face, bottom.

AJC211

ThisIsWeird said:

AJC211 said:

It's a tough decision. I now feel like I've had experience of what happens when neighbours disagree, and it's been truly horrible. Also, my property has a lot of complicated 'bits and pieces' on its deeds already that my conveyancing solicitor when I bought the house said "would take some time to get through" (various other easements, rights of way, access rights, bits of land added here and there, access road moved etc etc), so to have one less 'snag factor' on the deeds when/if I sell the house could be something I'm very glad of in the future...So any extra spend will be considered an investment in the longterm value of the property (and my sanity). If it had been 3 months ago, I'd have just continued the status quo though...Tricky!

Pros and cons of agreeing - worth making a list?

A significant one would be that the easements in the deeds should remain unchanged. That should avoid a hugely complex and expensive situation.

And a third of a (larger) TP will still be a lot less than you having your own (smaller) one.

And no digging of your own garden.

And if you went with your own TP, you'd still have to allow No1's carp to flow through the original pipe under your garden.

And if you still say 'non' after they've finally seen sense, then - wow - you'll seriously pee them off :-)

In fact, you quite possibly cannot say 'no'. By that I mean, you can fit your own system if you like - no-one can stop you doing that - but your lovely neighbs will still retain all the rights outlined in their deeds; you cannot simply extricate yersel' from that. Soo, enjoy still paying for their system too...

As propertyrental says - nose, spite, face, bottom.

My understanding  is that we will still need a new easement form the new system - aside from the fact the current one is badly written, the new tank will be in a different location (albeit same property). I also believe it’s possible to adjust easements t remove parts and basically update them, so removing my requirement to pay Towards a shared one, but you’re right it’s something to consider, and I’m sure my neighbours will not hesitate to point out anything they refuse to agree to with regards easement changes. 

ThisIsWeird

AJC211 said:

ThisIsWeird said:

AJC211 said:

It's a tough decision. I now feel like I've had experience of what happens when neighbours disagree, and it's been truly horrible. Also, my property has a lot of complicated 'bits and pieces' on its deeds already that my conveyancing solicitor when I bought the house said "would take some time to get through" (various other easements, rights of way, access rights, bits of land added here and there, access road moved etc etc), so to have one less 'snag factor' on the deeds when/if I sell the house could be something I'm very glad of in the future...So any extra spend will be considered an investment in the longterm value of the property (and my sanity). If it had been 3 months ago, I'd have just continued the status quo though...Tricky!

Pros and cons of agreeing - worth making a list?

A significant one would be that the easements in the deeds should remain unchanged. That should avoid a hugely complex and expensive situation.

And a third of a (larger) TP will still be a lot less than you having your own (smaller) one.

And no digging of your own garden.

And if you went with your own TP, you'd still have to allow No1's carp to flow through the original pipe under your garden.

And if you still say 'non' after they've finally seen sense, then - wow - you'll seriously pee them off :-)

In fact, you quite possibly cannot say 'no'. By that I mean, you can fit your own system if you like - no-one can stop you doing that - but your lovely neighbs will still retain all the rights outlined in their deeds; you cannot simply extricate yersel' from that. Soo, enjoy still paying for their system too...

As propertyrental says - nose, spite, face, bottom.

My understanding  is that we will still need a new easement form the new system - aside from the fact the current one is badly written, the new tank will be in a different location (albeit same property). I also believe it’s possible to adjust easements t remove parts and basically update them, so removing my requirement to pay Towards a shared one, but you’re right it’s something to consider, and I’m sure my neighbours will not hesitate to point out anything they refuse to agree to with regards easement changes. 

I am simply suggesting you weigh it up, from purely the pov of your own benefit. 
Would the existing No1 to No3 pipe across your land (to which you are attached) continue to be used, or is a new one required? If the former, then I'd suggest that the existing easement easily covers the change to a TP. It is clearly effectively a 'repair'; the old ST is beyond functioning, so needs to be replaced. 
There is nothing in the deeds that specifies the exact location of the ST within No3's garden. And no-one would replace a defunct ST with another ST when the need arose. You wouldn't even be allowed to.
So, this is not a material change outwith the wording of the deeds - it is what would have occurred at some point, from the day the deeds were written. 
That is, if course, my view - I'm not a legal expert. But this really seems clear cut; should this all go 'legal' - which it won't - I can see zero way that any arbitrator would call it differently to this.
Even if the pipe across your land was also replaced due to need, the same should apply - the layout is effectively as original, and all covered under maintenance and upkeep.
In your shoes, and based on what you have told us, I know what I would do. 
But, yes, I'd also have it evidenced that both other parties agree that the status quo continues, as outlined in the deeds; equal rights, equal share going forward.
Well done - you've won :-)

AJC211

The deeds actually do have a plan showing the location of the tank, so since the location will change (I don’t know exactly by how much) something will need updating at least in the deeds. My conveyancing solicitor said the easement isn’t worded as water-tightly as it would be nowadays, too, so it could be a good opportunity to future-proof it so this sort of disagreement doesn’t recur! I’ll check with my solicitor. Thank you!

ThisIsWeird

AJC211 said:

The deeds actually do have a plan showing the location of the tank, so since the location will change (I don’t know exactly by how much) something will need updating at least in the deeds. My conveyancing solicitor said the easement isn’t worded as water-tightly as it would be nowadays, too, so it could be a good opportunity to future-proof it so this sort of disagreement doesn’t recur! I’ll check with my solicitor. Thank you!

Ok, but be ready to pay a third of the solicitor's fees. If it's a sensible amount, then fine. If the other two are in agreement, then fine. The chosen solicitor will need to have written ground rules - that this new TP serves all three parties equally, in very sense. The neighbs cannot then modify or sway this.

Your daft neighbours have seen sense, as they know they haven't a hope in hell of legally getting what they want. Even if they had Legal Protection up to their eyeballs, the company would not take it this on for them. LP requires a greater-than-50% chance of winning, and not 0.5.

You make sure that you have solid LP, and if they were to try anything similar in future, you would nobble them.

You will be paying a third towards the cost of the new TP. The installation contract will stipulate that it will be serving all three properties. No3 cannot cut you off whilst leaving No1 connected. If they even tried, you'd nobble them.

To me, this is ironically watertight. But, it's your call, and I understand your concern based on their behaviour. It was always 'bluff', tho'.

ian1246

Ultimately they've failed to recognise your Kingmaker here. You hold the middle ground through whuch all pipes for a shared system have to go - they have a legal right to maintain those pipes but absolutely no legal rights to change the pipes to cut you out of the shared system. To do so would involve entering your property and causing damage to it - either physically blocking the pipe-entrance from your system or digging up the sewer junction & replacing it with a different one, leaving yours going to a dead end.

That would be criminal damage on your own property. Absent of being able to cut you off any shared system between the 2 would always have your own waste feeding into it - unless they lay a whole new pipeline, which would require your permission & consent! 

It seems they've finally seen sense.

I'd go for a shared replacement system, just update the wording better on the easement.

AJC211

ThisIsWeird said:

AJC211 said:

The deeds actually do have a plan showing the location of the tank, so since the location will change (I don’t know exactly by how much) something will need updating at least in the deeds. My conveyancing solicitor said the easement isn’t worded as water-tightly as it would be nowadays, too, so it could be a good opportunity to future-proof it so this sort of disagreement doesn’t recur! I’ll check with my solicitor. Thank you!

Ok, but be ready to pay a third of the solicitor's fees. If it's a sensible amount, then fine. If the other two are in agreement, then fine. The chosen solicitor will need to have written ground rules - that this new TP serves all three parties equally, in very sense. The neighbs cannot then modify or sway this.

Your daft neighbours have seen sense, as they know they haven't a hope in hell of legally getting what they want. Even if they had Legal Protection up to their eyeballs, the company would not take it this on for them. LP requires a greater-than-50% chance of winning, and not 0.5.

You make sure that you have solid LP, and if they were to try anything similar in future, you would nobble them.

You will be paying a third towards the cost of the new TP. The installation contract will stipulate that it will be serving all three properties. No3 cannot cut you off whilst leaving No1 connected. If they even tried, you'd nobble them.

To me, this is ironically watertight. But, it's your call, and I understand your concern based on their behaviour. It was always 'bluff', tho'.

100% nail on the head! It was all bullying and bluff from the get go and I spotted it early on thankfully. My eyebrows have never been so busy...And yes I feel comforted by the fact I have legal protection ready in the wings. 

And yes, they've said they're putting in a new system in September, so...I dunno how, maybe no 1 and 2 use the old system until I'm off it...or they illegally cut me off and divert me to the new one...ah well. I shall make my decision when I have all the facts and not before.