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

ian1246

Either dont respond at all or alternatively tell them that since they are now threatening legal action, you do not wish to have any further direct correspondence from them and it is to be done via your representative. Tell them if they don't comply with this wish, you'll deem it harassment and report it as appropriate.

These people cannot be reasoned with. I think you have to treat it now as a ongoing legal battle & act accordingly in your correspondence with them, which is to say... none.

AJC211

ian1246 said:

Either dont respond at all or alternatively tell them that since they are now threatening legal action, you do not wish to have any further direct correspondence from them and it is to be done via your representative. Tell them if they don't comply with this wish, you'll deem it harassment and report it as appropriate.

These people cannot be reasoned with. I think you have to treat it now as a ongoing legal battle & act accordingly in your correspondence with them, which is to say... none.

Sadly I think you are right. If she can at least tell me if there’s an option on the table for us all to share again then that would be good! But she seems to have thrown her toys out of the pram
and there’s no going back from that 😞

ThisIsWeird

AJC211 said:

ThisIsWeird said:

You can counter all these ludicrous claims with facts, so they remain 'bluff'.
As a one-third party to this, you have a one-third say. 
There is hardly any chance of this going 'legal' from their side, as they'd only be able to get legal support from insurance if they lie. Or, they fruitlessly dig into their own pockets. Neither is likely. And if they try, you do have protection.
But, you should have your LP lot guiding you now; how to reply to their misguided accusations; do you reply to them, concisely, clearly, factually?
The current proposal - albeit with a disagreement over the type of TP (I have next to zero knowledge of these things) - remains to me the most sensible way forward, where tweaks to the deeds should be relatively simple, such as identifying the new location of the TP, the change of system, and adding the sharing of the running cost because of the electrical power required (assuming this system is chosen). One solicitor, shared by three, should manage this.
The alternative 'tweaks' from you going it alone would need to include the removal of your liability and contribution to the existing - and their separate - systems, and presumably some reference to No1's remaining (or new) right to passage under your garden. As well as the extra installation costs you'd have to bear.

I am not a 'legal' fellow, so presume that the latter costs would be more significant?

Do you counter their silly claims at all, in a recordable manner? I fear they are continuing to bluff, bluster, and bully, because you are not putting them on the back-foot with an evidenced rebuttal. Forgive me if I have that wrong.
But, if they are saying 'stuff' with impunity, when you could reply with a, "They facts of the matter are as follows...", then they will continue to think they can try it on. 

But, call up your LP first, and ask - "How do I best deal with this?"

I’ve held of activating the LP because o didn’t want the solicitor writing them a letter out of the blue, but will now activate it. However there’s apparently a one week lag before they decide whether to accept it, and I’m being pressurised to respond ASAP and do face to face meeting this week

This has been a repeated theme of this thread - they 'demand' replies within X days, and you panic. Then they don't reply to you.
They are almost certainly blaggards, with no legal support or backing whatsoever. I repeat - I believe I can say with some certainty that they would not have Legal-Insurance support or backing for any of their demands. 
So, I suspect that you telling them that you are now contacting your Legal Advisor before going any further will sober them up nicely. I suspect they believed you didn't have this, and we're therefore reticent in going 'legal'.

AJC211

ThisIsWeird said:

AJC211 said:

ThisIsWeird said:

You can counter all these ludicrous claims with facts, so they remain 'bluff'.
As a one-third party to this, you have a one-third say. 
There is hardly any chance of this going 'legal' from their side, as they'd only be able to get legal support from insurance if they lie. Or, they fruitlessly dig into their own pockets. Neither is likely. And if they try, you do have protection.
But, you should have your LP lot guiding you now; how to reply to their misguided accusations; do you reply to them, concisely, clearly, factually?
The current proposal - albeit with a disagreement over the type of TP (I have next to zero knowledge of these things) - remains to me the most sensible way forward, where tweaks to the deeds should be relatively simple, such as identifying the new location of the TP, the change of system, and adding the sharing of the running cost because of the electrical power required (assuming this system is chosen). One solicitor, shared by three, should manage this.
The alternative 'tweaks' from you going it alone would need to include the removal of your liability and contribution to the existing - and their separate - systems, and presumably some reference to No1's remaining (or new) right to passage under your garden. As well as the extra installation costs you'd have to bear.

I am not a 'legal' fellow, so presume that the latter costs would be more significant?

Do you counter their silly claims at all, in a recordable manner? I fear they are continuing to bluff, bluster, and bully, because you are not putting them on the back-foot with an evidenced rebuttal. Forgive me if I have that wrong.
But, if they are saying 'stuff' with impunity, when you could reply with a, "They facts of the matter are as follows...", then they will continue to think they can try it on. 

But, call up your LP first, and ask - "How do I best deal with this?"

I’ve held of activating the LP because o didn’t want the solicitor writing them a letter out of the blue, but will now activate it. However there’s apparently a one week lag before they decide whether to accept it, and I’m being pressurised to respond ASAP and do face to face meeting this week

This has been a repeated theme of this thread - they 'demand' replies within X days, and you panic. Then they don't reply to you.
They are almost certainly blaggards, with no legal support or backing whatsoever. I repeat - I believe I can say with some certainty that they would not have Legal-Insurance support or backing for any of their demands. 
So, I suspect that you telling them that you are now contacting your Legal Advisor before going any further will sober them up nicely. I suspect they believed you didn't have this, and we're therefore reticent in going 'legal'.

I’ve gently intimated that I am consulting my lawyer about their new proposal, that I will only do face to face with another person present with me, and that we need to at least agree new easement wording by writing, cos that really can’t be done face to face! 

Yep, lots of bluff. But getting my own system will take months, and if they’re threatening me that everything will fall on my shoulders for those X months (maintenance and decommissioning costs) AND they’ll claim damages, then I will be very glad of my legal protection!!

MeteredOut

AJC211 said:

ThisIsWeird said:

AJC211 said:

ThisIsWeird said:

You can counter all these ludicrous claims with facts, so they remain 'bluff'.
As a one-third party to this, you have a one-third say. 
There is hardly any chance of this going 'legal' from their side, as they'd only be able to get legal support from insurance if they lie. Or, they fruitlessly dig into their own pockets. Neither is likely. And if they try, you do have protection.
But, you should have your LP lot guiding you now; how to reply to their misguided accusations; do you reply to them, concisely, clearly, factually?
The current proposal - albeit with a disagreement over the type of TP (I have next to zero knowledge of these things) - remains to me the most sensible way forward, where tweaks to the deeds should be relatively simple, such as identifying the new location of the TP, the change of system, and adding the sharing of the running cost because of the electrical power required (assuming this system is chosen). One solicitor, shared by three, should manage this.
The alternative 'tweaks' from you going it alone would need to include the removal of your liability and contribution to the existing - and their separate - systems, and presumably some reference to No1's remaining (or new) right to passage under your garden. As well as the extra installation costs you'd have to bear.

I am not a 'legal' fellow, so presume that the latter costs would be more significant?

Do you counter their silly claims at all, in a recordable manner? I fear they are continuing to bluff, bluster, and bully, because you are not putting them on the back-foot with an evidenced rebuttal. Forgive me if I have that wrong.
But, if they are saying 'stuff' with impunity, when you could reply with a, "They facts of the matter are as follows...", then they will continue to think they can try it on. 

But, call up your LP first, and ask - "How do I best deal with this?"

I’ve held of activating the LP because o didn’t want the solicitor writing them a letter out of the blue, but will now activate it. However there’s apparently a one week lag before they decide whether to accept it, and I’m being pressurised to respond ASAP and do face to face meeting this week

This has been a repeated theme of this thread - they 'demand' replies within X days, and you panic. Then they don't reply to you.
They are almost certainly blaggards, with no legal support or backing whatsoever. I repeat - I believe I can say with some certainty that they would not have Legal-Insurance support or backing for any of their demands. 
So, I suspect that you telling them that you are now contacting your Legal Advisor before going any further will sober them up nicely. I suspect they believed you didn't have this, and we're therefore reticent in going 'legal'.

I’ve gently intimated that I am consulting my lawyer about their new proposal, that I will only do face to face with another person present with me, and that we need to at least agree new easement wording by writing, cos that really can’t be done face to face! 

Yep, lots of bluff. But getting my own system will take months, and if they’re threatening me that everything will fall on my shoulders for those X months (maintenance and decommissioning costs) AND they’ll claim damages, then I will be very glad of my legal protection!!

They can threaten all they want; the existing easement, whilst in place, is clear that costs are split 3 ways.

And, damages for what? What losses are they expecting?

AJC211

MeteredOut said:

AJC211 said:

ThisIsWeird said:

AJC211 said:

ThisIsWeird said:

You can counter all these ludicrous claims with facts, so they remain 'bluff'.
As a one-third party to this, you have a one-third say. 
There is hardly any chance of this going 'legal' from their side, as they'd only be able to get legal support from insurance if they lie. Or, they fruitlessly dig into their own pockets. Neither is likely. And if they try, you do have protection.
But, you should have your LP lot guiding you now; how to reply to their misguided accusations; do you reply to them, concisely, clearly, factually?
The current proposal - albeit with a disagreement over the type of TP (I have next to zero knowledge of these things) - remains to me the most sensible way forward, where tweaks to the deeds should be relatively simple, such as identifying the new location of the TP, the change of system, and adding the sharing of the running cost because of the electrical power required (assuming this system is chosen). One solicitor, shared by three, should manage this.
The alternative 'tweaks' from you going it alone would need to include the removal of your liability and contribution to the existing - and their separate - systems, and presumably some reference to No1's remaining (or new) right to passage under your garden. As well as the extra installation costs you'd have to bear.

I am not a 'legal' fellow, so presume that the latter costs would be more significant?

Do you counter their silly claims at all, in a recordable manner? I fear they are continuing to bluff, bluster, and bully, because you are not putting them on the back-foot with an evidenced rebuttal. Forgive me if I have that wrong.
But, if they are saying 'stuff' with impunity, when you could reply with a, "They facts of the matter are as follows...", then they will continue to think they can try it on. 

But, call up your LP first, and ask - "How do I best deal with this?"

I’ve held of activating the LP because o didn’t want the solicitor writing them a letter out of the blue, but will now activate it. However there’s apparently a one week lag before they decide whether to accept it, and I’m being pressurised to respond ASAP and do face to face meeting this week

This has been a repeated theme of this thread - they 'demand' replies within X days, and you panic. Then they don't reply to you.
They are almost certainly blaggards, with no legal support or backing whatsoever. I repeat - I believe I can say with some certainty that they would not have Legal-Insurance support or backing for any of their demands. 
So, I suspect that you telling them that you are now contacting your Legal Advisor before going any further will sober them up nicely. I suspect they believed you didn't have this, and we're therefore reticent in going 'legal'.

I’ve gently intimated that I am consulting my lawyer about their new proposal, that I will only do face to face with another person present with me, and that we need to at least agree new easement wording by writing, cos that really can’t be done face to face! 

Yep, lots of bluff. But getting my own system will take months, and if they’re threatening me that everything will fall on my shoulders for those X months (maintenance and decommissioning costs) AND they’ll claim damages, then I will be very glad of my legal protection!!

They can threaten all they want; the existing easement, whilst in place, is clear that costs are split 3 ways.

And, damages for what? What losses are they expecting?

They will be able to leave the old system and join their new one
much sooner than I will - they’ve been planning it for months and are ready to install imminently, whereas I will have delays like a survey to see how deep the dreaded crossing pipes are, lead time +/- planning permission. So there will be a time where they have left, and I have not. The outflow pipe is ‘leaking foul’ (causing some dead grass) in their garden (and has been for many months)…they’ve made it quite clear that they’ll try and stab in the back any way they can 😡I could offer to get that pipe repaired, but it’ll involve digging up their garden… 😉😂

propertyrental

I've lost the plot a bit, but does their new system still require pipes crossing your garden and do your waste pipes not join those existing pipes?

They can't go digging up your garden to lay a new pipe so you can continue to use the existing pipe.

Or have I mis-remembered / isunderstood?

MeteredOut

propertyrental said:

I've lost the plot a bit, but does their new system still require pipes crossing your garden and do your waste pipes not join those existing pipes?

They can't go digging up your garden to lay a new pipe so you can continue to use the existing pipe.

Or have I mis-remembered / isunderstood?

I recall (but can't find the posts now) that the OP said that a new system (be that a new joint system or a new system for use exclusively by the OP) could not co-exist with the existing pipework, due to the layout of that existing pipework in relation to their property.

AJC211

propertyrental said:

I've lost the plot a bit, but does their new system still require pipes crossing your garden and do your waste pipes not join those existing pipes?

They can't go digging up your garden to lay a new pipe so you can continue to use the existing pipe.

Or have I mis-remembered / isunderstood?

They will use existing pipes crossing my garden (tbc if their right to use them continues when old system decommissioned but assume so). My pipes will be capped off and go under them to new individual system.

AJC211

AJC211 said:

propertyrental said:

I've lost the plot a bit, but does their new system still require pipes crossing your garden and do your waste pipes not join those existing pipes?

They can't go digging up your garden to lay a new pipe so you can continue to use the existing pipe.

Or have I mis-remembered / isunderstood?

They will use existing pipes crossing my garden (tbc if their right to use them continues when old system decommissioned but assume so). My pipes will be capped off and go under them to new individual system.

I have spoken to my installer and he says it’s fine, we can just take my pipes under the existing crossing ones