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

AJC211

ThisIsWeird said:

AJC211 said:

Sorry I wasn’t clear the levels survey is on my property to assess feasibility of an individual system for my property. C1 will not put in a new pipe across my land, they will want to use the existing one to access a new system at C3 (independent of whether I join this or go solo).

Thanks for the heads up about the legal protection. I feel unable to make clear headed decisions without a legal mindset, as it’s such a complicated situation.

Ultimately it is possible to site a new shared system in the existing property, but they might well be willing to argue that it is not reasonable (due to upheaval or lack of space, although two firms have quoted to site a new tank next to the old one). In which case they keep digging their heels in, and I either accept their ultimatum or dig my heels in, or go individual. Doesn’t feel like much progress!

I reckon these two points are the clinchers. This neighbour - along with their relative (so hardly impartial) - want to completely alter the status quo that's been in operation for X years, and written in to the deeds, and with little justification. From what you say, there is no credible reason for them to have to change the location - they just want to.

Yes, your garden is nearer the road for emptying, but (a) with a new TP, 'emptying' should now be a very rare event, and (b) isn't C1's garden even closer to the road?!

In any event, to alter the location would surely introduce all sorts of additional complications and costs; the deeds would need modifying, and new pipes would need running from all three properties to your new tank - no existing pipe could be reused. 

Keep the reasoning simple - stick to such key points as these. And just wait for the situation to come to a head - a big smelly brown sludgy head.

Then they will be forced to act, and there will only be one logical option; any delay will be on their heads.

Jobbie literally jobbied.

Yes a new TP can be sited next to the existing one in the yard, or in the field next to their garden which they also own. If it’s next to the existing tank, to stay on their property would require either a pump to exit the outflow into existing drains (old clay pipes), or digging up an established shrubbery to lay new outflow pipes.

We have agreed that it’s reasonable to have an end date to this - they’ve given me formal notice of closure…and I suspect that if nothing is done by that point they will threaten me with damages as the existing system effectively discharges foul on their land. But we’re all equally liable Id imagine - the only way they can sue me solely is if they put their own new system in and left me using the old one alone (only possible if the two other cottages get their own systems, which they can but they don’t want to- and if they share a new one then as we’ve said my house’s sewage will be swept into too along with cottage 1’s). 

So yes I could just sit it out and let the s**t hit the…tank 🤷‍♀️

ThisIsWeird

AJC211 said:

ThisIsWeird said:

AJC211 said:

Sorry I wasn’t clear the levels survey is on my property to assess feasibility of an individual system for my property. C1 will not put in a new pipe across my land, they will want to use the existing one to access a new system at C3 (independent of whether I join this or go solo).

Thanks for the heads up about the legal protection. I feel unable to make clear headed decisions without a legal mindset, as it’s such a complicated situation.

Ultimately it is possible to site a new shared system in the existing property, but they might well be willing to argue that it is not reasonable (due to upheaval or lack of space, although two firms have quoted to site a new tank next to the old one). In which case they keep digging their heels in, and I either accept their ultimatum or dig my heels in, or go individual. Doesn’t feel like much progress!

I reckon these two points are the clinchers. This neighbour - along with their relative (so hardly impartial) - want to completely alter the status quo that's been in operation for X years, and written in to the deeds, and with little justification. From what you say, there is no credible reason for them to have to change the location - they just want to.

Yes, your garden is nearer the road for emptying, but (a) with a new TP, 'emptying' should now be a very rare event, and (b) isn't C1's garden even closer to the road?!

In any event, to alter the location would surely introduce all sorts of additional complications and costs; the deeds would need modifying, and new pipes would need running from all three properties to your new tank - no existing pipe could be reused. 

Keep the reasoning simple - stick to such key points as these. And just wait for the situation to come to a head - a big smelly brown sludgy head.

Then they will be forced to act, and there will only be one logical option; any delay will be on their heads.

Jobbie literally jobbied.

Yes a new TP can be sited next to the existing one in the yard, or in the field next to their garden which they also own. If it’s next to the existing tank, to stay on their property would require either a pump to exit the outflow into existing drains (old clay pipes), or digging up an established shrubbery to lay new outflow pipes.

We have agreed that it’s reasonable to have an end date to this - they’ve given me formal notice of closure…and I suspect that if nothing is done by that point they will threaten me with damages as the existing system effectively discharges foul on their land. But we’re all equally liable Id imagine - the only way they can sue me solely is if they put their own new system in and left me using the old one alone (only possible if the two other cottages get their own systems, which they can but they don’t want to- and if they share a new one then as we’ve said my house’s sewage will be swept into too along with cottage 1’s). 

So yes I could just sit it out and let the s**t hit the…tank 🤷‍♀️

Almost certainly complete BS by them.
You have made it 100% clear than the acceptable option is modernising the status quo with a TP. 
Tbh, I think I would reinforce that point - it should be the default. It can be done.
It could even be done by physically removing the old ST and replacing it. Yes, that might mean you all need to move out for a few days, or use chemical toilets, but you wouldn't be the first - non-functioning sewers must be occurring hundreds of times across the country right now, on a daily basis.
Take it to its logical; if there were no other options, you wouldn't be discussing it - it would just have to happen. No discussion.
You do have some alternatives in this case, but none obviously better than the SQ; they come with their own complexities and additional costs, including legal fees. 
Make sure you have a full paper-trail to demonstrate that you have agreed to the upgrade, but do not accept that the layout requires a change - because it demonstrably does not. 
They can do the 'formal notice of closure' bit if they want - it sounds great, but is meaningless if it's unreasonable. If they actually submit such as thing, but I've no idea what it is, you reply agreeing to the replacement of the ST with a TP - maintaing the SQ as outlined in the deeds.
Once the actual threats occur - "We are disconnecting your sewer then...", or any such actual activity, then LegProt.
But you make your case watertight. No vagueness in what you've told them.
Have a Portaloo company on standby! And give written warning to your neighb's that you will be suing them for the costs. And for going to the local gym for showers. And laundry...and...
Seriously, I cannot remotely see them doing this. 

AJC211

Thank you. I’ve said all along that I believe the best course of action is to maintain the status quo, and that the only alternative is us all getting our own individual systems.

The notice was given by recorded delivery letter setting out a time by which I am
expected to inform them of my decision. 

I’ve said ‘no’ to equipment on my land all along,  and have consistently requested the existing system is replaced, even getting other firms to quote for other more practical options (that they’ve vetoed). 

I had hoped that the legal protection would kick in because they had set a date of closure, and have refused to replace the system. The assessment letter seems to
imply that it will only
be triggered when they actually cut me off. Threats are not sufficient.

AJC211

My biggest concern is that my insurer may not cover LegProt:
The policy  was taken out in spring, but my neighbour told me we’d need to consider septic tank replacement/repair options earlier than this. The assessment letter says that my policy states 
”you must notify the administrator in writing….as soon as..aware of any cause event circumstance which has given or MAY GIVE rise to a claim, dispute…”

So they could just say we knew we’d have to replace it before I took the policy out, so if it’s causing a dispute now then we’re not covering it. Absolute nightmare and a potential disaster 😖

ThisIsWeird

AJC211 said:

My biggest concern is that my insurer may not cover LegProt:
The policy  was taken out in spring, but my neighbour told me we’d need to consider septic tank replacement/repair options earlier than this. The assessment letter says that my policy states 
”you must notify the administrator in writing….as soon as..aware of any cause event circumstance which has given or MAY GIVE rise to a claim, dispute…”

So they could just say we knew we’d have to replace it before I took the policy out, so if it’s causing a dispute now then we’re not covering it. Absolute nightmare and a potential disaster 😖

I am as certain as a certain thing - which is quite - that you are ok in the LP regard. It would be silly to be otherwise; "My neighbours wish to replace the boundary fence - POSSIBLE DISPUTE!" "Our communal roof needs fixing - POSS..."

Clearly not.

The only potential dispute here is that your neighbours are now trying to force a significant change to the layout, one that they do not have to do.

You have been in full agreement all along with the fact that the ol' ST needs replacing, and that a TP is the answer. Reinforce that point, so they cannot claim otherwise with your discussions over 'going your own way'.

If you wish to reply to their 'decision' deadline, then I see no harm in doing so, making it 100% clear you agree with the like-for-like replacement of the old ST with a current-reg TP, deeds unchanged. Nailed.

In your boots, I would go with this option as being the best overall. Yes, you may prefer separate TPs, but you are not dealing with reasonable folk who will (currently) agree with this, so you would almost certainly have an unpleasant legal struggle to make it happen, and lots more costs besides. And I would suggest that your LP would not become involved at all, as it was your decision to make this change.

The obvious like-for-like upgrade should work 100%, be the least disruptive, and should be the cheapest - both to carry out and to maintain. By all means also offer the 'going-it-alone' option, but only if THEY want this too - let them drive it. Ie, you have unambiguously placed the most credible option - the SQ - on the table, and given them an alternative if they wish; you are happy with both. Now let THEM make the decision - they will have to carry the responsibility.

Don't push the "I'd rather go it alone" option, as that might muddy the waters, and they could try and use it to claim you were the one who wanted a change.

Make 100% sure that your decision to support the SQ is unambiguous; upgrade the ST to a TP. Deeds remain unchanged. 

AJC211

Thank you. When they last demanded my final
answer this is exactly what I said: not willing to put things in my lane, so the only options remaining are: 1 replace the existing tank on the existing property (keep SQ), or 2 all go solo. This is when they said they’d do 3 I go solo and they share and keep using the pipes crossing my land. 

But you’re right it wouldn’t do any harm to repeat that at the point when they insist upon (another) final answer. And to make it absolutely crystal clear that I have always and continue to support a SQ replacement. 

Thank you!

ThisIsWeird

AJC211 said:

Thank you. When they last demanded my final answer this is exactly what I said: not willing to put things in my lane, so the only options remaining are: 1 replace the existing tank on the existing property (keep SQ), or 2 all go solo. This is when they said they’d do 3 I go solo and they share and keep using the pipes crossing my land.

These guys are making stuff up. They cannot arbitrarily make a decision that would clearly breach the terms of all three sets of deeds.

Just as you couldn't decide to go solo and tell them they'd have no continued access to your land - 'cos that would breach their entitlement in their deeds - neither can they do such a thing that would cut you off but still allow them to access your land. You cannae pick and choose. No one person - or two - can modify the deeds at the expense of a third.

So, as your deeds stand, the only thing that does not breach the terms of the deeds is the SQ - upgrade the ST to a TP. You therefore fully 'accept' this solution.

Then offer - if they prefer - to each go solo. That would need a deeds alteration, so would have to be agreed by all three parties.

Make it 100% clear that is the situation.

Don't even mention or refer to their third option - just ignore it. It's silly.

Mgman1965

I see your position entirely and should not be coerced.
Neighbour disputes are always to be avoided if at all possible (I had one over parking). 

Living with the atmosphere (especially both sides of you), must be awful and would make me feel surrounded by the enemy. 

Knowing they're waiting for you to put a foot wrong in any way at any time to pounce on you and give you grief honestly plays on your mental health (been there). 

And, having to declare a neighbour dispute  if you decide to sell at any point I can assure you, puts buyers off.

No matter how many times you tell yourself "stuff them, I don't need them or care what they think of me" it grinds you down, every time I saw mine they never actually said anything, but gave me the evils and dirty looks and generally did petty, annoying things they knew pushed my buttons  hoping I'd bite and retaliate (making them the victim).

In the end, my dream home felt like a horrible prison and I eventually sold up and moved on and now have lovely neighbours. 

AJC211

Mgman1965 said:

I see your position entirely and should not be coerced.
Neighbour disputes are always to be avoided if at all possible (I had one over parking). 

Living with the atmosphere (especially both sides of you), must be awful and would make me feel surrounded by the enemy. 

Knowing they're waiting for you to put a foot wrong in any way at any time to pounce on you and give you grief honestly plays on your mental health (been there). 

And, having to declare a neighbour dispute  if you decide to sell at any point I can assure you, puts buyers off.

No matter how many times you tell yourself "stuff them, I don't need them or care what they think of me" it grinds you down, every time I saw mine they never actually said anything, but gave me the evils and dirty looks and generally did petty, annoying things they knew pushed my buttons  hoping I'd bite and retaliate (making them the victim).

In the end, my dream home felt like a horrible prison and I eventually sold up and moved on and now have lovely neighbours. 

I’m so sorry you went through all that!! It really has been stressful and taken it’s toll, yes. It’s also made me realise a) I can be horribly bloody minded about what I see as ‘the right way’ to do something, b) I really don’t mind if people don’t like me and c) I have been gifted with a silly spaniel puppy who has forced me to think about other things every single day 🤣

I am determined to find a solution that means we can all live amicably together, but it is clear that we can’t ALL have our favourite option!

MeteredOut

AJC211 said:

Mgman1965 said:

I see your position entirely and should not be coerced.
Neighbour disputes are always to be avoided if at all possible (I had one over parking). 

Living with the atmosphere (especially both sides of you), must be awful and would make me feel surrounded by the enemy. 

Knowing they're waiting for you to put a foot wrong in any way at any time to pounce on you and give you grief honestly plays on your mental health (been there). 

And, having to declare a neighbour dispute  if you decide to sell at any point I can assure you, puts buyers off.

No matter how many times you tell yourself "stuff them, I don't need them or care what they think of me" it grinds you down, every time I saw mine they never actually said anything, but gave me the evils and dirty looks and generally did petty, annoying things they knew pushed my buttons  hoping I'd bite and retaliate (making them the victim).

In the end, my dream home felt like a horrible prison and I eventually sold up and moved on and now have lovely neighbours. 

I’m so sorry you went through all that!! It really has been stressful and taken it’s toll, yes. It’s also made me realise a) I can be horribly bloody minded about what I see as ‘the right way’ to do something, b) I really don’t mind if people don’t like me and c) I have been gifted with a silly spaniel puppy who has forced me to think about other things every single day 🤣

I am determined to find a solution that means we can all live amicably together, but it is clear that we can’t ALL have our favourite option!

Whilst waiting for the next update, a picture of the puppy is required