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

AJC211

Update:
I maintained my position, either status quo or system is closed and easements extinguished. Neighbours refused both for a YEAR...

When I didn't budge, 2m before the closure deadline (imposed by them), they caved and said they would replace the ST with a TP under the existing easement after all...but they were choosing the installer and they system (Biodisc), and that they would NOT assure me that rainwater and sewage would have separate drainage. So they are forcing through a replacement with a non-conforming system; by accepting rainwater it will not meet Building Regs nor manufacturer's installation specification, and the manufacturer warranty will be void. 

I have been given 2w to either 1) accept this non-conforming replacement under the existing easement, or 2) they have agreed to allow me to abandon the system and easement in a formal manner. 

I'm pretty sure my Legal Protection will support me in challenging 1) because it will cause me to be connected to a system that doesn't meet Building Regs. But do I want to fight that? No, I don't. So I think I will accept abandonment. 

WIAWSNB

AJC211 said:

Update:
I maintained my position, either status quo or system is closed and easements extinguished. Neighbours refused both for a YEAR...

When I didn't budge, 2m before the closure deadline (imposed by them), they caved and said they would replace the ST with a TP under the existing easement after all...but they were choosing the installer and they system (Biodisc), and that they would NOT assure me that rainwater and sewage would have separate drainage. So they are forcing through a replacement with a non-conforming system; by accepting rainwater it will not meet Building Regs nor manufacturer's installation specification, and the manufacturer warranty will be void. 

I have been given 2w to either 1) accept this non-conforming replacement under the existing easement, or 2) they have agreed to allow me to abandon the system and easement in a formal manner. 

I'm pretty sure my Legal Protection will support me in challenging 1) because it will cause me to be connected to a system that doesn't meet Building Regs. But do I want to fight that? No, I don't. So I think I will accept abandonment. 

Be 100% clear what 'abandonment' means. Sorry - I mean 110%.

If they are agreeing to extinguish all references to the shared ST, in all the updates in the deeds, and this includes the supply pipes that cross your garden, so all three of you now independently go your own way, then that sounds like exactly what you want.

Which is why I suspect it ain't the case. 

Be 120% clear what you are prepared to accept. For instance, if they are happy to extinguish everything except No1's right to cross your garden with a single sewer pipe to No3, and you are ok with that single concession, then fine. But you need to nail this down. No loopholes. No get-outs. 

They have been playing you for over a year - I still smell a sewer rat.

Oh, and you have LegProt - don't be afraid to use it. If you chose to go shared with new TP, then you seek LP advice on how to tackle their threat to allow groundwater into the system. They will guide you. If you go 'abandonment', then get their guidance on this too. 

You have this LP facility - use the darned thing. 

AJC211

My legal protection has been excellent. They suggested that I either challenge them on their proposal and press for a legal system (ie rain and sewage must have separate drainage systems) IF I want to continue sharing, and take legal action if they go ahead and install a non-conforming system that accepts rainwater. 

Alternatively, as they are now (finally!) agreeing to replace the tank with an STP under the existing easement, I am on the back foot if I wish to leave - but I can do so with a Deed of Release. This is why they have agreed that the existing easement does include renewal after all, because they didn't want to change anything about the easement on the deeds. So I pushed them into this corner, but they're still not being reasonable, and I've had enough and want out once and for all. 

You're absolutely right, they have only ever been interested in what they want, and I have gradually whittled it down to being closer to a mutual agreement, but it's still not good enough. 

WIAWSNB

AJC211 said:

My legal protection has been excellent. They suggested that I either challenge them on their proposal and press for a legal system (ie rain and sewage must have separate drainage systems) IF I want to continue sharing, and take legal action if they go ahead and install a non-conforming system that accepts rainwater. 

Alternatively, as they are now (finally!) agreeing to replace the tank with an STP under the existing easement, I am on the back foot if I wish to leave - but I can do so with a Deed of Release. This is why they have agreed that the existing easement does include renewal after all, because they didn't want to change anything about the easement on the deeds. So I pushed them into this corner, but they're still not being reasonable, and I've had enough and want out once and for all. 

You're absolutely right, they have only ever been interested in what they want, and I have gradually whittled it down to being closer to a mutual agreement, but it's still not good enough. 

Yes, but...
You have procrastinated for absolute donkeys, so - sorry - a lot of this is down to you.
And now you are seemingly almost there, you are suggesting you could stick to one option and mess it up. They are on the back foot, and you are offering them a stabilising hand.
Personally, I would use LP for advice, as you have, but only 'engage' them to act when defending, and not pursuing.
You have 'challenged' them on their proposal, haven't you? You've outlined the perfectly rational terms for agreeing to a straight replacement for the ST by a TP. If you haven't done so, add that you will inform BC should each property not also take care of their own G&RW.
Simple. Unambiguous. If they try anything else, you'll have them over a barrel. 
It really should be that simple. MAKE IT EVIDENTIALLY CLEAR.
Then they might just consider the 'erase the easements' alternative more attractive, which is what you want. But, I suggest you make them choose that option, or they will try and shout 'foul'.
They are 100% untrustworthy, so you box them in, in a way that no-one can fail to understand. Two options. Their choice. But no bending the rules.

AJC211

I hear you. But they've made it abundantly clear they won't budge at all on this, the installation is booked and will absolutely go ahead. So yes, I could challenge them legally using my LP. I'm just done with the whole thing, and if it means leaving the easement then so be it. 

AJC211

WIAWSNB said:

AJC211 said:

My legal protection has been excellent. They suggested that I either challenge them on their proposal and press for a legal system (ie rain and sewage must have separate drainage systems) IF I want to continue sharing, and take legal action if they go ahead and install a non-conforming system that accepts rainwater. 

Alternatively, as they are now (finally!) agreeing to replace the tank with an STP under the existing easement, I am on the back foot if I wish to leave - but I can do so with a Deed of Release. This is why they have agreed that the existing easement does include renewal after all, because they didn't want to change anything about the easement on the deeds. So I pushed them into this corner, but they're still not being reasonable, and I've had enough and want out once and for all. 

You're absolutely right, they have only ever been interested in what they want, and I have gradually whittled it down to being closer to a mutual agreement, but it's still not good enough. 

Yes, but...
You have procrastinated for absolute donkeys, so - sorry - a lot of this is down to you.
And now you are seemingly almost there, you are suggesting you could stick to one option and mess it up. They are on the back foot, and you are offering them a stabilising hand.
Personally, I would use LP for advice, as you have, but only 'engage' them to act when defending, and not pursuing.
You have 'challenged' them on their proposal, haven't you? You've outlined the perfectly rational terms for agreeing to a straight replacement for the ST by a TP. If you haven't done so, add that you will inform BC should each property not also take care of their own G&RW.
Simple. Unambiguous. If they try anything else, you'll have them over a barrel. 
It really should be that simple. MAKE IT EVIDENTIALLY CLEAR.
Then they might just consider the 'erase the easements' alternative more attractive, which is what you want. But, I suggest you make them choose that option, or they will try and shout 'foul'.
They are 100% untrustworthy, so you box them in, in a way that no-one can fail to understand. Two options. Their choice. But no bending the rules.

Actually, thinking about what you've said, you could very well be right and this is the better approach...in other words, if they want to install the system they want (and avoid installing a soakaway or being reported to the BCO), then they need to agree to the removal of the easements. To be honest it comes to the same thing materially (we each get what we want), just one is much neater and in my favour deed-wise. Hmmm. Just fed up of backing them into corners after over a year of doing it, and only ever getting abuse back! Thanks for your advice

WIAWSNB

AJC211 said:

I hear you. But they've made it abundantly clear they won't budge at all on this, the installation is booked and will absolutely go ahead. So yes, I could challenge them legally using my LP. I'm just done with the whole thing, and if it means leaving the easement then so be it. 

Remind yourself that when they 'make it abundantly clear they won't budge at all on this', they are talking nonsense. These are their words and claims only.

IF they are daft enough to proceed with the work, you will be informing them that you will make zero contribution until it is fully signed off by BC. Which it won't be, until it fully conforms. 

If they still say they are going ahead - if they give you an actual date - then call up Build Control and tell them your concerns. A quick visit from that guy should soon sober them up. 

And at no point can they disconnect you from the new TP; (a) they'd also have to disconnect No1, and (b) your LegPro would have serious words with them, as would EnvHealth.

These guys are producing enough BS to overwhelm any TP.

So, by all means ask them for the fitting date so you can contact Build Control...

And then give them the opt-out option. 

To be clear - would you be ok with no 1 and 3 having a shared TP, so one sewer pipe crossing your land as currently? 

Anyhoo, confirm all this with your LP; "If they try and proceed with a TP system that they admit will not conform, what should I do?"

AJC211

BCO area surveyor is elusive, I’ve emailed and called them SO many times, every day last week, telling them it was urgent, still won’t call me back. I shall call again today!

AJC211

Yes, I’m happy for them to keep using the pipe across my garden, either under the existing easement or with a new one, I always have been willing for them to do so but it should be for sewage only. Arguably if we separate our sewage systems and they use it for both sewage and rainwater, they’d be breaching environmental law, so it might be useful to have that leverage in future.