Neighbour wants to build extension against ours

MikeJXE

Doozergirl said:

The lack of comprehension in the replies is quite breathtaking.  

OP, if you treat this as a party wall then under the act, your neighbour should pay you half the cost of building your wall, that they will use, at the prevailing rate. 

Your house are already joined so I don't really understand why others are raising issues of being attached, when you are already attached. 

It does make sense to join extensions.  If your previous owners had considered things properly then they'd have built a true party wall over the boundary, but we are where we are.  

There should really be legal paperwork to tie things up and next door should pay for that.   I'm nit really sure that it's totally financially viable or worth the admin for next door, but I would definitely prefer to be attached than have a tiny gap where neither wall can really be maintained over two storeys.  

Lol I was thinking that very point

Do people actually read whats written ?

Not only this thread but but others too

Who are these people ? Everyone can't have fat fingers 

ThisIsWeird

Would it be sensible for MTC, assuming they agree to the 'join', to insist that no actual 'living' area crosses the boundary? 
Ie, yes, they can build right up to the boundary, and yes the roof can come over for a seamless join, and yes the gap will be filled, but their extension 'stops' at the boundary?

35har1old

Vitor said:

I'd see a massive downside that you'd be making what I assume is a detached house into a linked-semi.

>The planning permission diagrams showed it stopping 10cms short of the boundary<

Be very careful he isn't then going to add soffit and guttering that introduces over the boundary, creating issues of access for maintenance etc. Also, if the wall is 10cm from the boundary then the foundations will be over the boundary.

TBH sounds like the developer is trying to squeeze every sq.m out of the floorplan and he's playing fast and loose with the regulations and your privacy to do it.

The existing extension it's foundations are likely to be over the boundary 

GDB2222

The developer is going to get a few sq m more floor space by building over the boundary, compared to staying within his boundary. Round here, houses are valued at £10k per sq m. So, how much is he prepared to offer? 

kipsterno1

GDB2222 said:

The developer is going to get a few sq m more floor space by building over the boundary, compared to staying within his boundary. Round here, houses are valued at £10k per sq m. So, how much is he prepared to offer? 

But he isn't proposing to build beyond his boundary. He is, from how I read it, looking to build to the boundary but in fill the large gap to the OPs wall as a very wide cavity thus allowing them to have a seamless roof. He won't gain any extra space and as the OP can't use the space between their wall and the boundary they lose nothing.

ThisIsWeird

kipsterno1 said:

GDB2222 said:

The developer is going to get a few sq m more floor space by building over the boundary, compared to staying within his boundary. Round here, houses are valued at £10k per sq m. So, how much is he prepared to offer? 

But he isn't proposing to build beyond his boundary. He is, from how I read it, looking to build to the boundary but in fill the large gap to the OPs wall as a very wide cavity thus allowing them to have a seamless roof. He won't gain any extra space and as the OP can't use the space between their wall and the boundary they lose nothing.

In which case, I'd see that as the completely sensible option.

Doozergirl

ThisIsWeird said:

kipsterno1 said:

GDB2222 said:

The developer is going to get a few sq m more floor space by building over the boundary, compared to staying within his boundary. Round here, houses are valued at £10k per sq m. So, how much is he prepared to offer? 

But he isn't proposing to build beyond his boundary. He is, from how I read it, looking to build to the boundary but in fill the large gap to the OPs wall as a very wide cavity thus allowing them to have a seamless roof. He won't gain any extra space and as the OP can't use the space between their wall and the boundary they lose nothing.

In which case, I'd see that as the completely sensible option.

I wouldn't.  

Why would next door even pay to do that when the gap problem is just as much the OP's as it is their?  

I'd rather give them the useless space and be paid for use of the wall than pay to create dead space.  I cant see either party being particularly willing to pay for that.  

Without the OP this thread is ridiculous anyway.  There's too much information missing and far too many assumptions and lack of decent building knowledge.  

ThisIsWeird

Doozergirl said:

ThisIsWeird said:

In which case, I'd see that as the completely sensible option.

I wouldn't. 

Why would next door even pay to do that when the gap problem is just as much the OP's as it is their? No idea. I just answered the scenario presented - and I would still say that it's the sensible option on that basis.

I'd rather give them the useless space and be paid for use of the wall than pay to create dead space.  I cant see either party being particularly willing to pay for that. The OP shouldn't have to pay for anything. I don't understand your point. The neighbour 'gains' by having a sensible arrangement that doesn't require awkward ongoing access issues.

Without the OP this thread is ridiculous anyway.  There's too much information missing and far too many assumptions and lack of decent building knowledge. Now you're talkin' :-)

biiiits iiinnn boooold.

MikeJXE

If I was the OP and I would benefit from 25cm of.extra space

I would try to make a deal whereby next door builds to the boundary, my wall is demolished and rebuilt to my boundary, reclaim bricks/blocks therefore the cost would be mostly labour.

It has already been stated the roofs would join so no extra cost there 

No problem with empty space or the expense of filling a 40cm cavity and concealing it from the outside

GDB2222

kipsterno1 said:

GDB2222 said:

The developer is going to get a few sq m more floor space by building over the boundary, compared to staying within his boundary. Round here, houses are valued at £10k per sq m. So, how much is he prepared to offer? 

But he isn't proposing to build beyond his boundary. He is, from how I read it, looking to build to the boundary but in fill the large gap to the OPs wall as a very wide cavity thus allowing them to have a seamless roof. He won't gain any extra space and as the OP can't use the space between their wall and the boundary they lose nothing.

The developer wants the wall to be on the boundary, so of course the foundations will have to be partially on the OP's side. Otherwise, he'll have to set the side wall of the extension back within his side of the boundary by at least the extra width of the foundations. 

I see nothing wrong with selling the land to the developer, but I don't see why it should be given away.