Septic Tank Drama

Section62

PRDMKT said:

Section62 said:

propertyrental said:

The nearby sewer is surface water only and discharges to a ditch

The tank is shared with the adjoining property

This one?......

PRDMKT said:

gwynlas said:

There is a public foul sewer nearby, but the property is landlocked (bar the driveway which is the other end of the plot) and the drain would have to travel uphill to get the drain and cross the public surface water sewer, so I don't think it's reasonable to connect to it.

My concern is that the system requires immediate replacement and that would cost £10,000's 

Section62

PRDMKT said:

Section62 said:

Ahhh yes, sorry, there is one "nearby" but it would be a fair job connecting to it- see below (I have circled the property in red and the approx location of the septic tank in green)

The rising main from a small pumping station could be something like 50mm PE pipe, potentially installed (at least in part) using trenchless techniques.  I wouldn't rule the possibility out without having quotes for the different options.

It will potentially be more of a problem that the system is shared.  Is there some kind of agreement in place over who pays for what, and how eventual replacement would be funded?

propertyrental

PRDMKT said:

Section62 said:

propertyrental said:

Again - ambiguous!

What does 'getting full' mean? Liquid reaching the top of the tank? It's supposed to. Then the bacteria gets to work breaking down the solids (though nowhere near as effectively as a treatment plant). A tank does not 'need' emptying just because it is 'getting full'

If the system is working correctly then the solids should be broken down in the primary tank, what exits the primary tank should only be liquid.  A packaged treatment plant is designed to work on this liquid effluent to speed up the process of biological decomposition (in old systems what the secondary tank was for) so that the final effluent meets the discharge consent requirements (e.g. for BOD)

The need to pump out the primary tank (and usually the sump of the treatment plant) is because the anaerobic process doesn't achieve 100% decomposition of the solids, so over time there will be an accumulation of solids.  How long that takes before the primary needs desludging depends on what people are putting into the system, and the capacity of the primary tank.

Packaged treatment plants overcome the problem of inefficient leach fields - by allowing the final effluent to be discharged direct to a watercourse.

propertyrental said:

Have a proper survey done? These people are only one of many firms that do this:

https://www.ukdpsolutions.co.uk/septic-tanks/surveys

Further comments in bold below

PRDMKT said:

I suggest you get a survey done and /or just assume replacement will be necessary.

A treatment plant is the way to go. No leach field required (these can add a lot to the cost of a septic tank). Is there a pond, drain, ditch, or other watercourse nearby you can use? If so, and dependent on number of bedrooms (which dictates size of treatment plant) budget £5K for plant and labour?

I think the OP would have to do some more investigations before coming to that conclusion.

With a main sewer nearby it may be better to switch to a pumping station option and discharge to the public sewer instead.  It won't be an easy decision to make though, as all the different economic factors would need to be taken into account.  The pumping option would use more energy and would require ongoing payments to the local water company, vs the likely larger capital cost of a packaged treatment plant and the ongoing cost of maintenance and desludging.

What may swing it is the need for a discharge consent.  There are powers which can be used to compel people to connect to the public sewer if one is within a certain distance from the property, and with growing concern for the quality of our rivers, the relevant consent authority may refuse an application if the alternative of connecting to the public sewer is an option.

What really does need clarifying as a matter of urgency is whether the septic tank serves this property alone, or is shared with others.

The nearby sewer is surface water only and discharges to a ditch

Then that is not a sewer! You could discharge properly treated water into it, but not the outflow from a septic tank. So a pump from a ST won't comply.

Section62 is obviously right that more information is needed but my point was that if a change is needed and a new leach field would be needed, then a treatment plant is preferable to a septic tank for several reasons (financial, environmental, practical...)

£20K will buy you an awful lot of treatment plant though biggest unknown/potential cost is pipework. And of course you only pay half.

PRDMKT

!!!APOLOGIES FOR THE RANT!!!

I find myself in a predicament.

We are in the late stages of purchasing a barn conversion that we love. The offer has been accepted, and we are just a few days away from exchange. However, the barn shares a cesspit with the neighbors. Although it has never caused any issues for either side, it requires emptying every 3-6 months at a cost of about £60 to £120 per household per year.

I thought I was okay with this, but now the situation is causing me some cold feet. Although, I am not sure if this is part of the normal worrying that comes with buying a property. I am concerned about the responsibility that comes with the tank and the potential for future problems. We are considering connecting the drains to a nearby foul sewer at some point, but I am guessing this could cost tens of thousands of pounds.

I have a real fear about purchasing a property that we might struggle to sell in the future, or worse, finding ourselves subject to EA enforcement. As someone who has only ever lived with mains drainage, I initially thought a septic tank was similar—you just call someone to empty it, and it’s not much different in that respect. However, after the intense scrutiny during conveyancing regarding binding rules and other regulations, I am now quite anxious. The vendor has confirmed that the tank complies with the binding rules after some prompting, but I am not sure they are fully aware. We haven't had a specific survey on the tank, but a level 3 structural survey identified no superficial issues.

I have this innate fear that we will move in and something will be wrong with the septic tank. Since compliance is enforceable by the EA, I worry we will be forced to immediately rectify any issues, potentially facing a £40k bill or more. I have no problem fixing issues or upgrading utilities; I just prefer to do it when it’s appropriate for me.

Apologies again for the rant—this probably makes about as much sense as a Joe Biden speech. Any advice or insights would be really appreciated.

FreeBear

PRDMKT said: Any advice or insights would be really appreciated.

Advice - Stick to a single thread rather than cross posting to multiple areas.

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6538982/septic-tank

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6537155/septic-tank-drama

Albermarle

Advice - Stick to a single thread rather than cross posting to multiple areas.

I second that advice !

stuart45

Is it a septic tank or cesspit? They are different, but you've used both words in your post.

gm0

1 You need to see in conveyancing the paperwork that allows you to "share it" and the costs to maintain and replace also.  Clarity.  Legally effective.

2 You need to look at the land and say - is it shared because it wasn't practical to do anything else.  As this constrains future options.  See 1 if this is so - check most carefully as your long term future plan is to do something shared again.

There are thousands of single user tanks and a smaller number of shared in rural settings.  It is possible for any that were fitted as little as 20-25 years ago to be viewed as "non compliant" on a spectrum from

- always was an illegal discharge - EA enforcement possible.  Bodged by original owner/builder.  Illegal discharge to LA drains and water courses types of scenario.  Not normal tanks with soakways - buried and working.

- legal when fitted but don't meet rules introduced after fitting (but so what).  Still not notfiable. There is a quiz on the government website to help you work out what is notifiable to EA and what isn't.  And it is in service life.  Working. And doesn't need attention. Sleeping dogs lie.  For the latter the probability of EA enforcement that a working soakaway is a bit too near a property boundary for the post install distance rules is in practice zero. 

"Working" is the key word.  If you are spilling raw sewage across the road then this is going to become an issue at some point. 

At replacement (in the far future) they will need a solution which meets the regulations - *then* for new installs - whatever they are.  It is possible they will change again before then.  That is a then problem not a now problem that can be solved in advance definitively.

Soakaways don't last "forever" can silt up.  Unless seriously over sized.  So may require repair and extension at some point a marginal one perhaps 20 years.  A better one longer.   When that happens the overfall of water from the tank slows and the drains can back up until this is addressed.  Weather is a factor.  We had a tank previously and when the county was effectively sodden and a lot of fields and ground were sqeulching underfoot at surface level.  Unsurprisingly the septic tank soakway - could not soakaway - as much water as in a dry summer.  It did not stop working entirely but the volume it could cope with was much reduced.

Where binding regs are not met - because the road layout and land fall doesn't co-operate with it not being near a boundary.  The "compromise solution" is often a septic tank which is a "treatment plant" (stirrer/air blower) to improve discharge quality.  Where there is nowhere for direct discharge.  A soakaway as before just with cleaner more digested input.  Otherwise the same.

If your deeds are in place then at some point it may be necessary for you and the person sharing to fit such a plant and run power to it as needed.

The only real horror show scenario is if a treatment plant solution compromise cannot be agreed at replacement with the authorities.  And EA insist on a sealed cess pit which requires tanker emptying.  This is rare.  But there are situations where development has happened directly alongside sites of special scientific interest or other "treasures". 

The defacto soluition for this is for sellers to "not know".  And for buyers to "not care" and just carry on with the existing working setup for another 20 years. 

The "dejure" solution involves in replacing a tank without a bubble blower with one with a bubble blower into the existing soakaways and carrying on as before.  After a big bureaucratic constipation exercise if the title plans don't match the aribtrary distance to boundary rules.

Albermarle

PRDMKT said:

!!!APOLOGIES FOR THE RANT!!!

I find myself in a predicament.

We are in the late stages of purchasing a barn conversion that we love. The offer has been accepted, and we are just a few days away from exchange. However, the barn shares a cesspit with the neighbors. Although it has never caused any issues for either side, it requires emptying every 3-6 months at a cost of about £60 to £120 per household per year.

I thought I was okay with this, but now the situation is causing me some cold feet. Although, I am not sure if this is part of the normal worrying that comes with buying a property. I am concerned about the responsibility that comes with the tank and the potential for future problems. We are considering connecting the drains to a nearby foul sewer at some point, but I am guessing this could cost tens of thousands of pounds.

I have a real fear about purchasing a property that we might struggle to sell in the future, or worse, finding ourselves subject to EA enforcement. As someone who has only ever lived with mains drainage, I initially thought a septic tank was similar—you just call someone to empty it, and it’s not much different in that respect. However, after the intense scrutiny during conveyancing regarding binding rules and other regulations, I am now quite anxious. The vendor has confirmed that the tank complies with the binding rules after some prompting, but I am not sure they are fully aware. We haven't had a specific survey on the tank, but a level 3 structural survey identified no superficial issues.

I have this innate fear that we will move in and something will be wrong with the septic tank. Since compliance is enforceable by the EA, I worry we will be forced to immediately rectify any issues, potentially facing a £40k bill or more. I have no problem fixing issues or upgrading utilities; I just prefer to do it when it’s appropriate for me.

Apologies again for the rant—this probably makes about as much sense as a Joe Biden speech. Any advice or insights would be really appreciated.

This is the third duplicate post !

PRDMKT

gm0 said:

1 You need to see in conveyancing the paperwork that allows you to "share it" and the costs to maintain and replace also.  Clarity.  Legally effective.

2 You need to look at the land and say - is it shared because it wasn't practical to do anything else.  As this constrains future options.  See 1 if this is so - check most carefully as your long term future plan is to do something shared again.

There are thousands of single user tanks and a smaller number of shared in rural settings.  It is possible for any that were fitted as little as 20-25 years ago to be viewed as "non compliant" on a spectrum from

- always was an illegal discharge - EA enforcement possible.  Bodged by original owner/builder.  Illegal discharge to LA drains and water courses types of scenario.  Not normal tanks with soakways - buried and working.

- legal when fitted but don't meet rules introduced after fitting (but so what).  Still not notfiable. There is a quiz on the government website to help you work out what is notifiable to EA and what isn't.  And it is in service life.  Working. And doesn't need attention. Sleeping dogs lie.  For the latter the probability of EA enforcement that a working soakaway is a bit too near a property boundary for the post install distance rules is in practice zero. 

"Working" is the key word.  If you are spilling raw sewage across the road then this is going to become an issue at some point. 

At replacement (in the far future) they will need a solution which meets the regulations - *then* for new installs - whatever they are.  It is possible they will change again before then.  That is a then problem not a now problem that can be solved in advance definitively.

Soakaways don't last "forever" can silt up.  Unless seriously over sized.  So may require repair and extension at some point a marginal one perhaps 20 years.  A better one longer.   When that happens the overfall of water from the tank slows and the drains can back up until this is addressed.  Weather is a factor.  We had a tank previously and when the county was effectively sodden and a lot of fields and ground were sqeulching underfoot at surface level.  Unsurprisingly the septic tank soakway - could not soakaway - as much water as in a dry summer.  It did not stop working entirely but the volume it could cope with was much reduced.

Where binding regs are not met - because the road layout and land fall doesn't co-operate with it not being near a boundary.  The "compromise solution" is often a septic tank which is a "treatment plant" (stirrer/air blower) to improve discharge quality.  Where there is nowhere for direct discharge.  A soakaway as before just with cleaner more digested input.  Otherwise the same.

If your deeds are in place then at some point it may be necessary for you and the person sharing to fit such a plant and run power to it as needed.

The only real horror show scenario is if a treatment plant solution compromise cannot be agreed at replacement with the authorities.  And EA insist on a sealed cess pit which requires tanker emptying.  This is rare.  But there are situations where development has happened directly alongside sites of special scientific interest or other "treasures". 

The defacto soluition for this is for sellers to "not know".  And for buyers to "not care" and just carry on with the existing working setup for another 20 years. 

The "dejure" solution involves in replacing a tank without a bubble blower with one with a bubble blower into the existing soakaways and carrying on as before.  After a big bureaucratic constipation exercise if the title plans don't match the aribtrary distance to boundary rules.

Thank you so much for your response