Neighbour refuses repairs on my side, both leaseholds, freeholder invovled.

eddddy

Actually, on that note, it may be worth suggesting to the FHer to have this cover added to the Buildings policy too, as it seems this issue could have been resolved earlier with some legal 'pressure'.

Freeholders don't generally need legal expenses cover for stuff like this. They generally recharge their legal expenses to leaseholders.

For example, if a leaseholder breaches their lease, and the freeholder takes legal action against the leaseholder - generally the leaseholder has to pay the freeholder's legal costs.

And there's also the question of whether a freeholder can add the cost of legal expenses cover to the service charge. The freeholder won't want to pay for legal expenses cover, if they can't claim the cost back from the leaseholders.

TroubledTarts

Awkward neighbours and shared anything always a potential disaster waiting to happen.

It sounds like your neighbour is burying their head in the sand so with legal cover (hope you have it) that's your best route now

WIAWSNB

You leave it to the FHer to sort. It sounds as tho' they are almost there.

(Assuming the neighb is responsible for the work - I find reading leases too hard... But the FHer clearly thinks so.)

How far up the pipes did the CCTV inspection go? Is the damage local to the inspection chamber?

stuckinarut123

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82065572#Comment_82065572

went all the way up until you can see the light for our pipes, for their pipes E survey was abandoned due debris and F was 3m stretch, G was also abandoned due to decoupled pipe.

damage to benching and pipes in the manhole, further damage inside the pipes i guess? They said the reline them nowadays

eddddy

What does the head lease relate to?

In any case, it's your lease that's important, not the head lease.

You need to read your lease to see who is responsible for the drain pipes.

It's very, very, very likely that all 4 leases will have exactly the same wording about responsibility for drain pipes.

TBH, all your observations about pipes A,B,C etc, cctv surveys etc aren't really relevant, until you've read your lease to find out who is responsible for each section of drain pipe.

(But it sounds like your freeholder has read the lease, and decided that your neighbour is responsible for the damaged section of pipe - so maybe you can just accept your freeholder's findings, and you don't have to do any further investigation.)

stuckinarut123

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82065737#Comment_82065737

the head lease and lessor lease pretty much say the same things, there isn’t anything different except a few clauses to do with non relevant information.

however the right of repair, repair by lessor and right to entry seem like the relevant points.

i know you have the survey and thames water information isnt relevant and its only what it says in the lease, but surely you can see these supersede and provide the latest evidence that in fact it is indeed the neighbours pipes, and as per their covenants in the right of repair, they must repair these. Irregardless of the lease failing to mention that the pipe is on my side right?

because basically this is the whole argument here, they refuse to fix it because its on my side, but its their pipe - anyone can tell you its their pipe even a 5 year old. Which is why i’m struggling to get anywhere with them.

stuckinarut123

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82065305#Comment_82065305

what do you mean by legal cover? Home insurance which covers contents? Or building insurance which is provided by the freeholder?

eddddy

stuckinarut123 said

i know you have the survey and thames water information isnt relevant and its only what it says in the lease, but surely you can see these supersede and provide the latest evidence that in fact it is indeed the neighbours pipes, and as per their covenants in the right of repair, they must repair these.

I'm not sure what you're trying to say. But based on other things you've said in the thread…

1. The survey says the pipe needs repair
2. Thames Water say the pipe isn't their responsibility
3. So you need to read the lease to find out who is responsible for repairing the pipe

If your neighbour's lease says they are responsible for repairing the pipe, then your neighbour must repair it.

If your neighbour's lease says that the freeholder is responsible for the pipe, then your freeholder must repair it

If your neighbour's lease says the head leaseholder is responsible for the pipe, then the head leaseholder must repair it

(Or if your lease says that you are responsible for repairing the pipe, then you must repair it - but that seems unlikely)

stuckinarut123 said

because basically this is the whole argument here, they refuse to fix it because its on my side, but its their pipe - anyone can tell you its their pipe even a 5 year old. Which is why i’m struggling to get anywhere with them.

So the 5 year old needs to ignore whose side the pipe is on, and read the lease to find out who is responsible for repairing the pipe.

stuckinarut123 said

the head lease and lessor lease pretty much say the same things, there isn’t anything different except a few clauses to do with non relevant information.

I assume you mean head lease and lesser lease, often called a sub lease. You need to read the lesser lease (or sub-lease) to find out who is responsible for repairing the pipe. You (and your neighbour) won't be party to the head lease.

(But the lesser lease might cross-reference to the head lease.)

Do you understand the concept of head leases and lesser leases?

stuckinarut123

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82066411#Comment_82066411

ah yes your feedback has cleared this up for me, i was confused as i kept thinking the surveys and Thames outweighed any lease. I am in fact wrong and have taken aboard that it is indeed the lesser lease which contains the weight on the property owners.

I have seen the Lesser Lease (it was a typo), yes it does say repairs of drainage, sewers erc are the responsibility of the leaseholder (property owners).

i guess the only reason i was flummoxed is because even if the lesser lease says this, that every leaseholder must keep in good order and repair sewage, drains etc the neighbour could argue their way out of the repair by saying the pipe is found on my side broken hence not their responsibility to repair.

But are you saying that they cannot say this, as its their pipe as per the lesser lease hence the repairs are to be done by the covenant in the lesser lease - it does not matter if the pipe for example stretches over a differnt property or no property at all?

Without the use of the surveys, how do you determine if its their pipe? The lessor lease shows a map of the property, but not of the drainage system entering the manhole on my side.

eddddy

i guess the only reason i was flummoxed is because even if the lesser lease says this, that every leaseholder must keep in good order and repair sewage, drains etc the neighbour could argue their way out of the repair by saying the pipe is found on my side broken hence not their responsibility to repair.

But are you saying that they cannot say this, as its their pipe as per the lesser lease hence the repairs are to be done by the covenant in the lesser lease - it does not matter if the pipe for example stretches over a differnt property or no property at all?

If the lease says the pipe is that leaseholder's responsibility… then it's that leaseholder's responsibility.

That leaseholder can argue whatever they like, but arguing won't change what the lease says.

Without the use of the surveys, how do you determine if its their pipe? The lessor lease shows a map of the property, but not of the drainage system entering the manhole on my side.

I guess you .mean for example…

If the lease says something like "Any pipes that exclusively serve one maisonette are the responsibility that maisonette's leaseholder" … then how do you determine whether a particular pipe serves just one maisonette, and which maisonette it is?

I think you said earlier that a 5 year old could tell that the pipe exclusively served one maisonette. So why would you need to pay for a survey, if it's that obvious to everyone?

(If it ended up in court / tribunal and that point was disputed, then maybe one or both sides would get a survey to submit as part of their evidence.)