Building Notice and Build Over Public Sewer- Waltham Forest

[cmyaseen]

Hi,

Please advise me, I have already got the planning permission to extend my house for 3 meter at the rear and on the side.

After making the building regulations, my architect confirmed from Thames water for any Sewage pipe coming within the 3m area of extension but they said (on phone) that there is nothing coming up in the record of you area, they havn't confirmed that either there is any sewage or NOT. So my architect advised if there is nothing coming up in the TW system, then no need to submit Build Over Sewer application nd fee of £343.

When submiting building notice to council they also rechecked at their end and confirmed Water Sewage pipe not involved in this property (the lady who confirmed this also wrote this on the form).

Now we have started the building work, and while digging the foundation we found out there is sewage pipe exactly coming under the foundation. that pipe is not being used for our drainage and also not for our neighbour of one side, for other side not sure.

My architect said just submit the structure calculations of beams at the foundation(to protect the pipe) to the Council and dont submit the 'Building over Public sewer' application (nd Fee £343) to TW as these are not required (because nothing is coming up in TW record).

Can you please advice me what should I do? should I simply submit the structure calculations of foundation to council (I have already submitted the Building regulations) or should I first submit the 'Building Over public sewer' application to TW and get the approval?

Second Builder has already started the work, so can we contineou the work by following the structure's calculation of foundation or should we stop the work until we get the approval from TW (if we submit the Build over sewer app) or from Council ?

Please advise what should we do?

Man thanks

 

[^woody^]

You should probably follow your Architects advice. If there are any problems then he will be responsible. Get something in writing if possible

IMO, if the water company and building control have not flagged up anything, then just carry on and take the normal building over drains precautions. The building inspector will need to check the foundation trenches and drains in any case.

I'm not sure what structural calculations you are referring to, as if you have traditional foundations then building over drains is pretty standard, and do not require special calculations ... nor should you be charged for any by an Architect

 

[cmyaseen]

Many thanks 'woody' for your advise.

These structural calculations that I was referring are just the standard calculations(as you said) to protect the sewage when we build over sewage pipe.

As you advised I will do the same, will submit the build over sewage calculations (even though those are standard) to the Building inspector.

One more thing, do I need to wait for the approval from inspector after submitting to him or Can the builder start the work as per the structural calculation and invite inspector after digging to inspect ?

thanks a lot of your advise.

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

^woody^, the OP needs to check if the drain is used or not and if so by whom, as you well know if it is being used and not solely by the OP it will be subject to a build over whether it appears on the water company's records or not. To just go ahead is a little naive to say the least.

 

[cmyaseen]

How can we check if the sewage pipe is in use or not? to whom we should contact, when it is not coming up in the TW mapes, please advise.

thanks

 

[^woody^]

^woody^, the OP needs to check if the drain is used or not and if so by whom, as you well know if it is being used and not solely by the OP it will be subject to a build over whether it appears on the water company's records or not. To just go ahead is a little naive to say the least.

No at all.

The OP has asked the water company and got an answer. Further, he has effectively got the same response from the council

Therefore, it is safe to assume that the response from two professional bodies, who would have diligently checked their information before responding, can be relied upon.

The OP can proceed on the basis of the information given to him, and build as normal and bridge the pipe as normal.

In any case, as you know, the pipe will be bridged the same whether an application is made or not. The only difference will be the £343 fee

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

All that advice won't be worth a thing if a problem should arise in the future. Water company records are notoriously inaccurate and just because their records don't show does not mean there will never be a problem with it.

 

[^woody^]

No, but there is no further duty on the OP, and he can not be responsible for the company's inaccurate records, of if he subsequently builds having relied on the statements of the water company and the council

If there are future problems with this pipe, not of the OP's making, then he could expect substantial compensation for any work that needs to be done if it disturbs his property

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

We'll have to beg to differ on this one woody.

 

[^woody^]

Yeah that's fine.

Its just .... how much is a layperson (ie the OP) expected to rely on the information specifically requested from a professional information holding company, and their expert knowledge?

They certainly can't use the "Oh our records may not be accurate" excuse. It really is simple . .... you ask, they tell, and that's it. Anything missing from what they tell you is their problem, and at their cost

 

[maltaron]

Woody, it is important to note that the information from the Water Authority was given "on the phone". FMT will know the problems caused recently when he was given similar information "on the phone" and the water company denied the call ever took place. After this denial was repeated several times both in writing and on the phone. a solicitors letter and the threat of legal action finally produced proof of the call and saved me £12,000 cost of replacing the pipe under my extension.

 

[cmyaseen]

thanks for all the comments.

Tomorrow or day after, I am going to submit the structural calculation to protect the sewage pipe to the inspector of BR in council, if he asks me to first get the approval of Build over agreement from TW, then will do. And the inspector also have to consult to TW about the building work going on over the sewage so there should be not a problem if inspector knows every thing, at the end he is the one who has to make sure that work done over the sewage is up to the standard. TW just have to get the money £343.

I will update you all what he replies.

 

[jeds]

The sewer adoption act has been a bit hit and miss when it comes to procedure and implementation at local level. I've found that one day they seem to take fairly minor situations quite seriously and on other days (presumably when they are busy with other things) they've given approval for things with much greater potential without so much as a visit.

Different sewage authorities might have slightly different procedures and documentation but I can tell you that Wessex makes it clear on their forms that it is the homeowners responsibility to identify what drains exist on the property and report unseen drains as soon as they come to light. First stop at the start of a new job is a call to the developer office and they'll tell you straight away if a drain is shown. Three or four months ago if no drain was shown that was the end of it. But I'm now finding that they take details and send forms even if nothing is shown. They probably had a number of situations arise where drains came to light and delayed jobs with people whining 'I phoned the office and they said it was ok' and all that. They've obviously cottoned on to the fact that they have to cover themselves for these situations so now they just automatically send forms regardless.

I had one where they insisted on a form and fee when a marked drain was 7 metres from the build. They said they had to confirm it was not within 3 metres and to do that they would have to visit and they won't visit without a fee. I pursueded them in the end but it gives you a flavour of how variable their attitude can be.

As for building control, I've had three or four jobs delayed when drains appeared that did not show on records. On the other hand I've had more where unseen drains were ignored by building control because procedure had been followed. As long as we adopted the usual technical approach (by usual I mean what we used to do before October) they were happy. So, again, a bit hit and miss approach.

 

[^woody^]

Wessex makes it clear on their forms that it is the homeowners responsibility to identify what drains exist on the property and report unseen drains as soon as they come to light.

That may well be bluff just put on the forms for the company's own benefit

There does not appear to be anything in the 1991 or the 2011 Acts that put a duty on the landowner to notify.

The landowners duty is fulfilled by making his enquiry, and he would be entitled to act on the information provided to him.

The duty to maintain and record their network is on the water companies, and this can not be passed to the landowner

 

[jeds]

That's just a technicality. There may not be an express duty to inform but there is an express duty not to interfere with a sewer pipe without the consent of the authority. (1991 Act under protection of apparatus) There might be an argument that building over does not necessarily constitute interfering with but that's not a defence I'd be happy with if I was on the wrong end of a claim.

The problem remains though that without consent building control half the time won't proceed.