Kitchen extractor into shared passageway

[militantconsumer]

My builders have made a big hole in my external wall for the kitchen extractor fan. In fact the hole is in the archway that supports the party wall between the upstairs rooms above.

Problem is this goes into an external passageway shared with the neighbours and they are unhappy about it.

Are we allowed to do this? Is it a problem that the extractor will come out at head height in a narrow covered passageway? (it's covered because the upstairs goes across the passageway - it's a terraced row of houses)

They also say it's a fire hazard because there are wooden boards above you as you look up in the passage and we are sending out hot and greasy air.

And it will smell of our cooking in there.

 

[^woody^]

It wont be a fire hazard.

You will be concentrating cooking odours into a confined space and as such it could be deemed a Statutory Nuisance. But it all depends on a lot of factors

Also, depending on the actual construction of the passageway soffit, then over a longer term, smells could percolate into the floor void and rooms above.

It's probably an inappropriate place for an extract outlet, and the builder should have, IMO, known this

 

[militantconsumer]

Thanks woody for your reply.

According to the local authority they cannot take any action over domestic cooking fumes. And I believe that a statutory nuisance again only applies to commercial activities.

The builder's argument is that it complies with Building Regs as it is not an enclosed space because the passage is open at both ends.

The comment about the soffit boards is a useful point.

But is anyone aware of any other rules or legislation that could be used to convince the builder to complete the work at their own cost?

 

[joinerjohn]

You could always duct the extraction from the outlet to the end of the passageway. A bit more expense, but at least it'll keep the neighbours happy.

 

[freddiemercurystwin]

The builder's not gonna re-route the duct through a floor and then out of the wall at higher level at his own cost is he? Didn't it occur to you that that was where the duct was gonna stick out?

 

[militantconsumer]

Thanks John.

The neighbours agreed to that proposal but there is some internal rerouting to be done.

Look at the attached picture. The left hand side shows the passageway in profile (with arch) directly outside the kitchen extraction.

The hole is coming down via the red hole. They need to go another foot higher up inside the chimney then come out towards us where the blue spot is, i.e. down the passageway.

The rest of the passageway doesn't have an archway, i.e. like the right hand picture.

Now I just have to find a way of convincing the builders that's what they really should have done in the first place.

They're now trying to make out it's an extra project with more costs to be added.

Untitled

• militantconsumer
• 3 Aug 2012
• 1

[/img]

 

[militantconsumer]

The builder's not gonna re-route the duct through a floor and then out of the wall at higher level at his own cost is he? Didn't it occur to you that that was where the duct was gonna stick out?

Hi freddy

Not through the floor, see my last post that I was writing while you were writing yours.

Yes, there's extra work to be done, someone has to pay for it.

It didn't occur to me because they waited until I was out and then just cut a hole in the wall without discussing the route. You could see into our kitchen from outside!

I would suggest this was done deliberately to save money in the first place as it's obviously not a very appropriate place to direct fumes.

 

[joe-90]

It's your vent - you pay for it. What's the problem?

 

[militantconsumer]

It's your vent - you pay for it. What's the problem?

Hi Joe

Problem is there's a fixed price contract and now I am being asked to pay for extras that should, IMO, be part of that.

I don't mind paying for unforeseen eventualities - e.g. foundations having to be dug deeper, sewers not being where expected and so on.

But being asked to pay more to take the extraction to where it should have been in the first place?

It's a bit like if I agree a price to do your accounts for you and then I try to charge you an extra fee to send them off the the tax man, when clearly that was always going to be needed. Whereas I'd be within my rights to charge you extra for an additional service like, say, helping you with reclaiming your PPI or something like that. (although even that should be agreed).

So the question is really whether or not the extraction originally done by the builders (and not discussed with me) was sufficient and appropriate or not.

 

[joe-90]

If the original price had included ducting then the original would be higher than it is. What's the problem? They are doing more work and want more pay. Either that or you fall out with the neighbour and have to declare it when you sell. Just pay up and stop whining.

 

[militantconsumer]

OK, leaving aside the obviously emotive issue of who should pay for the 'extra' work....

Does anyone have any specific knowledge, experience or opinion about whether it is acceptable to vent a kitchen extractor into a covered passageway?

Many thanks in advance for any useful comments!

 

[joe-90]

Just because you don't like a comment doesn't mean it's wrong.

If it upsets your neighbours then it's a bad move.

Making holes in arches is silly too. An arch is a structural feature.

 

[noseall]

As Joe says, the simple fact is it is NOT acceptable to cause a nuisance and only a blind/lazy builder would consider venting in this location.

As for costs - did you agree to this location?

 

[militantconsumer]

As Joe says, the simple fact is it is NOT acceptable to cause a nuisance and only a blind/lazy builder would consider venting in this location.

As for costs - did you agree to this location?

We agreed that the passageway would be used for ventilation but not specifically that there would just be a hole in the wall as opposed to ducting along the top of the passageway and into the open air.

The contract wasn't specific about this point, hence why I came on this forum to work out a) what is normal practice and b) are there any rules and regulations in this area.

 

[noseall]

The contract wasn't specific about this point.

Ah, the old ambiguity trick!

This is the problem with any contractual agreement where the less specific items get misinterpreted. Grey areas eh!

However, your builder has a professional obligation to "follow the rules" as it were and should not fit stuff wrong. You need to emphasise this and ask if he would be happy leaving it this way or doing it in his own home. If the answer would be an honest no, then he should change it without cost.

If however the contract specifically says the vent discharges where it does then you may have to pay.