Moving neighbour's sewer and manhole

[Notch7]

Very true. To be honest, even for a significant fee, I wouldn’t grant them access to our property. Their extension plans are ridiculous- almost doubling the size of their house on a plot which isn’t really big enough. They’re going to be left with a tiny garden. We’d already decided that we wouldn’t grant them access to our property for the building of the extension (scaffolding etc) since, as far as I’m aware, once granted this sets a precedent and can’t be refused in future, thus potentially devaluing our property.

it surprising they got PP.

on another note, they’ve been very silly because when embarking on such a project you always mitigate any potential showstoppers first. You do not pay out for planning permission, building regs, sewer undertaker applications first.

Unless they’ve deliberately left until the last moment to put maximum pressure you, which emotional blackmail.

 

[noseall]

We’d already decided that we wouldn’t grant them access to our property for the building of the extension (scaffolding etc) since, as far as I’m aware, once granted this sets a precedent and can’t be refused in future, thus potentially devaluing our property.

Oh, it's a sour grapes NIMBY thread now..?

Granting easement for a temporary scaffold could be a wise idea, especially since it will cause minimal inconvenience. However, I do sympathise with those that have lousy neighbours and even lousier builders. I'd agree to let them put it it but with a strict timescale, no weekends and no after hours and cleaning around the stanchions once a week.

We always bribe offer compensation to any neighbours we need on our side.

 

[mrrusty]

I bet there is no consultation with the utility company. As it's a shared sewer it isn't their manhole to move. We had a broken manhole cover in our garden and I asked UU to tell me either what they would like me to do if it was my responsibility or fix it if theirs. They fixed it. Check the planning docs and see. I think it is unlikely Utility will accept a complete rerouting of a sewer that is their responsibility without consultation.

In any case, it saves huge bother later to protect your boundary absolutely.

However, I WOULD grant permission for access and scaffolding as this adds weight to the things you don't agree to and shows you are not just be an a***

 

[michaelb136]

Oh, it's a sour grapes NIMBY thread now..?

Granting easement for a temporary scaffold could be a wise idea, especially since it will cause minimal inconvenience. However, I do sympathise with those that have lousy neighbours and even lousier builders. I'd agree to let them put it it but with a strict timescale, no weekends and no after hours and cleaning around the stanchions once a week.

We always bribe offer compensation to any neighbours we need on our side.

No, it’s not a NIMBY thread. You say you give strict timescales, what do you do if those timescales aren’t met? Make them remove all scaffolding and leave the job half-finished?

 

[noseall]

No, it’s not a NIMBY thread. You say you give strict timescales, what do you do if those timescales aren’t met? Make them remove all scaffolding and leave the job half-finished?

Fine them - per day.

 

[Dereekoo]

No, it’s not a NIMBY thread. You say you give strict timescales, what do you do if those timescales aren’t met? Make them remove all scaffolding and leave the job half-finished?

Yes, and then they would be in the position that they would have been without the scaffolding but hopefully things wouldn't come to that and if they did you can decide whether to be amenable or not, just dont say 2 weeks instead of 6 months. Also if they do have to lay the brickwork from their side the finish will not be as nice if laid from yours.

 

[Dereekoo]

Fine them - per day.

Don't have the powers to fine them

 

[noseall]

Don't have the powers to fine them

If an agreement is met, i.e. you can have the scaffold for a reasonable period. If it's not complete then a financial penalty will be imposed or the scaffold will be struck by our own contractors.

 

[Dereekoo]

If an agreement is met, i.e. you can have the scaffold for a reasonable period. If it's not complete then a financial penalty will be imposed or the scaffold will be struck by our own contractors.

So not a fine but an agreed cost for over run of time frame. Also cannot be classed as a penalty otherwise contractually invalid, thats why contracts have liquidated damages clauses and not penalties.

 

[^woody^]

So not a fine but an agreed cost for over run of time frame. Also cannot be classed as a penalty otherwise contractually invalid, thats why contracts have liquidated damages clauses and not penalties.

LADs are still penalties for the person paying them, just called so.

 

[Dereekoo]

LADs are still penalties for the person paying them, just called so.

Quite agree but the law disagrees, in theory LDs are a auditable calculated figure to determine an actual loss that will occur as opposed to a penalty which is any damn figure you want to make up

 

[rssteve]

Brickwork will look crap from your side if they work overhand.

 

[^woody^]

Brickwork will look crap from your side if they work overhand.

It depends excludes doing the bricklaying.

 

[noseall]

It depends excludes doing the bricklaying.

It's impossible to see the uppermost part of the brick joint from an overhand perspective. Even the best brickies are going to achieve a mediocre (weathering) job at best. Don't tell me - you have a car wing mirror attachment for your joint gagger?

 

[^woody^]

It's impossible to see the uppermost part of the brick joint from an overhand perspective. Even the best brickies are going to achieve a mediocre (weathering) job at best. Don't tell me - you have a car wing mirror attachment for your joint gagger?

I have a mod joiner.

As long as you can stay high enough to be able to reach over the wall, it can be pointed well as work proceeds. And often there is the option to tidy up joints from the neighbor's side.

I suppose the trick is to fill the joints when laying.