Party wall advice advice
Discussion
Guys I need some advice, I have replaced with all relevant planning permission a single story extension with two storey extension, My neighbour did not put any objections forward. She has now planted a Virginia creeper which is a very rapid growing climbing plant. My concern is that it will soon be at roof height and causing a problem with the slates what are my rights?
The problem with that legislation is that it hasn't been proved yet. Although the purpose of it is to give access rights.
It's hard to give definative advice on the info you've provided so far.
Planning Consent has balls all to do with the Party Wall Act. Did you serve the appropriate Party Wall notices before starting works? Where do yo live? When was the extension built? What is the roof arrangement?
Is your neighbour just refusing to discuss the matter of pruning? How close is this plant to the building?
It's hard to give definative advice on the info you've provided so far.
Planning Consent has balls all to do with the Party Wall Act. Did you serve the appropriate Party Wall notices before starting works? Where do yo live? When was the extension built? What is the roof arrangement?
Is your neighbour just refusing to discuss the matter of pruning? How close is this plant to the building?
If the structure IS a Party Wall then the Adjoining Owner (your neighbour) is liable to maintain their side of it. If the creeper causes damage to the wall and other structures on your side of the wall - eg: the roof tiles - then you have a very simple claim for damages against the Adjoining Owner.
Again if it IS a Party Wall then you have rights of access to carry out works under the Party Wall Act (aside from the previously mentioned legislation) and this access is well proven in the Courts.
Again if it IS a Party Wall then you have rights of access to carry out works under the Party Wall Act (aside from the previously mentioned legislation) and this access is well proven in the Courts.
mk1fan said:
Again if it IS a Party Wall then you have rights of access to carry out works under the Party Wall Act (aside from the previously mentioned legislation) and this access is well proven in the Courts.
...but quite limited in its scope. My personal experience of the Access to Neighbouring Land Act is that it doesn't matter that it's not well proven, 'cos in practice you never have to take it to court. Your average Joe Bloggs will just cave in when you present him with a coppy of an Act of Parliament with the appropriate bits clearly highlighted.
Perhaps that's why it hasn't been heavily tested in the courts?
You probably have at least three years until it gets to roof height.
Our Virginia Creeper is a bit of a ball ache as 2-3 times during the summer I will have to use very long trimmers to pull and rip is out from underneath gutters etc.
It may be the case that the neighbour has not looked this far ahead. At the very least they are setting themselves up for a few hours work each summer and about £70 spent on the tool.
I would simply put in writing to them that you have taken advice and been told that the tendrils can cause problems degrading the wall, and when gets toward roof height causes serious damage.
I would advise her to remove it, but if she wants to keep it she should accept the fact that should minor damage to the wall occur that you will be asking her to pay for it, and ask that she keeps the creeper cut to a manageable height or at very least 3 feet away from the roof at all times.
Our Virginia Creeper is a bit of a ball ache as 2-3 times during the summer I will have to use very long trimmers to pull and rip is out from underneath gutters etc.
It may be the case that the neighbour has not looked this far ahead. At the very least they are setting themselves up for a few hours work each summer and about £70 spent on the tool.
I would simply put in writing to them that you have taken advice and been told that the tendrils can cause problems degrading the wall, and when gets toward roof height causes serious damage.
I would advise her to remove it, but if she wants to keep it she should accept the fact that should minor damage to the wall occur that you will be asking her to pay for it, and ask that she keeps the creeper cut to a manageable height or at very least 3 feet away from the roof at all times.
I too suffer from rampant Virginia creeper (one of those things that seemed like a good idea at the time!) but while I've been hacking it down in lumps for over 10 years, I can't see any sign that it does any damage to the wall. It might be simpler to live with the issue, or deal with it pleasantly, rather than start throwing legal stuff about.
Sam_68 said:
...but quite limited in its scope. This is only been available to the country as a whole (so tospeak) from 1996 though when the PWA was extended to cover the whole of England and Wales rather than just London.
The other legislation hasn't be proven yet because of the expense of doing so is vastly more than the costs of the required works. Commercial occupiers don't use the legisation as there are usually lease covenants to provide access - or the PWA. So it is left to domestic occupiers to foot the court fees to test it.
Edited by mk1fan on Tuesday 18th August 19:00
Simpo Two said:
I too suffer from rampant Virginia creeper (one of those things that seemed like a good idea at the time!) but while I've been hacking it down in lumps for over 10 years, I can't see any sign that it does any damage to the wall. It might be simpler to live with the issue, or deal with it pleasantly, rather than start throwing legal stuff about.
If left unchecked it will work it's way beneath sills and tiles. The main damage is the affect they have on weatherings and subsequent water ingress rather than eating into the fabric of the building.mk1fan said:
You're entitled to access in order to carry out maintenance, works or repairs to the Party Structures plus any works to complete them.
But if I was the sort of a
hole who was obstructive enough to refuse access in the first place, I'd argue that access to prune overhanging vegetation does not constitute maintenance, works, or repair to the Party Structures themselves. Unless you could prove that the pruning was necessary preventative maintenance (...I see lots of money on expert witnesses and Party Wall Surveyor's reports, here...), it would only give you the powers to go in and repair the damage after it had been done.I agree that the Party Wall Act is an equally useful bit of legislation to beat the uninitiated over the head with, though.
...the bottom line is that either piece of legislation is usually adequate to frighten awkward neighbours into backing down. I think it's telling that the Access to Neighbouring Land Act came into force in 1993 -16 years ago - yet has reached court so infrequently that there's not enough case law to establish its robustness.
The fact that there's more case law to support the Party Wall Act is simply due to the fact that it deals with work of a more major and fundamental nature, therefore is exercised more frequently.
In this case there is a climbing plant attached too and taking support from the party structure rather than a plant over hanging a party structure.
Doesn't matter how billigerent an Owner wishes to be the PWA's obligations are to the party wall or party structure not the desires of an Owner. Courts are very intollerant of Owners who seek to frustrate the procedure just to be arwkward. There is established case law backing up the PWA because of it's continual use commercially and thus the financial resources are there to test it.
The ANLA is left for domestic situations where financial limitations are more likely.
Regardless, it may well be simpler just to sue for damages under Tort rather than getting access.
Doesn't matter how billigerent an Owner wishes to be the PWA's obligations are to the party wall or party structure not the desires of an Owner. Courts are very intollerant of Owners who seek to frustrate the procedure just to be arwkward. There is established case law backing up the PWA because of it's continual use commercially and thus the financial resources are there to test it.
The ANLA is left for domestic situations where financial limitations are more likely.
Regardless, it may well be simpler just to sue for damages under Tort rather than getting access.
Gassing Station | Homes, Gardens and DIY | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff