News1 min ago
Sewer in back garden instead of front street
I purchased a new build house in 06 from a major PLC builder, then june 07 we recieved a letter from the housing co stating there was a un-adopted sewer in the passing through the center of the garden, and the 3 other houses in our row. this was news to us as we had no prior knowlege of the sewer from searches performed by the solicitor. The letter said they were going to appoint a solcitor for us who would guide us with the signing of a 'deed of grant of easement' this would then allow the local SU to adopt the sewer at public expense.
All well and good until you read it and realise that you can not build with in 3 meters of a main public sewer - our garden is 8 meters in length from our patio door to our fence which the sewer is 4 meters away from the house. We were concerned that we would not be able to add a conservatory/extension to the property and decined to sign the deed.
since then there have been numerous letters back and forth via our appointed solicitor and direct from the building co's solcitor and from the building co with one letter saying the were going to take legal action to make us sign the deed. they pointed out a clause in our orgional trasfer agreement when we bought the house stating 'you agree to sign any easement grants placed before you'. An unfair term surly? Retrieveing all my documentation from the solicitor that dealt with my purchase i found the following - there is already an easment in place for the road infront of my house (land which i own) to allow access for sewers etc. so more digging I found the planning application for the estate - one document was a request for a 'minor amendment' to the plans in which they asked to remove a 'redundant road' from the rear of my house..... tbc
All well and good until you read it and realise that you can not build with in 3 meters of a main public sewer - our garden is 8 meters in length from our patio door to our fence which the sewer is 4 meters away from the house. We were concerned that we would not be able to add a conservatory/extension to the property and decined to sign the deed.
since then there have been numerous letters back and forth via our appointed solicitor and direct from the building co's solcitor and from the building co with one letter saying the were going to take legal action to make us sign the deed. they pointed out a clause in our orgional trasfer agreement when we bought the house stating 'you agree to sign any easement grants placed before you'. An unfair term surly? Retrieveing all my documentation from the solicitor that dealt with my purchase i found the following - there is already an easment in place for the road infront of my house (land which i own) to allow access for sewers etc. so more digging I found the planning application for the estate - one document was a request for a 'minor amendment' to the plans in which they asked to remove a 'redundant road' from the rear of my house..... tbc
Answers
1 to 5 of 5
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Jackie235. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
then the penny dropped as to why the sewer is acutally there!! the minor amendment plan showed the layout as they wanted it to be but they removed all signs of the sewers on the layout plan. the council passed it as a minor amendment and the houses were built! So our land regisrty doc says the sewer should be in the front street and we have ended up with a house that has one meter of garden with nowhere to build - the sewer now shows up on a CON29DW which we would have to enclose in a HIP pack should we sell the house so a prospective buyer would see it and say, not buying that i can extend - we never got the chance to say that, when we bought the house we had a pic of plots and we chose the house due to the nice garden with the room to build on - from what i can see they have contravened planning and the secretary of states protocol on building sewers- please give me an indication where to go with this as no one seems to have heard anything like it!!!
Hmm, a messy situation indeed, and one to tax even BM's brain.
A couple of initial observations:
Are you confirming that there is an easement built into your LR document describing the rights for the sewer owner, tied to the LR plan which shows the position of the sewer in a place where it isn't?
(Nit-picking point) This isn't a planning issue, nor is it a technical breach of Building Regs - because the sewer has probably been built to the right standard (allegedly) - it has become a problem because the Developer will have covenanted with the Local Authority that the sewer will be adopted and now finds that difficult because of the distance thing. It is the Water Company has sets the 'rules' that say a building can't be closer to a sewer than 3 metres - not the Sec of State or the local authority.
What do you want out of this? Not being funny, but the options are probably:
1) Big compensation because of the loss of an amenity (your plan for a conservatory)
2) Force the Developer into a situation where the sewer can't be adopted - hence it becomes the residents liability - for some compensation to each of the owners who feed into this sewer and end up with a small future liability ?
3) Move out with all your cost paid for? (probably unrealistic)
4) ?????? (I can't think what else you can do.)
Surely 1) is the only realistic possibility? - it just depends on how much.
A couple of initial observations:
Are you confirming that there is an easement built into your LR document describing the rights for the sewer owner, tied to the LR plan which shows the position of the sewer in a place where it isn't?
(Nit-picking point) This isn't a planning issue, nor is it a technical breach of Building Regs - because the sewer has probably been built to the right standard (allegedly) - it has become a problem because the Developer will have covenanted with the Local Authority that the sewer will be adopted and now finds that difficult because of the distance thing. It is the Water Company has sets the 'rules' that say a building can't be closer to a sewer than 3 metres - not the Sec of State or the local authority.
What do you want out of this? Not being funny, but the options are probably:
1) Big compensation because of the loss of an amenity (your plan for a conservatory)
2) Force the Developer into a situation where the sewer can't be adopted - hence it becomes the residents liability - for some compensation to each of the owners who feed into this sewer and end up with a small future liability ?
3) Move out with all your cost paid for? (probably unrealistic)
4) ?????? (I can't think what else you can do.)
Surely 1) is the only realistic possibility? - it just depends on how much.
The Transfer deed contains a clause saying " you will agree to sign on presentation any utility easements" or wording to that effect. They are saying we should sign the easement because we agreed at purchase by signing the transfer deed.... how can you agree to something you have no prior knowlege of?
My points about the planning and the sec of states protocol are things that the builders should surely have follwed, my thoughts were if i pointed out this to them then they would be more forth coming with compensation! Yeah thats what im after really, i dont think its fair that they have not disclosed this information prior to me buying the house. I feel that when i come to sell the house it will be pointed out that there is a Public Sewer with a man hole cover in my garden serving over 40 houses up stream.
For example, If they came now wanting to build more houses next to mine and the only access to the main public sewer was via my garden, they would have to make me an offer for my land wouldn't they??
My points about the planning and the sec of states protocol are things that the builders should surely have follwed, my thoughts were if i pointed out this to them then they would be more forth coming with compensation! Yeah thats what im after really, i dont think its fair that they have not disclosed this information prior to me buying the house. I feel that when i come to sell the house it will be pointed out that there is a Public Sewer with a man hole cover in my garden serving over 40 houses up stream.
For example, If they came now wanting to build more houses next to mine and the only access to the main public sewer was via my garden, they would have to make me an offer for my land wouldn't they??
"i dont think its fair that they have not disclosed this information prior to me buying the house."
I agree, and I don't think you should do so. I'll be interested to see whether Barmaid or Jenna picks up on this one - they are solicitors and I am not. The difficulty seems to be that the solicitors appointed to you should be acting in your interests but are being paid for by the Developer - who has an obligation to ensure you get independent legal advice on the LEGAL aspects that you are signing up for. But I don't see how they can (easily) advise you on the level of amenity loss that you are about to incur by signing the legal document - because they are being funded by the Developer. Sounds like a conflict of interest.
I agree, and I don't think you should do so. I'll be interested to see whether Barmaid or Jenna picks up on this one - they are solicitors and I am not. The difficulty seems to be that the solicitors appointed to you should be acting in your interests but are being paid for by the Developer - who has an obligation to ensure you get independent legal advice on the LEGAL aspects that you are signing up for. But I don't see how they can (easily) advise you on the level of amenity loss that you are about to incur by signing the legal document - because they are being funded by the Developer. Sounds like a conflict of interest.
Can I ask what you could put on an 8mtr garden that wouldn't swamp it beyond use? (Or have I got my depth perseption goggles on back to front lol) Other than a patio that just needs a nice looking drain cover that is.
(((What do you want out of this? Not being funny, but the options are probably:
1) Big compensation because of the loss of an amenity (your plan for a conservatory)
2) Force the Developer into a situation where the sewer can't be adopted - hence it becomes the residents liability - for some compensation to each of the owners who feed into this sewer and end up with a small future liability ?
3) Move out with all your cost paid for? (probably unrealistic)
4) ?????? (I can't think what else you can do.) )))
This is really the only important question (and possible answer).
I would think your only recourse is to get compensation from the developer otherwise you will have the burden of upkeep of a major sewer running through your property because they sure as hell won't take it out and redirect it.
(((What do you want out of this? Not being funny, but the options are probably:
1) Big compensation because of the loss of an amenity (your plan for a conservatory)
2) Force the Developer into a situation where the sewer can't be adopted - hence it becomes the residents liability - for some compensation to each of the owners who feed into this sewer and end up with a small future liability ?
3) Move out with all your cost paid for? (probably unrealistic)
4) ?????? (I can't think what else you can do.) )))
This is really the only important question (and possible answer).
I would think your only recourse is to get compensation from the developer otherwise you will have the burden of upkeep of a major sewer running through your property because they sure as hell won't take it out and redirect it.
1 to 5 of 5
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.