# Does Builder need permission to connect new house to sewer on my land?



## Doug71 (7 Oct 2020)

Sorry if I get the terminology wrong but here goes.

A developer is building 5 houses on land behind my house. Today they dug a trench up to my boundary directly in line with a drain cover which you use to access the sewer on my land. I can only assume the trench is for the drains/sewer from the new houses and they intend to connect to the sewer on my land. To get to the sewer/manhole cover they will need to dig up about 15m of my drive.

The houses are practically finished and all sold.

Does the builder need my permission or does he have a right to connect to the sewer? I have been googling public and private sewers and not sure what mine is classed as, two properties use it but originally it was one.

I will speak to the developer if I manage to see him tomorrow but I am out early and his is often not about anyway only contractors.

I just picture coming home tomorrow evening to find a big hole in my drive.

Thanks for any advice.


----------



## topchippyles (7 Oct 2020)

If your sewer is linked into a main sewer and supplying 2 houses on private land then yes he would need permission to access it. Speak to your water utility supplier as they own and maintain the sewers. Nobody can just come on to your property and start digging it up.


----------



## bjm (7 Oct 2020)

I would have assumed they would need your consent but you might find your local water utility company there instead, who may not need consent, to finish the job?? Just speculation but it seems odd that you haven't been involved in some discussion before now?


----------



## Cabinetman (7 Oct 2020)

Most perturbing Doug, I really can’t imagine though that he has left it this late to connect to the mains drains. It’s normally the first thing they do. And as far as I’m aware they do not have the right to go onto your land. You might though if he has left this late be able to get a lot of money out of him ha ha. Sorry don’t build your hopes up!


----------



## Cordy (7 Oct 2020)

That happened to me in the 1980s
A new build next door wanted to connect into my drainage system to save them a lot of £££ and time
My smart solicitor got them to pay me a few hundred pounds


----------



## Spectric (7 Oct 2020)

Hi

Make sure both the local council is informed and your utility company who are responsible for the sewers. They may decide that you cannot connect an extra five houses into the sewer system at that point and insist on a connection elswhere. the developer is probably trying to do it on the cheap and will not care if they leave you swiming in waste due to not enough capacity or incorrect levels.


----------



## Blackswanwood (7 Oct 2020)

It is possible that if the owner of the land being developed now originally owned the land your house is on that they retained a right to connect services across your land. This will be in the title documents for your house and would (or should) have been pointed out by your solicitor when you bought the house. 

If they don’t and want to connect over your land I would suggest that you first agree in writing that matters will negotiated via your solicitor with them committing to meet your legal fees in addition to the payment to reflect the value of you agreeing to let them make the connection. Whatever you do don’t just let them do it for a brown paper envelope of cash. It leaves you open to problems if the work is shoddy and potentially if you sell your house.


----------



## Yojevol (7 Oct 2020)

I know from my own experience that your water utility will have a maintenance responsibility for the drains from another property which are on your land. My neighbour's drain joins ours at an inspection chamber in our garden and the combined outflow then goes to the sewer which runs under the road. Our system is old and blockages and leaks are frequent, particularly on my neighbour's bit, which means Severn-Trent have to come and sort it. If there is a problem on our bit then we have to take responsibility. S-T may do it if we ask them nicely but we have to pay.
Your new development must have all the water supply and drainage agreed before connection can be made. I'm sure this would mean consultation with you.
I would start asking some questions.
Brian


----------



## Doug71 (7 Oct 2020)

Some good points, thank you gents.

I have just been looking at the Planning Portal as I knew original plans showed the drains going in a different direction but found a variation of plans submitted at a later date showing it coming onto my land  

I shall phone Yorkshire Water in the morning and take it from there, might have to leave my van parked in a strategic position


----------



## Cordy (7 Oct 2020)

Might be a good idea tomorrow morning to contact the builder too -- 
Good luck !


----------



## AJB Temple (7 Oct 2020)

Also put up a clear large sign saying that there is no right of access for any excavation or connection or inspection works and that access is prohibited. Put your contact details on it. Take a photo of the clear signage.


----------



## topchippyles (7 Oct 2020)

The council will also have a part to play as it will be shown and stated on the planning applications and drawings.


----------



## Sheptonphil (7 Oct 2020)

Cordy said:


> That happened to me in the 1980s
> A new build next door wanted to connect into my drainage system to save them a lot of £££ and time
> My smart solicitor got them to pay me a few hundred pounds


Two years ago when the drainage had to cross our land the developer approached us and we agreed to nigh on 10k for the right to dig our land up, instal drainage to main sewer and then reinstate the ground as before they started as well. It was a case of pay the ransom or don’t develop the adjoining land. It paid for a good holiday and a new lathe.

if they want to come on your land, don’t underestimate the value to them or the effect on the likelihood of selling houses with no drainage. It doesn’t matter if it’s 15m or 150m, they need the access, think thousands, not hundreds.


----------



## Rorschach (7 Oct 2020)

Sheptonphil said:


> Two years ago when the drainage had to cross our land the developer approached us and we agreed to nigh on 10k for the right to dig our land up, instal drainage to main sewer and then reinstate the ground as before they started as well. It was a case of pay the ransom or don’t develop the adjoining land. It paid for a good holiday and a new lathe.
> 
> if they want to come on your land, don’t underestimate the value to them or the effect on the likelihood of selling houses with no drainage. It doesn’t matter if it’s 15m or 150m, they need the access, think thousands, not hundreds.



While I agree that there should be both permission and fair compensation for access to land I think holding the developer to ransom is morally wrong and you should be ashamed of profiteering like that.


----------



## Phil Pascoe (7 Oct 2020)

Rorschach said:


> While I agree that there should be both permission and fair compensation for access to land I think holding the developer to ransom is morally wrong and you should be ashamed of profiteering like that.


Tosh.


----------



## Robin Whitfield (7 Oct 2020)

Rorschach said:


> While I agree that there should be both permission and fair compensation for access to land I think holding the developer to ransom is morally wrong and you should be ashamed of profiteering like that.


Whilst I would generally agree to this, if it is indeed (as it seems to be in this case) a situation where an assumption has been made without actually talking to the landowner then significantly more compensation is called for than if they'd asked nicely when the plans were drawn up in the first place.


----------



## Sheptonphil (7 Oct 2020)

Rorschach said:


> While I agree that there should be both permission and fair compensation for access to land I think holding the developer to ransom is morally wrong and you should be ashamed of profiteering like that.


With the mess they made doing the job across 150m of our land, the inconvenience of disrupting our lives for two weeks and parking heavy machines on our land for that time, I feel no shame and have no regrets, and I do have morals. They bought the land knowing full well they had to have access to our land to convert it from pasture to housing. For the eight homes built it was a very small cost per unit expense and fully budgeted for in the scheme. Why should they make hundreds of thousands by relying on other’s goodwill.


----------



## Lons (7 Oct 2020)

Not the same but when a new estate was due to be built in the village I got a visit from the LA saying they had been contracted by the water company to put a surface water sewer across the bottom of my land as well as that of my adjoining neighbour, it was firmly pointed out that I had no right to refuse, that was well over 20 years ago and the water company graciously offered me £125 compensation for crossing 65 metres of my field. It was clear this was the cheapest route option available to them but I told them to get stuffed and my neighbour followed my lead.

We appointed a local land agent to negotiate on our behalf, all of his and solicitors costs to be covered by the water company who tried every trick in the book to force us to accept next to nothing so we fought back, held meetings and charged them £25 an hour each for time spent, recorded and photographed every detail and though it took 12 months got the whole thing reinstated, field drained as they'd cut through the original, all our expenses and I got £7500 in additional compensation.
I discussed the matter later with a water board official who said 99% of people give in to the pressure and there's only an odd stubborn bas**rd like me who doesn't  so they win financially overall.


----------



## topchippyles (7 Oct 2020)

Rorschach said:


> While I agree that there should be both permission and fair compensation for access to land I think holding the developer to ransom is morally wrong and you should be ashamed of profiteering like that.


Its called a ransom strip and all land owners use it so dont talk pineapples


----------



## Lons (7 Oct 2020)

topchippyles said:


> Its called a ransom strip and all land owners use it so dont talk pineapples


Exactly.
The same estate I mentioned needed entrance access across parish council land from the main road and they got £260,000 from the developers for that ransom strip.


----------



## RobinBHM (7 Oct 2020)

You should contact your local sewer undertaker.

It is more involved than just the physical drain, it requires a solicitor to draw up an easement.

There are considerations, it's possible a drain run will prevent you from future building work.

Anyway since drains got adopted in 2011 the drain run will be under public ownership so it has to have the necessary agreements with the sewer undertaker / water co


----------



## --Tom-- (7 Oct 2020)

Rorschach said:


> While I agree that there should be both permission and fair compensation for access to land I think holding the developer to ransom is morally wrong and you should be ashamed of profiteering like that.


Im sure the developer isn’t profiteering at all and will be selling the houses for prices based on their costs rather than trying to get as much as possible? I’m also sure that if in the process of buying you failed to mention or negotiate a key point of the purchase they’d never hold your deposit to ransom due to your error....

They should have approached the OP (landowner) at the point they decided to submit plans that were contingent on access. Negotiate for as long as it takes to get a fair outcome, the time pressure is their side not yours and they’ll want it sorted quickly to not hold up any sales


----------



## owen (8 Oct 2020)

Doug71 said:


> Some good points, thank you gents.
> 
> I have just been looking at the Planning Portal as I knew original plans showed the drains going in a different direction but found a variation of plans submitted at a later date showing it coming onto my land
> 
> I shall phone Yorkshire Water in the morning and take it from there, might have to leave my van parked in a strategic position



Can I just ask, what's the problem with them connecting it on your land? Obviously as long as they put everything back exactly as they found it I can't really see a problem. You'll be creating yourself more of a headache/stress by holding them back unless you're the kind of person that loves thinking they've got one over on someone?


----------



## owen (8 Oct 2020)

--Tom-- said:


> Im sure the developer isn’t profiteering at all and will be selling the houses for prices based on their costs rather than trying to get as much as possible? I’m also sure that if in the process of buying you failed to mention or negotiate a key point of the purchase they’d never hold your deposit to ransom due to your error....
> 
> They should have approached the OP (landowner) at the point they decided to submit plans that were contingent on access. Negotiate for as long as it takes to get a fair outcome, the time pressure is their side not yours and they’ll want it sorted quickly to not hold up any sales



There's a difference between building houses to make a profit or stopping access to your land to make a profit. Obviously a token gesture by the developer would be nice, but trying to get a load of money for it just seems wrong to me.


----------



## Rorschach (8 Oct 2020)

At least someone agrees with me.

Whether the developer is profiteering or not does not mean that you should either. The fact there is a term "ransom strip" is even more disappointing.

I am not against fair compensation that covers the works done plus some money for the hassle of having the workmen there etc, I simply said you should not hold them to ransom for thousands more than is necessary. After all the developer does not pay for this, the people buying those homes do. I expect the same people who would hold a developer to ransom are also the same ones who decry the price of new houses and the fact young people cannot afford them.


----------



## Blackswanwood (8 Oct 2020)

owen said:


> Can I just ask, what's the problem with them connecting it on your land? Obviously as long as they put everything back exactly as they found it I can't really see a problem. You'll be creating yourself more of a headache/stress by holding them back unless you're the kind of person that loves thinking they've got one over on someone?


There is actually a whole host of potential problems. It starts with the disruption of the OP's drive being dug up, the need to ensure that the connection to the existing run is done properly and that it is capable of dealing with the increased flow. Then you get into who is responsible for subsequent problems and it's not as simple as saying it's adopted by the water company. What if the development grows and he ends up with 100 houses discharging through his drain? If all this isn't properly sorted the OP could be sat with an overflowing manhole and be unable to subsequently sell his house as ownership of the drains is unclear.

In all likelihood the developer will have budgeted for some form of compensation - if they haven't they are muppets. Not to have approached the OP and assuming he will agree is plain stupid and rude on their part.

The argument that the developer doesn't pay and the purchasers do is a bit spurious. House prices are largely dictated by supply and demand. New builds carry a premium as a good chunk of the population like the idea that no one has previously sat on their toilet seat. This is just likely to end up being absorbed by less margin for the developer. I doubt the OP driving a hard bargain will see the developer having to use a food bank.


----------



## Eric The Viking (8 Oct 2020)

Like all the best-run projects, start from where you want to end up and work backwards: You have to decide if you will let them connect to your drainiage (upsized if necessary), or not.

If you can be persuaded that's OK, given the "issues arising"* from long runs of shared drainage on private land, I would be adamant that your own surveyor was involved during the work (at their cost) to insure the work was done to an acceptable standard - correct falls, hardcore underneath the pipe run (not thrown in on top!), adequate provision for inspection, etc., and obviously excellent reinstatement. Take lots of pictures, as stated beforehand, before they put as much as a hand trowel to your ground.

Also be ready for the possibility that the site manager has been told one thing about the legalities (whether the developer has contracted with you to permit the drain connection), although you know the truth to be quite different. It's very easy for things to be "misunderstood" so the guy may instruct work to start in good faith, but without permission. Find out who the 'organ grinder' is and deal with them.

It doesn't bode well at present - the fact they have apparently set this all up somewhat slyly suggests they don't care for doing things properly (legally at least). This isn't just about the mess made doing the work, but the fact you have to live with the connection for ever afterwards. The developer will make a large profit from the project in any case, so I would have no qualms about insisting I was adequately compensated.

Rorshach: I don't disagree with the principle of good neighbourliness, far from it, but this isn't to do with the new house owners. It's the developer who seems to be deciding to "just do it anyway". 

I am reminded of a certain American "entrepreneur", currently occupying a big house in the US capital, and the locals surrounding a Scottish golf course project of his, in a SSSI.

If nothing else, being hit hard in the pocket does cause a bit of focus, and often sudden reasonableness.

E.

*"issues arising" usually start from around manhole covers, but sometimes in downstairs loos etc.


----------



## Rorschach (8 Oct 2020)

Eric The Viking said:


> Rorshach: I don't disagree with the principle of good neighbourliness, far from it, but this isn't to do with the new house owners. It's the developer who seems to be deciding to "just do it anyway". I am reminded of a certain American "entrepreneur" and the locals surrounding a Scottish golf course project. If nothing else, being hit hard in the pocket does cause a bit of focus, and often sudden reasonableness.



Once again, I am not against the principle of compensation and doing things properly (people like to attack me without actually reading/think about what I say). I 100% think the developer should be held to high standards for what they are doing and should pay a fair price to do it. 
All I am against is people gouging the developer for as much money as they think they can get based purely on the fact that the developer has no choice, that is not right and saying that the developer might be unscrupulous is no justification. 
The post I commented on the OP seemed to revel in the fact he had got a big lump of money for very little upheaval to himself (later clarified to be a big job but that's not the point as it wasn't told to us at first). It seems to be a ongoing theme on this forum that certain (predominantly old and financially comfortable) members like to complain about the state of the country right now, but then you come to realise they are causing the problems they complain about by their actions.


----------



## okeydokey (8 Oct 2020)

Any legal folk here what is the full legal position if they don't have proper landowner consents?


----------



## Phil Pascoe (8 Oct 2020)

The thread only started yesterday.


----------



## Anthraquinone (8 Oct 2020)

The developer may well be planning on selling the new houses leasehold so the owners can be screwed a few years down the line. Take them for as much as you can get. They would happily do the same to you if the case was reversed.


----------



## bansobaby (8 Oct 2020)

If the sewer was adopted by the authority in 2011 as many previously private sewers were, the matter rests with them, and they would almost undoubtedly have contacted the OP.
If the developer is simply chancing it, which seems possible, simply don't allow them onto the land.


----------



## Doug71 (8 Oct 2020)

Thanks guys, more good advice.

Blackswanwood sums up my thoughts quite well.

I find it a bit rude nobody has spoken to me about it.

I'm not looking to make any money from it but worried about the long term effects as in if it all blocks up on my land am I responsible.

Also I'm guessing it's not just a straightforward connection, it's a converted Victorian school I live in and when you lift said drain cover you find a very big deep concrete chamber which has a metal ladder cast in the side of it.


----------



## RobinBHM (8 Oct 2020)

Eric The Viking said:


> I would be adamant that your own surveyor was involved during the work (at their cost) to insure the work was done to an acceptable standard - correct falls, hardcore underneath the pipe run (not thrown in on top!)



I am not sure if that is necessary because the sewer will be publicly owned and so whoever the local water authority is, will have to take ownership of it.

They will expect drawings to sign off before work is started and they will probably want before and after CCTV to ensure they are happy work is ok. From memory they also probably want to do a site inspection once drains are in place but still uncovered.


----------



## RobinBHM (8 Oct 2020)

Doug71 said:


> Thanks guys, more good advice.
> 
> Blackswanwood sums up my thoughts quite well.
> 
> ...



I would contact your local water authority and ask for a copy of the plans.

in 2011 most private drains were adopted. 
So a drain from your house to the manhole where it joins the run -is yours
But any drain that comes onto your land from another property -is public drainage

So all of the new drainage will be the responsibility of the local water authority.

And for that reason the work will have to be done to their specification.


if the drain is big and deep -thats going to mean some quite major earthworks and big cost. 
Unless they can just join into the side of the chamber


----------



## Eric The Viking (8 Oct 2020)

RobinBHM said:


> I am not sure if that is necessary because the sewer will be publicly owned and so whoever the local water authority is, will have to take ownership of it.
> 
> They will expect drawings to sign off before work is started and they will probably want before and after CCTV to ensure they are happy work is ok. From memory they also probably want to do a site inspection once drains are in place but still uncovered.


That last bit is key. In my very limited experience, the contractor/developer can be quite keen to backfill ASAP, inspection or not.

It recently happened next door (last year). We are on heavy clay, and I advised my neighbour that the new pipe run needed to be bedded well on heavy chippings, not just on the clay at the bottom of the trench. Don't know quite why, but this was ignored: although a lot of chippings were chucked in the trench they were on top and alongside the pipe, which did sit on bare clay. Now the property's soil stack (for three flats) has sunk into the ground by about one or two inches - anybody's guess what's happening underground.

I know the inspector should have signed off the open trench, but I never saw one on site at all. I suspect it wasn't inspected. Now, instead of a trivial issue, they may well have a rather big and expensive one. The contractor "wasn't from round here" either, which might have had a bearing. It's not the first time I have seen similar, either.

[edit] This project was an extension to the GFF, so I think the building inspector should have signed off...


----------



## Jonm (8 Oct 2020)

If the builder/developer does need to cross your land and has not sorted this out before starting work let alone virtually completing the work then you are dealing with someone who may get very difficult. You could well come home to find your drive has been dug up, the pipe laid and your utility services broken in the process.

Lots of good advice here. You mention leaving your Van parked in the way. I would definately do that and keep a vehicle parked there at all times, even when you are in the house. I would also be loathe to leave the house unattended. You may need to purchase an IP camera so you can monitor what is going on and record if they are breaking in to and moving a vehicle, then you can get the police involved. It may have been mentioned above but I would contact Building Control at your Local Authority. This is the “building inspector”, they are usually very helpful and will have given building control consent, they should be able to tell you what is going on.

If you do have a ransom strip then start planning that holiday you always wanted when Covid restrictions are lifted.


----------



## Steve Blackdog (8 Oct 2020)

Doug71 said:


> Sorry if I get the terminology wrong but here goes.
> 
> A developer is building 5 houses on land behind my house. Today they dug a trench up to my boundary directly in line with a drain cover which you use to access the sewer on my land. I can only assume the trench is for the drains/sewer from the new houses and they intend to connect to the sewer on my land. To get to the sewer/manhole cover they will need to dig up about 15m of my drive.
> 
> ...



I am a lawyer by profession. This is the answer.

with land law, everything comes down to the deeds/ registered title. You need to get someone to check that for you.

I assume there is no pre-existing easement allowing the neighbour to lay pipes etc. 

If anyone wants to access your land and connect to your sewer, they will need your agreement which you can refuse. 

My guess is that it will save them money to tap into your sewer. 

so this is all about money. How much will they save by going through your land, versus how much they have to pay you for an easement.

to my mind this should be a five figure sum, as any easement will need to “run with the land” and will grant long term rights.

so first things first. Ask how much they are prepared to pay for the privilege. unless It is a five figure sum, I might be inclined to say no.

in any event there will need to be an easement registered at the land registry and legal drafting.

if the developer is seriouS, then I would ask them to pay you £750 up front, non returnable on account of your legal fees. Then go see a decent property solicitor who will advise from there.

DON’T FORGET TAX. In effect you will be selling an interest in your land, which will attract capital gains tax. Take that into account in agreeing the deal.

all the best.
steve


----------



## RobinBHM (8 Oct 2020)

Eric The Viking said:


> That last bit is key. In my very limited experience, the contractor/developer can be quite keen to backfill ASAP, inspection or not.
> 
> It recently happened next door (last year). We are on heavy clay, and I advised my neighbour that the new pipe run needed to be bedded well on heavy chippings, not just on the clay at the bottom of the trench. Don't know quite why, but this was ignored: although a lot of chippings were chucked in the trench they were on top and alongside the pipe, which did sit on bare clay. Now the property's soil stack (for three flats) has sunk into the ground by about one or two inches - anybody's guess what's happening underground.
> 
> ...


Yes I must admit you have to be so careful that things are done correctly, especially with main contractors who are under massive time pressure

Generally where a drain is publicly owned Ive found the water authorities to be strict on compliance to their specification -because they own the drain and they will have to sort it out in the future.

Quite often the water authority will insist on a large payment to be made and held until the work is completed to their satisfaction -I know Southern Water do that.


----------



## Lons (8 Oct 2020)

_"It seems to be a ongoing theme on this forum that certain (predominantly old and financially comfortable)"_

There's the old monkey on the back surfacing again from someone who was very happy to accept free money from the government which will have to be paid back by us the taxpayers and all the while complaining that everyone will suffer financially. If that person had the morals he insists he has he wouldn't have taken those £thousands . Most of the members he keeps referring to have worked hard all their lives and managed to pay off their 25 or 30 year mortgages, maybe one day he will too or perhaps he doesn't need one as trolls live in holes in the ground.

As another member already stated, when a utility company puts a pipe through your land they impose a restriction on that strip of land which stops you building directly over it, planting trees etc. Remember it's not their land it's yours,


----------



## Richard_C (8 Oct 2020)

In England the rules about maintaining drains changed a few years ago. Up until the change householders were responsible for drains up to where they joined the main sewer. If 2 houses 'joined' before that, there was scope for dispute. Now it's clear, the drainage provider (normally same as water company, but here in Cambridge its split - Cambridge Water supply, Anglian remove) is responsible from wherever 2 or more houses 'join' regardless of where that is. Where I live, 2 houses join under a manhole cover on the drive of one of them, each householder has to deal with any issues on 'their side' of that, but the long stretch beyond that is Anglian Water's responsibility.

The OP should find that any future issues from his manhole onwards now become the drainage providers responsibility, so he may have less to worry about than he does now. If the 5 new houses join into a single drain before it goes under his land, the whole lot is the drainage authorities responsibility apart from the short stretch from his house to the manhole - normally easily d.i.y. rodded if the rodding covers are in the right place.

Our house was built mid 80's along with 2 others and 2 refurbished cottages. There are 3 key manhole covers/junctions, each on someone's property. The deeds mirror one another and are clear - each of us and the original landowner (although its all freehold) have right of access with notice, access not to be unreasonably refused. To my mind I could reasonably ask that the garden is reinstated or that jack hammers aren't used at 4am, but if I say 'unless you pay me ££££' that would be unreasonable. There is a sub clause for no-notice access in an emergency, so if we were ankle deep in poop we can just get on with it. In practice we all get on and its never an issue. I own drain rods and have a map of all the drains so we help each other and call in Anglian Water if its 'downstream'. Its all flat around here and the fall is a bit marginal.

Key to all of this is what the deeds actually say. If the OP doesn't have a copy they can be purchased from the land registry or maybe the mortgage holder if you have a mortgage will have a set (they used to, I suspect its all electronic now). If you look for land registry make sure its a .gov, there are impostors who top the list in google searches.

It's also worth re-visiting the planning portal. The water/drainage authority is a statutory consultee. If you look under consultations, or sometimes under documents tab - you need to dig - you might find their response to original and changed plans. It might be anodyne or it might tell you something. If there is nothing there you can email the planning officer and ask where it is.

I suspect older properties have nothing in the deeds, very new ones probably give the developer and his dog the right to access any time on any particular whim and dig up your living room floor if they so choose (modern big estates are built for the benefit of the builders not the owners). Ours as described above is a half way house. 

If the deeds do give you right to refuse then there is the 'ransom strip' thinking which depends on your personal values - there is no 'right & wrong'. In our village a local charity is trying to build 8 affordable (in perpetuity, local exemption scheme) social rent houses, not as part of a commercial development, and if they needed access to my garden I wouldn't dream of asking anything more than that they re-instate. If it were Berkley homes I would get what I could and give it to the housing charity!

So - find the deeds, find the consultation comments on the planning portal. Just in case they start digging, take a few photos (on some cameras and phones you can set 'date stamp' on) so you have a starting point if they leave a mess.

_If you want to get angry about the whole state of the housing market (where prices are set by what people can pay/borrow, not cost +) look at the annual report of the big house builders. Tot up the total pay, bonus and share options of the Directors and divide by the number of houses they delivered. In many cases every first time buyer is paying a lot (4 figures +) just for that, let alone shareholder profit. How the boss of Berkeley managed to cash £23 million in share options in one year a couple of years ago when they build fewer than 10,000 houses defeats me. But that's another topic altogether._


----------



## Doug71 (8 Oct 2020)

Ok chaps, I have just spoken with the builder and looks like all is fine, in fact I'm feeling slightly embarrassed now for starting this thread 

Turns out they came across a pipe which connected to my chamber, they think it probably came from an old toilet block or something which is long gone, as said I live in a Victorian School and part of the development is on what would have been the grounds. Obviously the pipe ran towards my chamber which is why the new trench does, they replaced the pipe right up to my boundary because of how the new houses run in to it. The pipe has had a camera down and has all been approved. As said the chamber is big so I presume it will be able to accommodate the extra, the builder tells me you can have up to ten houses going in to a single 4" pipe! 

To everyone who responded thank you for your time, sorry it was wasted, I have learnt a lot though and hopefully it maybe useful to someone in future.

Doug


----------



## HappyHacker (8 Oct 2020)

Doug71 said:


> Ok chaps, I have just spoken with the builder and looks like all is fine, in fact I'm feeling slightly embarrassed now for starting this thread
> 
> Turns out they came across a pipe which connected to my chamber, they think it probably came from an old toilet block or something which is long gone, as said I live in a Victorian School and part of the development is on what would have been the grounds. Obviously the pipe ran towards my chamber which is why the new trench does, they replaced the pipe right up to my boundary because of how the new houses run in to it. The pipe has had a camera down and has all been approved. As said the chamber is big so I presume it will be able to accommodate the extra, the builder tells me you can have up to ten houses going in to a single 4" pipe!
> 
> ...



I would get some legal advice to see if there are any rights of drainage across your property. The existence of a pipe does not mean that the right exists. If there are any issues in the future its your property that will be dug up/flooded with sewage. Has the utility company accepted ownership of the pipe across your property? From my past experience there needs to be an easement in place.


----------



## Rorschach (8 Oct 2020)

Lons said:


> happy to accept free money from the government which will have to be paid back by us the taxpayers and all the while complaining that everyone will suffer financially. If that person had the morals he insists he has he wouldn't have taken those £thousands .



Well if you are old you won't be paying it back, you will be dead, I on the other hand will be paying it back for the rest of my life so you can be darn sure I accepted the money the government was handing out, do you think I would have got a tax break if I refused? I think not.
Do you refuse the money the government gives to you in the form of winter fuel allowance ( or will you if you are not old enough for it yet) or a free bus pass? No, I think you will use the argument "I paid for it so I will take it". Well I have/will pay for it, so I will take it.


----------



## Doug71 (8 Oct 2020)

HappyHacker said:


> I would get some legal advice to see if there are any rights of drainage across your property. The existence of a pipe does not mean that the right exists. If there are any issues in the future its your property that will be dug up/flooded with sewage. Has the utility company accepted ownership of the pipe across your property? From my past experience there needs to be an easement in place.



I have spoken with Yorkshire water about it all and am awaiting a call back from them within the next 24hrs , the builder did say it was classed as a public sewer and is Yorkshire Waters responsibility.


----------



## Cordy (8 Oct 2020)

Doug
Pleased to know you have enquired and put your mind at rest
John


----------



## lurker (8 Oct 2020)

Rorschach said:


> Well if you are old you won't be paying it back, you will be dead, I on the other hand will be paying it back for the rest of my life so you can be darn sure I accepted the money the government was handing out, do you think I would have got a tax break if I refused? I think not.
> Do you refuse the money the government gives to you in the form of winter fuel allowance ( or will you if you are not old enough for it yet) or a free bus pass? No, I think you will use the argument "I paid for it so I will take it". Well I have/will pay for it, so I will take it.


I am 66, and I reckon I spent much of my working life paying for war debts. Assuming you are really the age that you say you are, I have also been paying for your education (apparently wasted) and your health care. My current taxes are nearly up to higher rate even though I have been retired for 4 years.


----------



## lurker (8 Oct 2020)

Doug,
Glad your potential problems are resolved.
shame it became a soapbox box for the usual suspect.


----------



## Rorschach (8 Oct 2020)

lurker said:


> I am 66, and I reckon I spent much of my working life paying for war debts. Assuming you are really the age that you say you are, I have also been paying for your education (apparently wasted) and your health care. My current taxes are nearly up to higher rate even though I have been retired for 4 years.



Thank you for your contributions, you must be enjoying a very nice pension. Tell me, will you refuse winter fuel allowance or a free bus pass as @Lons obviously will be/has done?


----------



## lurker (8 Oct 2020)

Rorschach said:


> Thank you for your contributions, you must be enjoying a very nice pension. Tell me, will you refuse winter fuel allowance or a free bus pass as @Lons obviously will be/has done?


My pension was achieved by hard work and frugal lifestyle.
never bothered with a bus pass. You are unlikely to believe this, but my fuel allowance money is donated to a local children’s hospice where I do voluntary work.


----------



## Rorschach (8 Oct 2020)

lurker said:


> My pension was achieved by hard work and frugal lifestyle.
> never bothered with a bus pass. You are unlikely to believe this, but my fuel allowance money is donated to a local children’s hospice where I do voluntarily work.



I have not reason not to believe you so I will certainly take you at your word.


----------



## topchippyles (8 Oct 2020)

Lons said:


> Exactly.
> The same estate I mentioned needed entrance access across parish council land from the main road and they got £260,000 from the developers for that ransom strip.


Seen it many times,When i was a kid a certain super market bought a whole street up to gain planning for a new store but the local undertaker held out and they ended up build him a massive 6 bedroom house for a little 2 up 2 down and a pile on money. Its called business.


----------



## Chippyjoe (8 Oct 2020)

Rorschach said:


> While I agree that there should be both permission and fair compensation for access to land I think holding the developer to ransom is morally wrong and you should be ashamed of profiteering like that.




Absolute rubbish, the builder should have done his homework and had this potential problem sorted before he started to develop, not rely on the goodwill of a neighbour to connect on the cheap.
You really do like stirring debates up.


----------



## Rorschach (8 Oct 2020)

Chippyjoe said:


> Absolute rubbish, the builder should have done his homework and had this potential problem sorted before he started to develop, not rely on the goodwill of a neighbour to connect on the cheap.
> You really do like stirring debates up.



You have (purposely?) misconstrued what I said there. What I said applies in any situation, not just one where the developer made a mistake.


----------



## DBT85 (8 Oct 2020)

£10k to us will have been gleefully signed away by a developer for that kind of thing. It's peanuts to them.

Wimpy for one example had pre tax profit in 2018 of £810m on the sale of 15,250 homes. £53k profit per house. Persimmon made £66k profit per house in the same year. This is after they have paid their cowboys contractors who have also all made their own profit.

Wimpy alone have about 170,000 plots in their land bank. In April last year the big 3 wre sitting on 800,000 plots.


----------



## flying haggis (8 Oct 2020)

what if the OP had wanted to remove the up to now unused length of pipe from his boundary to the chamber. the builder should still have to pay for access to that pipe


----------



## Rorschach (8 Oct 2020)

flying haggis said:


> what if the OP had wanted to remove the up to now unused length of pipe from his boundary to the chamber. the builder should still have to pay for access to that pipe



Why?


----------



## MikeJhn (8 Oct 2020)

Looks though there may be a reason to look at your deeds to see if a "Way leave" exists that allows access for maintenance or connections into the drainage system by the local authority.


----------



## swb58 (8 Oct 2020)

I can’t help thinking that the builder/contractor knows more about what’s going on than the OP. Surely they’re not waiting at the other side of the fence ready to run a pipe in when no one’s looking. I’ve a feeling they know what’s possible and the OP is going to be powerless to stop it. 
If they haven’t got any rights then screw them for every penny and don’t feel guilty for a moment.


----------



## AJB Temple (8 Oct 2020)

Doug (OP) stated ages ago that he has resolved it. The fight was over before it started. The end


----------



## Jackbequick (9 Oct 2020)

Eric The Viking said:


> That last bit is key. In my very limited experience, the contractor/developer can be quite keen to backfill ASAP, inspection or not.
> 
> It recently happened next door (last year). We are on heavy clay, and I advised my neighbour that the new pipe run needed to be bedded well on heavy chippings, not just on the clay at the bottom of the trench. Don't know quite why, but this was ignored: although a lot of chippings were chucked in the trench they were on top and alongside the pipe, which did sit on bare clay. Now the property's soil stack (for three flats) has sunk into the ground by about one or two inches - anybody's guess what's happening underground.
> 
> ...



Not correct..not 'chips' the pipe should have been laid on 100% consolidated sand..thickness of sand support...depends on weight and size of pipe but start with say ten inches. 100% consolidation normally achieved by flooding the sanded trench


----------



## Chris70 (9 Oct 2020)

Oh for goodness sakes boys, I wish you could hear yourselves. Stop bickering! I thought this forum was quite good and I still do, but all this mud slinging is a bit much. I’ve just read, “War happens, in part, because people have retained our animal instincts about land.” Peace and goodwill to all men.


----------



## Jackbequick (9 Oct 2020)

Lons said:


> _"It seems to be a ongoing theme on this forum that certain (predominantly old and financially comfortable)"_
> 
> There's the old monkey on the back surfacing again from someone who was very happy to accept free money from the government which will have to be paid back by us the taxpayers and all the while complaining that everyone will suffer financially. If that person had the morals he insists he has he wouldn't have taken those £thousands . Most of the members he keeps referring to have worked hard all their lives and managed to pay off their 25 or 30 year mortgages, maybe one day he will too or perhaps he doesn't need one as trolls live in holes in the ground.
> 
> As another member already stated, when a utility company puts a pipe through your land they impose a restriction on that strip of land which stops you building directly over it, planting trees etc. Remember it's not their land it's yours,



"they impose a restriction on that strip of land which stops you building directly over it," not only over it but within some metres of it...and access will be forceable IF there is an easement created. The behaviour of the 'builder' is not unusual for plumber-drainers who are used to bullying people. They are trespassing on your land whatever their purpose if no easement presently exists for the drainage. I wouldn't worry about the pious pseudo-socialism of your detractors. Your land comes with specified rights, it is not public land although all ultimately belongs to the Crown...the ultimate bullies created through fantasy and violence to the point people think they are gods of a kind. There is the illusion of parliament being your representative but the more likely access for you would ultimately be magisterial or if you have a land tribunal...them. Serious land disputes go to higher courts. Stop it now by restricting their trespass. 

If you do nothing now it can be argued your capitulated. As one commenter suggested, block access and give the trespassers notice, advise police. They may wriggle out telling you 'civil matter' but no..trespass is a law breaking, that's your ace in the pack. When they lay pipe on your land they may apply for an easement and your land value will decrease. Steve (the 'lawyer' ) is not correct about 'Capital Gains' you do not incur capital gain by taking a position for income from allowing actions which diminishes the value of your land. Income is merely income. Capital gains arise when the land is sold at a profit owing to increase in demand or works done by yourself or a public entity increase the sale-able value but only when the increased value is realised. You'll find me correct.


----------



## Jackbequick (9 Oct 2020)

Lons said:


> _"It seems to be a ongoing theme on this forum that certain (predominantly old and financially comfortable)"_
> 
> There's the old monkey on the back surfacing again from someone who was very happy to accept free money from the government which will have to be paid back by us the taxpayers and all the while complaining that everyone will suffer financially. If that person had the morals he insists he has he wouldn't have taken those £thousands . Most of the members he keeps referring to have worked hard all their lives and managed to pay off their 25 or 30 year mortgages, maybe one day he will too or perhaps he doesn't need one as trolls live in holes in the ground.
> 
> As another member already stated, when a utility company puts a pipe through your land they impose a restriction on that strip of land which stops you building directly over it, planting trees etc. Remember it's not their land it's yours,



To impose a restriction negotiations should occur to the point you are seriously compensated. Your difficulty arises when it (pipe laying)happens and you want it removed. You do have remedy at court. Your decision (capitulation) can affect all future owners Unless there is a statutory right or an easement created or permission in the original subdivision of the land or some addle pated fool or machinater of council permission for development of the land 'back when' has given permission on title for such works to proceed...and believe me (please) that such is not uncommonly found in a title search...Examine your title, meanwhile put in a trespass complaint to police and discuss the matter ...without giving in...with the Council Engineer for their opinion and have it in writing, That commits them.


----------



## Jackbequick (9 Oct 2020)

Steve Blackdog said:


> I am a lawyer by profession. This is the answer.
> 
> with land law, everything comes down to the deeds/ registered title. You need to get someone to check that for you.
> 
> ...


I have commented elsewhere Steve on an incorrect statement you made...your last. That aside The land's value is being reduced perhaps significantly in currency value and sale-ability. You have said nothing of trespass. He should block access and make complaint to police...sticking to trespass i.e. to tort and not civil matters which include your right to peaceful occupancy.

I add from experience with builders that they will commonly disobey laws and regulations finding it cheaper to pay fines that say Council requisitions (e.g. payment for parking rights against normal restrictions). In your case they are banking on you being a mug/overawed/ presuming they have some right owing to their hard hat boots and reflective clothing to enter your land but 'even more-so.'..to dig it up and use it in a way detrimental to you whether you know it or the extent of it. . '_No way Jose!!' _

Your fear and anxiety and worry will continue long after these bully boys have packed up and gone Do not take Steve's advice about the $750.00...no one will pay you to act against them unless they get an advantage...and you would be giving that to them by accepting money. NO..stay at arms length and use the legal process readily available. Do however give notice in writing of the trespass and demand the people do not enter your land for _any _purpose. Any negotiating can be held in a place where...and here I agree with Steve where either pro-bono ..perhaps from a community aid organisation, or a local solicitor perhaps who is prepared to work within your finances...at the conference.

Be clear what you want and what you do not want. Know your title and any initial subdivision restrictions or permissions on your title. Don't give in to bullies....ignore this pseudo socialist claptrap which seems to be emerging and stand up for your land...i.e. for yourself. Don't spend any more than absolutely necessary and tell any solicitor not to respond to anything but critical issues...one way of suppressing dissent is to try to rack up legal bills...theirs are tax deductions...yours are not however a decision by court may find them refilling your pocket and the solicitors if your case and presentation is good and you know exactly what you want and the magistrate /judge/ tribunal can work on that.

Stop talking about it and start with a notice for them to not enter your land for any purpose. Don't say 'unless with my express permission' as that sounds as though you are blustering. Block the access...but leave a walkway... there is a general right to access your front door and you then also have a right to tell the caller to leave your land directly and immediately.

Keep a diary of all matters and a copy of your notice or any correspondences...though there should be none once you have demanded a stop to trespass. ...and where possible photographs and recording for later reference...however a diary done at the time can significantly impress an arbitrator because courts take a view that memory is reconstruction of events flavored by emotions and self interest.

You can write how you feel, in a diary but have the 'why' right there to,.Be fair, accurate and as far as possible provable. Do not commence in any 'money matters' that will weaken your case. Do realise also that technical law is not always what convinces a judge (say) but the way people behave when giving evidence. You will commonly find in Appeals that the judges say "I do not have the ability of the primary judge to gauge the behaviour of witnesses'...or words to that effect.

The initial matter is simple..you do not want them or their pipes on your land and no negotiations were ever entered into for access. They are trespassers Use firstly the available power..police and council... but _act._


----------



## Jackbequick (9 Oct 2020)

Easy to pontificate on 'peace to all men' and 'love they neighbour...open your arms and heart to being abused' , however this is a serious breach of the man's rights to his land and the bullies should be sent off...We all though protesting 'democracy' fantasy are in denial, that we don't live in socialist, even communal politics and reality. We do. 

The greatest infliction of injustice on people (other than 'adverse possession') is within communist regimes and the worst of them including Russian billionaires and the likes of filthy rich dictators such as Idi Amin are welcomed into Britain. The hypocrisy is embedded in the people in the power-elite. It is furthered by 'appeasement'. 

The pious, sanctimonious comments about a sort of 'love thy neighbour' disregards law and equity' herein is sad. It's easy to characterise a man fighting for his land when it isn't yours and you suffer no loss or restriction or would be happy to do so were it your situation. 

The sickness of globalisation and the movement to one world government (by bankers) is a pandemic worse than CV-19. It is well advanced, that plan by Mayer Amschel Bauer. Supporting bullies is a destructive societal position and it is bullies who will control you unless you fight...in this case for your land and your right to freedom from bully boys and your right to peaceful enjoyment of your land. Unless you resist where resistance is lawful or traditional you slowly and progressively allow an ebbing-away of the rights of all people.


----------



## Steve Blackdog (9 Oct 2020)

@Jackbequick
This is not the place to give legal advice and if you look at my post, it was not my intention to give advice, least of all tax advice.
Good luck!


----------



## Cabinetman (9 Oct 2020)

Chris70, The vast majority of people on here are decent hard-working people who just want to help each other, but there’s always a few who just love to have a go. So when they do I drop that thread and look at something more interesting and let them get on with it. They won’t listen and you won’t change their minds so it’s not worth the effort. Cheers Ian
Ps, ignoring them also really annoys them!


----------



## Blackswanwood (9 Oct 2020)

It worries me sometimes when I see incorrect rambling in posts like this that are opinion rather than fact. @Steve Blackdog has summed up the legal position accurately (as a lawyer) ... not sure why someone living in a different legal and tax jurisdiction feels the need to contradict him.


----------



## Woody2Shoes (9 Oct 2020)

Jackbequick said:


> Not correct..not 'chips' the pipe should have been laid on 100% consolidated sand..thickness of sand support...depends on weight and size of pipe but start with say ten inches. 100% consolidation normally achieved by flooding the sanded trench


JBQ - I notice that you're somewhere in the 'Pacific Region' - I think you need to take care with some of your advice, in that it may not take account of variations local regulations/codes. In England, 5mm pea shingle (not necessarily sand) is a perfectly acceptable bedding medium for 4" foul drain pipes.


----------



## Chris70 (9 Oct 2020)

Cabinetman: thanks. I just thought I’d give my two penn’orth, without wishing to be “sanctimonious”.


----------



## MikeK (9 Oct 2020)

This thread has run its course and Doug's issue was resolved. Given the amount of moderation required so far on this thread, now is a good time to close it.


----------

