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

[RobinBHM]

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--]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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

 

[Phil Pascoe]

The thread only started yesterday.

 

[Anthraquinone]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.

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]

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]

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]

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.

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]

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...

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]

"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,