Whose wall?

w3526602
Posts: 446
Joined: Mon Sep 20, 2010 4:58 pm
Location: south wales

Whose wall?

Post by w3526602 »

Hi,

Just back from visiting my daughter in Milton Keynes. The subject of one of her (?) walls came up.

Terrace of four houses, she is No.2. Each house has an integral garage projectin about 3M in front of house, leaving a small courtyard between that garage and the one next door Front window and front door open onto the courtyard. Garage walls are cavity, and line up with the internal cavity walls between the properties.

I don't think there is any doubt that my daughter's lounge wall is hers. But who owns the side wall of the courtyard? My daughter, or No.3? I doubt that this is a rare layout.

602
602 (That was my "last three")
ukmicky
Posts: 5237
Joined: Sat Sep 27, 2008 10:13 pm
Number of Posts per Page: 20
Number of topics per page: 20
Location: London

Re: Whose wall?

Post by ukmicky »

w3526602 wrote:Hi,

Just back from visiting my daughter in Milton Keynes. The subject of one of her (?) walls came up.

Terrace of four houses, she is No.2. Each house has an integral garage projectin about 3M in front of house, leaving a small courtyard between that garage and the one next door Front window and front door open onto the courtyard. Garage walls are cavity, and line up with the internal cavity walls between the properties.

I don't think there is any doubt that my daughter's lounge wall is hers. But who owns the side wall of the courtyard? My daughter, or No.3? I doubt that this is a rare layout.

602
Hard to imagine without seeing but it could be a party wall in joint ownership.
Any information provided is not legal advice and you are advised to gain a professional opinion
Rosenberg
Posts: 291
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 9:08 pm

Re: Whose wall?

Post by Rosenberg »

Why on earth would it be a party wall?

If the side wall of the courtyard is part of next doors garage, it is almost certainly owned by next door.

The internal walls of the house are probably party walls, but external walls probably aren't. In such circumstances, the boundary line would have a dog leg in it, running along the outside of the garage wall, then do a right angle turn for half the width of the internal (party) wall, then turn 90 degrees again to run along the centre line of the internal party wall.

I know it seems odd that it should do this, but it's quite common I believe. It was certainly the situation in my old house.
ukmicky
Posts: 5237
Joined: Sat Sep 27, 2008 10:13 pm
Number of Posts per Page: 20
Number of topics per page: 20
Location: London

Re: Whose wall?

Post by ukmicky »

Rosenberg wrote:.Why on earth would it be a party wall?
Excuse me ,when did i say it was a party wall but how do you know its not.

Someone with your skills could make a fortune if you are able to dertermine the ownership of a wall without even seeing a plan

Making asumptions without evidence is not the way forward.

Never asume anything until youve seen the evidence .

Theirfore until we see a picture or well draw plan my statement that iT could be a party wall stands or do you not know the understanding of the word COULD.
Any information provided is not legal advice and you are advised to gain a professional opinion
Rosenberg
Posts: 291
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 9:08 pm

Re: Whose wall?

Post by Rosenberg »

I didn't say that you said it was a party wall. I just asked you why it should be.

I think it's unlikely to be a party wall. What's your problem with that? Expressing an opinion is what this forum is for isn't it?

It might be a party wall, but it's unlikely given that the garage belongs to the neighbours and the wall seems (from the OPs description) only to serve as one side of the garage.
ukmicky wrote: Someone with your skills could make a fortune if you are able to dertermine the ownership of a wall without even seeing a plan
Even if the OP could supply a plan, I doubt that it would help much. Could you determine ownership on the basis of a plan that hasn't got the boundaries drawn on it? (If the OP had a plan with boundaries on it, he needn't have asked for opinions here.) I haven't made any categorical statements about whether it's a party wall or not. You really should verify that by carefully re-reading my post.
ukmicky wrote: Making asumptions without evidence is not the way forward.
You sound like a pompous old school teacher. Who are you to lecture me? There are no assumptions in my post - just my opinion, based upon the evidence of the OPs description and upon my own experience, that it's unlikely to be a party wall. Such an eventuality would, without doubt, be unusual; and I used the word "probably" (not "definitely") to indicate an appropriate degree of uncertainty about this point.
ukdicky wrote:...or do you not know the understanding of the word COULD.
Yes, thank you, I do. Without qualification, it conveys no indication of relative likelihood and is therefore pretty unhelpful. Do you know the meaning of the word PROBABLY? You'd also do well to look up the difference between ASSUMPTION and OPINION, and between THERE and THEIR. If you're going to use the latter two all over this forum, you might as well get them the right way round.

Now, I've told you why it probably isn't a party wall, but you haven't answered my question: why should it be a party wall?
rp_uk
Posts: 12
Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2011 6:28 pm

Re: Whose wall?

Post by rp_uk »

If the garden walls are built asride the boundary then they are Party Wall Fences.

If the walls are considered as extensions to the main house build and are on or at the boundary they may also be a Type B Party Wall.

You need to get the plans out and see what the conveyances say or don't say about any T marks.

You then need to survey the features on the ground and then check back to the plan.

We have a garden wall that we have single T marks for maintenance, but the structure itself is built astride the boundary, so is in fact a party wall fence and no longer my garden wall........ This is what hapens when a surveyor draws the plans and you then trust a builder to use a tape measure.......

Good luck.

RP_UK
ukmicky
Posts: 5237
Joined: Sat Sep 27, 2008 10:13 pm
Number of Posts per Page: 20
Number of topics per page: 20
Location: London

Re: Whose wall?

Post by ukmicky »

Rosenberg wrote:Why on earth would it be a party wall?
Rosenberg wrote:why should it be a party wall?


i Didn't say it should be or would be ,i said it could be.
Garage walls are cavity, and line up with the internal cavity walls between the properties.
If the OP.s comments are correct the garage wall does line up with the internal cavity walls between the properties which with most properties are party walls as they mostly sit stride the boundary, it makes sense to assume that a cavity wall that is in line with the main party wall is also sitting astride the boundary . If so i wonder what that would make it ?


It may not be a everyday setup but is not an unusual setup where identical houses are produced quickly. Yes it is possible that the wall may have a dogleg but i see no mention of it.

However in case all the necessary information has not been handed over by the OP I used the word to cover the situation as its impossible to say without detailed knowledge.
You sound like a pompous old school teacher.
Me a pompous old school teacher , That made the family laugh.
Any information provided is not legal advice and you are advised to gain a professional opinion
Rosenberg
Posts: 291
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 9:08 pm

Re: Whose wall?

Post by Rosenberg »

ukmicky wrote:
Rosenberg wrote:Why on earth would it be a party wall?
Rosenberg wrote:why should it be a party wall?

i Didn't say it should be or would be ,i said it could be.

You really don't have a very good grasp of English, do you?
ukmicky wrote:If the OP.s comments are correct the garage wall does line up with the internal cavity walls between the properties which with most properties are party walls as they mostly sit stride the boundary, it makes sense to assume that a cavity wall that is in line with the main party wall is also sitting astride the boundary .
Rubbish! It makes no sense at all to assume that. It is common for boundary lines to have a dogleg (as I said before) at the point where an internal party wall is joined to an external non-party wall. And because that situation is common it is rather silly of you to assume the contrary. And you accuse me of making unwarranted assumptions. :roll:
ukmicky wrote:It may not be a everyday setup but is not an unusual setup where identical houses are produced quickly. Yes it is possible that the wall may have a dogleg but i see no mention of it.
Please don't misrepresent what I have said in an effort to cover up your misunderstanding. It's a cheap and transparent tactic. I didn't say the wall had a dogleg. What I actually said was:
Rosenberg wrote:...In such circumstances, the boundary line would have a dog leg in it, running along the outside of the garage wall, then do a right angle turn for half the width of the internal (party) wall, then turn 90 degrees again to run along the centre line of the internal party wall.
ukmicky wrote:However in case all the necessary information has not been handed over by the OP I used the word to cover the situation as its impossible to say without detailed knowledge.
Of course it's impossible to give a definitive answer without the deeds and all other the relevant information. But I doubt the OP was expecting that - just opinions one way or the other. If all you have to say is it COULD be this or it COULD be that, it doesn't really help. So why bother saying anything?
ukmicky
Posts: 5237
Joined: Sat Sep 27, 2008 10:13 pm
Number of Posts per Page: 20
Number of topics per page: 20
Location: London

Re: Whose wall?

Post by ukmicky »

You really don't have a very good grasp of English, do you?
As its you i will take less care next time
And because that situation is common it is rather silly of you to assume the contrary.
nO
Please don't misrepresent what I have said in an effort to cover up your misunderstanding. It's a cheap and transparent tactic. I didn't say the wall had a dogleg. What I actually said was:
In such circumstances, the boundary line would have a dog leg in it,
Your words above ,not mine.
So why bother saying anything
Simple, because it could be which is all that matters until he finds out for sure.



Oh its you rosenburg, :D Just realised who you are ,the Mr i can drive over my neighbours paving slabs when i want without his permission and not be liable for any damage i cause

You are wrong by the way because you would be liable for any damage you caused to his paving slabs. Causing damage whilst trespassing is a very easy win for your neighbour.
Last edited by ukmicky on Thu Jul 14, 2011 1:47 am, edited 1 time in total.
Any information provided is not legal advice and you are advised to gain a professional opinion
w3526602
Posts: 446
Joined: Mon Sep 20, 2010 4:58 pm
Location: south wales

Re: Whose wall?

Post by w3526602 »

Hi,

I can accept that there are two possible answers, and both seem logical.
I think I'd better get my coat.

602
602 (That was my "last three")
rp_uk
Posts: 12
Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2011 6:28 pm

Re: Whose wall?

Post by rp_uk »

Hi again,

Party Wall law is very complex.....

An internal party wall does not have to straddle the boundary (TypeA) it can also be built at/next to the boundary (TypeB)

You really need to get the plans out and understand the conveyances and any subsequent 'agreements'.

Regards

RP_UK
Rosenberg
Posts: 291
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 9:08 pm

Re: Whose wall?

Post by Rosenberg »

ukmicky wrote:
And because that situation is common it is rather silly of you to assume the contrary.
nO
Why? Or can't you think of a reason? My six year old could formulate an argument better than you.
ukmicky wrote:
Please don't misrepresent what I have said in an effort to cover up your misunderstanding. It's a cheap and transparent tactic. I didn't say the wall had a dogleg. What I actually said was:
In such circumstances, the boundary line would have a dog leg in it,
Your words above ,not mine.
You are doing it again. I said the boundary line would have a dog leg in it, not the wall. The boundary line and the wall are not the same thing and they are necessarily co-linear! A simple enough concept, but you seem to have a hell of alot of trouble grasping it!
ukmicky wrote:
So why bother saying anything
Simple, because it could be which is all that matters until he finds out for sure.
Your statement that "it could be a party wall" tells him no more than he might have guessed before he posted!

ukmicky wrote: Oh its you rosenburg, :D Just realised who you are ,the Mr i can drive over my neighbours paving slabs when i want without his permission and not be liable for any damage i cause

You are wrong by the way because you would be liable for any damage you caused to his paving slabs. Causing damage whilst trespassing is a very easy win for your neighbour.
He hasn't won though! The reason: his slabs were on my land so how could I be trespassing. You do seem to like missing the point ukmicky!
Last edited by Rosenberg on Sun Jul 17, 2011 1:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Rosenberg
Posts: 291
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 9:08 pm

Re: Whose wall?

Post by Rosenberg »

rp_uk wrote:Hi again,

Party Wall law is very complex.....

An internal party wall does not have to straddle the boundary (TypeA) it can also be built at/next to the boundary (TypeB)

You really need to get the plans out and understand the conveyances and any subsequent 'agreements'.

Regards

RP_UK
But with regard to the external wall, which seems to have been used only to support the neighbour's garage, it beggars belief that it would be a party wall.
rp_uk
Posts: 12
Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2011 6:28 pm

Re: Whose wall?

Post by rp_uk »

Hi again,

As I said it is complex.

If it straddles the boundary then it a Party Wall.
It may also be causing a Trespass if it was built across the boundary without permission.

If the garages are internal, then the external part if at/on the boundary will therefore be Part A or Part B Party Walls, depending on location and ownership.
In both cases all the neighbours reserve their Party Wall rights of attachment subject to serving the required notices.
From the OP it sounds like the external wall is a continuation of the internal two leaf cavity wall, and should be a Type A Party Wall.

It may be difficult to accept, but that is what the Party Wall act states and provides for neighbours in such circumstances......
Check out the PDF guide which has nice drawings showing above cases.....

From past experience of similar circumstances to the above it is very difficult to find professionals that understand the detail of the Party Wall act to the extend one would expect for the fees being charged.

Cheers
RP_UK
Rosenberg
Posts: 291
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 9:08 pm

Re: Whose wall?

Post by Rosenberg »

It sounds from the OP's post that a row of houses were built like that together. Nothing was attached later.
rp_uk wrote:From the OP it sounds like the external wall is a continuation of the internal two leaf cavity wall, and should be a Type A Party Wall.
Yes it sounds like the the external wall is a contination of the internal party wall, but why would that make the external wall a party wall as well? Surely, you're assuming the boundary line is straight, which is not always the case.

My old house was one of a row of L shaped houses. In my case the part that projected at the front was a lounge and a kitchen (not a garage as in the OP's case). The kitchen wall was external, adjacent to the neighbour's land. It was also in line with an internal party wall. However, my kitchen wall was not a party wall. It didn't support any part of my neighbour's house. The boundary line ran along the wall's outside edge before doing a dog-leg into the centre of the internal party wall - just in the way I've already described. My solicitor told me that even in the absence of such boundary information, there is no way my neighbour could claim part ownership of the wall because both sides of it had been in my exclusive use (to support only my house) for over 20 years.

I know of a row of old terraced houses in the same street where each had a projecting rear kitchen and toilet. The same dog-legged boundary situation applied there. Presumably it still does because I have seen a recent planning application for one of them with the boundaries drawn in this way.

I'm not saying this applies everywhere, but it is very common where only a part of a wall's length is a party wall - i.e. the part that's attached to the neighbour's house.
Post Reply