Japanese Knotweed - Not a weed to ignore!

Japanese Knotweed is a serious consideration for Lenders, Developers, Purchasers, Landowners, Planners and Surveyors. The impact of the discovery of Japanese Knotweed on land and buildings can prove to be significant.

Source: Charles Lyndon

Anyone who has a garden will be more than aware of the speed in which weeds will grow, which if left uncontrolled can become unsightly and overgrown very quickly. Having acquired an overgrown allotment a few years ago, which I spent many hours clearing and digging I can tell you with authority that weeds are almost impossible to eradicate and therefore need to be regularly controlled. Most varieties of weeds are harmless if regularly managed, with the exception of the odd thorny or irritant types of weeds. There is however one particular type of weed that has received increased publicity over recent years, due to the size and rate of growth. There are plenty of opinions in relation to the risk and the extent of damage that Japanese Knotweed can cause to buildings/structures and there are plenty of examples of people affected by it which has resulted in denial of mortgage applications, disputes with insurers and extensive costs in trying remove or control its growth. On the other side of the coin, recent research by AECOM challenges popular opinion and suggests ‘Japanese knotweed is no more of a threat to buildings than other plants’. The research of members of the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) and the Property Care Association (PCA) who have interacted or dealt with Japanese Knotweed in one way or another found that ‘Only between 2% and 6% of respondents reported any co-occurrence of Japanese knotweed and structural damage to buildings. Our paper also concluded that where Japanese knotweed is associated with damage, it is likely that the plants will have exacerbated existing damage, rather than being the initial cause of the damage’. The results of the research are interesting and well worth a read; (Link).

Despite research by AECOM and others that suggest that Japanese is not the problem that the media would have us believe, we do live in a risk averse society. To those who buy/sell/rent and generally live in property I suspect that they will be un-swayed in their opinion and instead choose to panic at the mere mention of the words Japanese Knotweed in a similar way to which many people react to the words ‘Asbestos’ or ‘Subsidence’ etc. For those involved with property surveys and inspections it is essential to be able to identify Japanese Knotweed and to be able provide appropriate advice. This article is therefore written to provide some basic information about Japanese knotweed which can be used to supplement further reading.

Japanese Knotweed (Latin name - Fallopia japonica) was introduced into the UK as an ornamental plant by the Victorians. It originated from Asia in countries such as Northern China and Japan where it grew in harsh habitats on the slopes around volcanoes. When introduced into the UK the conditions were far more fertile than those in Asia allowing the plant to thrive. Japanese Knotweed is a Perennial Plant, meaning that it will grow for many seasons with the plant dying back in the winter and re-growing the following spring. Japanese Knotweed is capable of growing 10cm per day and it is highly invasive and capable of exposing weaknesses in buildings, foundations, concrete and tarmac. It has the capability of regenerating from minute rhizomes (a root or creeping stem), therefore there is a significant risk of spreading the plant from digging and other disturbance. Effective removal of Japanese Knotweed therefore requires a specialist, which as you would expect can be expensive.

As stated previously, Japanese Knotweed is a serious consideration for Lenders, Developers, Purchasers, Landowners, Planners and Surveyors. The impact of the discovery of Japanese Knotweed on land and buildings can prove to be significant. Land values can be reduced to take into account remediation works. It is therefore worth knowing how to identify Japanese Knotweed to firstly establish its presence and if identified how to deal with it. Devon County Council provided an excellent guide to the identification of Japanese Knotweed which is summarised below. The original link to the article is no longer active however the images and information below are still relevant:

How to identify Japanese Knotweed

  A Typical Japanese Knotweed Leaf

In the early spring red/purple shoots appear from the ground and grow rapidly forming canes. As the canes grow the leaves gradually open and turn green:

The plants are fully grown by early summer and mature canes are hollow with a distinctive purple speckle and form dense stands up to 3 metres high:

The plant flowers in late summer and these consist of clusters of spiky stems covered in tiny creamy-white flowers:

During the late autumn/winter the leaves fall and the canes die and turn brown. The canes remain standing throughout the winter and can often still be seen in new stands in the following spring and summer:

The rhizome is the underground part of the plant. It is knotty with a leathery dark brown bark and when fresh snaps like a carrot.  Under the bark it is orange or yellow.  Inside the rhizome is a dark orange/brown central core or sometimes it is hollow with an orange, yellow or creamy outer ring, although this is variable:

Japanese Knotweed and the Law

In 2016, the Environment Agency withdrew its Japanese Knotweed Code of Practice due to new government guidelines. This was replaced in March 2017, by the Invasive Non-Native Specialists Association (INNSA) new Code of Practice. Access to the new code is not as straightforward as the EA Code however you can request a copy from the following: (Link)

Below is a summary of the raft of legislation that relates to Japanese Knotweed which is taken from the Environment Agency’s Japanese Knotweed original Code of Practice.
  
Japanese Knotweed is classified as controlled waste and its disposal is strictly regulated. For example soil containing Japanese Knotweed roots/rhizomes is classified as contaminated waste and can only be taken to a licensed landfill site. Failure to dispose of Japanese Knotweed appropriately may lead to prosecution under section 34 of the Environmental Protection Act (EPA) 1990.  Also, although it is not a criminal offence to have Japanese Knotweed on your land, allowing it to grow onto neighbouring land may constitute a nuisance and as such may provide grounds for a civil action from those affected.

Other relevant legislation includes Section 14(2) of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 states that '…if any person plants or otherwise causes to grow in the wild any plant which is included in Part II of Schedule 9, he shall be guilty of an offence'. Japanese knotweed is one of the plants listed in Schedule 9. Also, waste must be transferred to an authorised person, in other words a person who is either a registered carrier or exempted from registration by the Waste (England and Wales) Regulations 2011. A waste transfer note must be completed and signed giving a written description of the waste as per regulation 35 of the Waste Regulations. The Hazardous Waste Regulations 2005 contain provisions about the handling and movement of hazardous waste.

Japanese Knotweed continues to receive an increased amount of negative publicity which makes it increasingly important for those undertaking property surveys and inspections and giving property advice to be able to identify its presence and give appropriate and proportionate advice.  This article should serve as a good starting point and hopefully generate interest for further reading and research for built environment and related professions. 

Author: Gary O’Neill

Please feel free to share this article and other articles on this site with colleagues, friends and family who you think would be interested

Information/opinions posted on this site are the personal views of the author and should not be relied upon by any person or any third party without first seeking further professional advice. Also, please scroll down and read the copyright notice at the end of the blog.

Basement Construction - Part 2 – Waterproofing

Nobody will want to deal with water ingress into a basement, especially when construction is well advanced, or even worse when the basement is occupied and in use. It is therefore necessary to carefully select an appropriate water proofing system, as failure to carry out thorough investigations and careful design can prove disastrous and particularly expensive!

Source: http://www.northernvirginiabasementwaterproofing.com/

In my previous article I discussed the growing popularity of basement construction and highlighted a number of factors that require consideration during their design. Undoubtedly one of the most significant issues in relation basement construction is how to keep the internal environment dry and therefore exclude sub-surface water. The impact of water and particularly hydrostatic pressure was highlighted: ‘Water in the ground has the ability to exert a lot of force onto the structure of the basement depending on the head or height of the water. This is something known as hydrostatic pressure. This is better defined as ‘the pressure at a point in a fluid at rest due to the weight of the fluid above it’. Basement design therefore needs to take into account the height of the water table because that will influence the amount of hydrostatic pressure that a basement structure will be exposed to. The method of waterproofing will also need to be designed to consider hydrostatic pressure’.

Nobody will want to deal with water ingress into a basement, especially when construction is well advanced, or even worse when the basement is occupied and in use. It is therefore necessary to carefully select an appropriate water proofing system, as failure to carry out thorough investigations and careful design can prove disastrous and particularly expensive! There are many specialist companies and waterproofing products on the market who offer a variety of different solutions for dealing with water ingress into basements however for the purposes of this article I will provide examples of a number of well established methods of basement waterproofing. Selection will vary depending on factors, such as ground conditions, the height of the water table, the method of basement construction, the proposed use of a basement and as ever, cost.

Source: http://quality-waterproofing.com/

When considering an appropriate way of waterproofing a new basement it is advisable to review the recommendations within BS8102:2009 ‘Code of Practice for Protection of Below Ground Structures Against Water from the Ground’. The standard advises on the types of waterproofing available and confirms the performance grade to be achieved:

Type of Waterproofing:

Type A (Barrier) protection - A barrier to water ingress is applied to the inner or outer surface of the structure

Type B (Structurally Integral) Protection - The structure is formed as a watertight construction and requires no additional protection

Type C (Drained) Protection - Water entering the structure is received by planned cavities or voids and safely removed

Grades of Waterproofing Protection:

Grade 1 - Some water seepage and damp is tolerable depending on the intended use. Car parking, plant rooms etc.

Grade 2 - No water penetration is acceptable. Damp areas are tolerable depending on the end use. Plant rooms, workshops etc.

Grade 3 - No dampness or water penetration is acceptable - Ventilated residential and commercial

Type A (Barrier) Protection relies totally on a waterproofing membrane to keep water permanently out of the internal basement environment. Concrete and blockwork are typical examples of materials used in basement construction, however these materials are highly porous, particularly in concealed enclosed environments such as below ground. Masonry materials have the ability to absorb high volumes of water, which once saturated will seep through to the internal environment. Barrier protection, often referred to as tanking is a method which prevents water saturating through the basement wall with the provision/application of an impervious membrane to the internal or external face of the wall. Tanking can also be provided within the structure, something referred to as sandwich tanking, although this method is less commonly used.

In my early years working as a labourer for a ground works Contractor, I remember a particularly project where I was required to paint the external face of a number of in-situ concrete constructed lift shafts, at their bases, with a liquid bitumen paint, which was referred to as ‘black jack’. At the time, I never really understood why it was necessary to paint concrete walls that were going to be buried in the ground, until someone explained that what I was doing was providing waterproofing protection.

Nowadays there are many products on the market in the form of brush applied surface coverings, trowel applied renders and rolled sheet applied materials such as elastomeric which are used for tanking solutions for basements. The success of a tanking method will be determined by the selection of the correct method as well as the quality of the installation. Many tanking solutions require installation by approved contractors and although these systems may seem expensive, it is worth considering the likely disruption and excessive cost of trying to rectify water ingress to a basement when it is occupied!

Type B (Structurally Integral) Protection relies on the basement structure itself to be robust enough to resist water ingress. In most cases the external basement structure will be constructed with concrete which must be designed to minimise joints as well as being cast with plenty of reinforcement to reduce the risk of cracking. It is not uncommon for concrete basements designed to achieve structural integral protection to include additional waterproofing measures to provide a barrier against water and water vapour. This may include the introduction of waterproofing admixtures into the concrete mix in order to help reduce porosity and drying shrinkage.

Structural integral protection will nearly always have a cooler internal surface temperature compared to other forms of waterproofing and such will be more prone to the effects of condensation. It is therefore necessary to additionally consider control of atmospheric moisture with the possible installation of controlled ventilation fans and de-humidifiers.  Clearly the design solution will depend upon grade and proposed use of the basement and additional measures may not be required in all situations

Type C (Drained) Protection takes the view that some water will be allowed through the external basement structure, however it will be dealt with or controlled when it arrives.  Drained protection may be a possibility in heavily waterlogged ground, possibly with a high water table or where for other reasons it will prove difficult to prevent moisture entering into an internal basement environment.  Any water that enters into the basement is gathered and disposed of in an appropriate way.

Drained protection usually takes the form of a raised floor and an additional membrane or wall installed/constructed in front of the main basement structure with a small cavity in between. Any water that finds its way through the main basement wall will seep behind the cavity (wall and floor), where through design the water will be channelled to a sump, which is basically a low point that will collect water, which is then usually pumped away from the basement.  Internally, there may be water entering the basement but this is concealed within the cavity. Therefore the internal basement environment remains dry.

As you would expect there are a number of disadvantages with the use of drained protection: Due to the installation of as wall and floor cavity there could be a loss in floor to ceiling height and useable space and pumps will need regular maintenance. There is also a possibility that high hydrostatic pressure will result in excessive amounts of water through the basement structure, which may not be able to be effectively drained. This will however be avoided with suitable design.

It is clear that waterproofing of a basement takes careful consideration, where the method of waterproofing should be determined by the range of different factors discussed above. Failure to understand ground conditions, including the impact of water in the ground, together other site conditions/restraints may result in the selection of a waterproofing system that is not fit for purpose. It is therefore always worth seeking specialist advice as remedial works will often prove to be very expensive.

Author: Gary O’Neill

Please feel free to share this article and other articles on this site with colleagues, friends and family who you think would be interested

Information/opinions posted on this site are the personal views of the author and should not be relied upon by any person or any third party without first seeking further professional advice. Also, please scroll down and read the copyright notice at the end of the blog.

Basement Construction - Part 1 - Design Considerations

When considering whether to construct a basement it is first worth weighing up the advantages and disadvantages, and then also thinking about a number of design considerations which will undoubtedly impact on the construction method, waterproofing, safety, usability and ultimately, costs

Source:Homebuilding & Renovating

An article in the London Evening Standard from 2013 (link) highlighted the growing popularity of basement construction, particularly where land is at a premium or restricted above ground. The scale of the proposed basement construction in the article was extensive to a point where it generated a section 106 contribution of £825,000!:

A millionaire hedge fund boss digging out a basement eight times the size of a typical London home has been ordered to pay £825,000 towards affordable housing in his area.
Kensington & Chelsea council planners said the two-storey, 9,160sq?ft basement — complete with cinema room, swimming pool and whirlpool spa — is the biggest they have been asked to approve. The scale of the extension, below two large Notting Hill villas which have been turned into a single family home, means it has fallen foul of rules that normally apply only to major commercial developments.

The fashion for digging out super-size basements to create so-called ‘iceberg homes’ in London, and the prospect of years of disturbance during excavation, has pitted residents against each other in some streets ......... neighbours are said to be horrified by the scale of the works which will involve scores of lorry loads of earth being removed from the site. One said: “It will certainly be one of the ‘iceberg houses’ and sadly, our house will probably be the Titanic.” The number of applications for subterranean spaces in Kensington & Chelsea has soared in recent years.......

Although the news article identified above is a rather extreme example of a residential basement construction it does demonstrate an alternative way of providing valuable useable space when above ground construction may be restricted or unavailable. Basement construction is still considered a less conventional method of adding space compared to above ground construction and is often instigated by those who are prepared to challenge the conventional norm and think outside the box. There are however many examples of residential buildings throughout the UK where basements were constructed as a normal part of the building process. Houses built during the Victorian period provide a typical example of where basements were commonly constructed and nowadays, these Victorian basements are often converted and refurbished to made them part of the useable habitable space within a dwelling.

When considering whether to construct a basement it is first worth weighing up the advantages and disadvantages, and then also thinking about a number of design considerations which will undoubtedly impact on the construction method, waterproofing, safety, usability and ultimately, costs.

Source: Source: http://basementwaterproof.com/

Clearly basements can add space and value to a property and it could also be argued that security can be less of an issue as there will be less accessible entry points into a basement, as by its very nature the structure in buried in the ground. Also, as long as the basement is waterproofed appropriately (something I will be discussing in my next article), and insulated correctly, you could argue that a basement can be made energy efficient more readily that an above ground building. Conversely, the perceived disadvantages and the impact that these may have on costs will prevent a lot of people proceeded beyond the initial enquiry stage when considering basement construction.

One of the key things to consider is that by placing an enclosed structure such as a basement in the ground you are subjecting the structure to a number of different forces. The first is the presence of water in the ground. Water is a naturally occurring element in the ground and the level of this water will vary from location to location. Many will be familiar with the term ‘water table’ which can be understood as the layer below which the ground is completely filled up (or saturated) with water. Try to imagine a basement like a boat which is surrounded by water in the ground. The problem is that boats leak, and so do basements!  A basement is unlikely to sink like a boat, but because the basement is an enclosed structure it has the ability to hold a lot of water if the basement is not adequately waterproofed. Water in the ground also has the ability to exert a lot of force onto the structure of the basement depending on the head or height of the water. This is something known as hydrostatic pressure.  This is better defined as ‘the pressure at a point in a fluid at rest due to the weight of the fluid above it’. Basement design therefore needs to take into account the height of the water table because that will influence the amount of hydrostatic pressure that a basement structure will be exposed to.  The method of waterproofing will also need to be designed to consider hydrostatic pressure.

In order to design and construct a basement correctly it is first necessary to establish ground conditions. This will require a thorough ground investigation which although will have a cost attached to it, is essential at the very early stages of a project. This will also highlight the type of ground and any contaminants present together with information of water in the ground and importantly the height of the water table. Other design considerations will include; protection and stability to adjacent structures, basement depth, boundary issues including Party Wall etc. Act implications, method of excavation, temporary support, method of construction in addition to exclusion of ground water. Of course all of this will have an impact on costs and there is no getting away from the fact that constructing a basement can be very expensive.

In my next article I will consider a number of methods of waterproofing of basements and explain that the correct choice of which method to use is crucial to ensure that the internal environment within a basement remains dry.

Author: Gary O’Neill

Please feel free to share this article and other articles on this site with colleagues, friends and family who you think would be interested

Information/opinions posted on this site are the personal views of the author and should not be relied upon by any person or any third party without first seeking further professional advice. Also, please scroll down and read the copyright notice at the end of the blog.

Party Wall etc. Act 1996 – Service after work has commenced can prove to be futile!

Unless there is damage caused on an Adjoining Owners land, when works are nearing completion, there is little benefit in appointing and paying for surveyors and issuing party wall notification at this point.  This is because the works ‘have already taken place’, (or mostly), so the remaining provisions that can be included in a Party Wall Award, at this late stage, will be extremely limited

Source: https://www.localpartywallsurveyors.com

The requirements of the Party Wall etc. Act 1996 often come as a surprise for those who propose to undertake works to domestic buildings as well as those who propose works to commercial buildings in England and Wales.  Given that the provisions of the Party Wall Act have now been in existence for over 20 years it is equally surprising that there still seems to be a general lack of awareness of the requirements of the Act.  The amount of Building Owners (a term used under the Act to describe the party who is undertaking the work), who choose to ignore the Act, whether through ignorance (which is no defence in law!) or a genuine desire to cut corners to save on time and expense, never ceases to amaze me. If the main purpose of the Act is to prevent and resolve disputes it seems a contradiction in terms that appointments under the Party Wall etc. Act, were usually made when a dispute had already occurred! (at this stage, the dispute was a dispute in general terms and not a Party Wall dispute).

For the purposes of this article I will refer to the domestic client, someone who in most cases (but not all), will have very little construction knowledge and will rely on others to point them in the right direction.  For many in this situation the first port of call may be to contact a Contractor to come a long to give them some initial advice as well as an indication of likely costs, a ball park figure if you like. I can remember several situations where I had been appointed by a Building Owner as Party Wall Surveyor, after works had commenced, where for whatever reason they had been made aware that they should have notified their Adjoining Owners (a term used under the Act to describe the party who is affected the work), but had not been advised of this by their Contractor, who they felt should have brought this to their attention. In my experience however, most builders/contractors have the same lack of knowledge of the Act as anyone else!

Source: Quorum Consulting Engineers

The impact of dealing with the Party Wall Act retrospectively can vary for the Building Owner depending on whether any damage has occurred on the Adjoining Owners land (which is one of the main reasons that brings the Party Wall Act to the attention of the Building Owner), and how advanced the works are.  In the case of damage occurring before party wall notification has been served, an Adjoining Owner may need to rely on common law rights and may seek an injunction in the County Courts to have the works stopped. The Adjoining Owner will not be able to rely on the provisions of the Party Wall Act at this point because the Act has not been initiated, which only happens when notification is served.

In the situation where works are well advanced and sometimes nearing completion, it is worth thinking about the benefits of a retrospective notification and a retrospective Party Wall Award (sets out the terms and conditions for the proposed works, including costs/fees).  One of the key reasons for the introduction of the Party Wall Act was to enable Building Owners to undertake work and give Adjoining Owners confidence that the works would be carried out in an appropriate manner and any damages caused on the Adjoining Owners land, in respect of the notifiable work would be rectified. Unless there is damage caused on an Adjoining Owners land, when works are nearing completion, there is little benefit in appointing and paying for surveyors and issuing party wall notification at this point.  This is because the works ‘have already taken place’, (or mostly), so the remaining provisions that can be included in a Party Wall Award, at this late stage, will be extremely limited.  An Adjoining Owner should not be given the impression that they can solely use the provisions of the Act as a way of disrupting the Building Owner and making them occur excessive expense (the Act also provides for the Building Owner to meet the reasonable fees of an Adjoining Owners Surveyor, if appointed), unless of course damage has occurred as a result of any works that may be notifiable.

If it is realised that a Building Owner has failed to serve Party Wall notification and works have been completed and an Adjoining Owner is not satisfied with the standard or quality of the works then they can scrutinise Building Regulations and Planning Permission requirements to check that these have been complied with and also consider areas of common law such as negligence, nuisance and trespass etc, if they have suffered damage or disruption. I have previously been approached by a number of people in this very situation where they have been told to insist that their neighbour issues retrospective Party Wall notification.  For the reasons explained above, this is a pointless exercise and very poor advice. Once works are complete an Adjoining Owner should seek a common law remedy if they feel they have a justified grievance with their neighbour. They cannot rely on the provisions of an Act that has not been initiated in the first place! 

It is worth noting that for the purposes of this article I have used the terms Building Owner and Adjoining Owner throughout.  Whereas these roles only exist once the Party Wall Act is initiated through the service of notices, these terms have been used to explain the relationship between those who may have work undertaken and those who may be affected by these works.

Author: Gary O’Neill

Please feel free to share this article and other articles on this site with colleagues, friends and family who you think would be interested

Information/opinions posted on this site are the personal views of the author and should not be relied upon by any person or any third party without first seeking further professional advice. Also, please scroll down and read the copyright notice at the end of the blog.

Party Wall etc. Act 1996 – Much more than just Party Walls!

It is easy to see how the Party Wall etc. Act can be mis-interpreted, particularly by members of the public, just by the nature of its title.  For those who work in the property professions and interact with the Act on a regular basis there will be generally less confusion, however in my experience this is not always the case!

Source: tayrosshomes.com

Although there is a lot of information available about the Party Wall etc. Act 1996 (the Act), and its implications, it appears that there is equally as much mis-understanding or even ignorance about the Act, particularly from members of the public in relation to if and when the Act may apply.  Awareness of statutory approvals such as Planning Permission and Building Regulations approval seems to be improving, however, the existence let alone the requirements of the Act, often comes as a complete surprise to many.

If you are proposing certain types of work on your land or to your property then you may be required to ‘notify’ your neighbour under the Act. It is worth pointing out at this point that the requirements and procedures within the Act are completely separate to other statutory permissions such as Building Regulations and Planning Permission.  On a number of occasions I have been informed by householders that they were either not made aware of the requirements of the Act by their advisors or that they thought that they had obtained all of the relevant permissions because they had Planning and Building Regulations Approvals, which is completely incorrect.

If you are proposing any work to your land or property it is worth undertaking a little research to establish if the work falls under the scope of the Act and therefore will require notification to your neighbour/s (referred to as Adjoining Owners under the Act).  As you would expect, I would always advise you to seek professional advice to confirm whether notification under the Act is required and if so to also guide you through the process, however, nowadays, with the raft of information available on-line, there is no reason why you shouldn’t undertake your own research in the first instance to give you a better understanding of the Act. The Ministry of Housing, Communities & Local Government (formally the Department for Communities and Local Government) have produced an excellent explanatory booklet, which explains the Act in a clear understandable manner and is a really good starting point, particularly for those with little or no knowledge of the Act. You will find a copy of the booklet by clicking on this (link).

You may be surprised by the range of different types of work that are notifiable under the Act, which you will see are not just restricted to a party wall itself. The Ministry of Housing, Communities & Local Government’s booklet defines a party wall as, ‘a wall is a "party wall" if it stands astride the boundary of land belonging to two (or more) different owner’. The booklet then provides some illustrations to demonstrate this point. It is interesting to note that the definition of a party wall is not just restricted to a wall inside a building, but can also relate to external walls also, such as boundary walls. The Act uses the term ‘Party Fence Walls’ to describe walls that are not part of an actual building itself, however may still require notification under the Act for works to, or in close proximity to them.

Source:My property guide

The term ‘etc’ in the title of the Act is also significant. Three innocent little letters (etc.), however the implications of the term denote that the scope of the Act is much wider than just Party Walls. In fact some works that require excavations near neighbouring buildings may also require notification under the Act. Section 6 of the Act requires notification of excavations within 3 metres or within 6 metres of a neighbours building or structure based upon the following criteria:

‘excavate, or excavate and construct foundations for a new building or structure, within 3 metres of a neighbouring owner’s building or structure, where that work will go deeper than the neighbour’s foundations;

or excavate, or excavate for and construct foundations for a new building or structure, within 6 metres of a neighbouring owner’s building or structure, where that work will cut a line drawn downwards at 45° from the bottom of the neighbour’s foundations’

The six metre ‘rule’ is a little more complicated to understand (see the diagram below) than the three metre ‘rule’ and usually relates to deeper excavations such as piled foundations and the like. It is also worth noting that the six metre rule can affect more than one adjoining owner, depending upon the depth of excavation and the proximity of adjacent buildings and structures. In order to establish how many adjoining owners may be affected in any instance by the six metre ‘rule’ it will be necessary to take measurements and produce a section drawing which will detail the depth of the proposed excavation and the location and proximity of adjacent structures and buildings. Professional expertise is highly likely to be needed to take measurements and to produce a section drawings to establish if and how many adjoining owners will be affected.

Source: My property guide

Another term used within the Act is ‘Party Structure’. This again suggests that the Act does not relate exclusively to party walls. In fact there are a number of notices that may be issued under the Act, one of which is a Party Structure Notice. The reason the notice is not entitled a Party Wall Notice, is that this would be misleading and not account for any works other those to Party Walls. Party structures are generally defined as dividing structures such as floors and other partitions, however it is very rare that these structures are subject to party wall notification.

In summary it is easy to see how the Party Wall etc. Act can be mis-interpreted, particularly by members of the public, just by the nature of its title. For those who work in the property professions and interact with the Act on a regular basis there will be generally less confusion, however in my experience this is not always the case!  As notification under the Act may be required for a whole range of different types of work, as defined in section 1, 2 & 6 of the Act. All construction professionals, regardless of discipline should have a good understanding of the Act including its procedures.

In my next article I discuss retrospective party wall notification and in future articles I will consider different types of notifiable works in more detail, as well as tackle the thorny issue of fees under the Act.


Author: Gary O’Neill

Please feel free to share this article and other articles on this site with colleagues, friends and family who you think would be interested

Information/opinions posted on this site are the personal views of the author and should not be relied upon by any person or any third party without first seeking further professional advice. Also, please scroll down and read thecopyright notice at the end of the blog.

Buying a Property – Part 2 - The Real Value of a Building Survey

Never be tempted to cut corners when considering the purchase of a property because even if you think a building survey is expensive …… it often proves to be much more expensive not to have one

Source: Daily Mirror

In my last article I discussed the limitations of a survey that would be instructed by a mortgage lender (a mortgage valuation survey) and how a purchaser should not rely on this as means of assessing the condition of a building. This is because the primary purpose of this type of survey is to establish the value of a property and to be confident that in the event of any default on behalf of the borrower, that the lender can re-coup what they are owed. The objectives of a purchaser however are very different in that they want to be satisfied that the building they plan to buy, and often live in, is not concealing anything that they are not aware of. I say ‘not aware of’ as it is perfectly feasible and acceptable to proceed with the purchase of a building as long as you are fully aware of any potential issues/problems. Let’s face it, buildings, particularly older buildings are highly unlikely to be free from defects and in fact many of us will accept buildings with issues/problems at a lower price, as a way of trying to get a bargain, this is particularly true of property developers.

Not all of us are property developers and the vast amount of residential property transactions that take place each year are by members of the public who in many cases have little to no knowledge of buildings and therefore rely on professional guidance. It would therefore seem sensible, particularly due to the large investment involved that prospective purchasers commission a survey so that they can establish if there are any issues/problems with the building they are considering buying. However, you may be surprised to learn that the vast majority of purchasers choose to ignore this very important part of the purchase process. 

Source: RMA Surveyors

The Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) recently reported: ‘Results from an RICS’ survey of home buying consumers, released today, show that many homeowners who did not take out a home survey are left with a property they regret buying and an average of £5,750 in repair bills. The survey of 1,017 buyers across the UK found that consumers are clearly aware of the need for independent advice, with 94% of respondents agreeing it is important to commission a survey. However, nearly a third failed to do so. This means buyers are left ignorant of issues with the property, such as structural defects, dry and wet rot, subsidence and many other faults, only for these to become serious matters at a later date. The new homeowner may then be unable to afford, or may lose the desire, to fix the faults and may be left with a property they may no longer want to live in but are unable to sell to recoup their losses'. (Source: http://www.rics.org/)

Over a third of those surveyed failed to have an independent survey commissioned. We could speculate on why, however as 94% of respondents agreed that it was important to commission a survey, I think it is reasonable to discount ignorance as the primary reason for this. I suspect that cost may be a significant contributing factor, where many prospective purchasers see this as a cost they can do without and hope that they ‘get lucky’ and purchase a property with no issues/defects, that they were not aware of.  However, trying to save money at this point is a false economy. True, a comprehensive residential building survey may cost on average between £700 and £1000 (costs will vary depending upon the size and complexity of a dwelling and the survey selected), however, this is always money well spent. In fact, purchasers should be asking themselves if they can afford not to have a building survey undertaken rather than thinking about how much they will save by not having one done.

A level 3 Building Survey (see below), will provide a prospective purchaser with a comprehensive assessment of a dwelling and highlight not just significant issues, but anything that the Surveyor thinks is relevant. Armed with this information, the prospective purchaser may decide you try to negotiate the sale price with the seller (to reflect the findings of the survey) or maybe even decide to discontinue their interest and look for alternative properties. Either way, the information provides the purchaser with choices, where decisions can be made before contracts are signed rather than having to deal with the consequences when the property comes into their legal ownership. I am sure that in hindsight many of those who took part in the RICS research above would have regretted not spending £700 to £1000 on a Building Survey, as they ended up with an average repair bill of nearly £6000. Never be tempted to cut corners when considering the purchase of a property because even if you think a building survey is expensive you can see from above that it often proves to be much more expensive not to have one. On the flip side, the Building Survey may not identify any significant issues. Even in this scenario this represents good value for money as you now have piece of mind that the property you are considering is in reasonable condition and you are likely to avoid any nasty surprises. The lesson here is very simple: Always commission a Building Survey before exchanging contracts!

The information provided by RICS below summaries three different levels of survey that you may consider when purchasing a dwelling: RICS surveys are available to suit the particular circumstances of the client and the property:

Level 1 - Condition Report

Provides an objective overview of the condition of the property, highlighting areas of major concern without extensive detail. This option is ideal for buyers purchasing a modern house in good condition and for sellers and owners.

Level 2 - Home-buyer Report

Is most suitable for standard older and modern properties that are in an apparent reasonable condition. It provides a concise report with advice detailing any significant problems that could make a difference to the value of a property.

Level 3 - Building Survey

The ‘flagship’ service providing a detailed report on a property. It is particularly useful for older, larger or non-traditional properties, or one which is dilapidated and has been extensively altered or if the buyer is planning a major conversion or renovation. (Source: http://www.rics.org/)

Author: Gary O’Neill

Please feel free to share this article and other articles on this site with colleagues, friends and family who you think would be interested

Information/opinions posted on this site are the personal views of the author and should not be relied upon by any person or any third party without first seeking further professional advice. Also, please scroll down and read the copyright notice at the end of the blog. 

Buying a Property – Part 1 – The Limitations of a Mortgage Lender’s 'Survey'

A Mortgage Lender’s 'survey' is for the lender only and should not be relied upon by a purchaser as a means of accurately assessing the condition of a property

Source: The Telegraph

Buying and selling of property can be one of the most daunting experiences of our lives. The complex process of dealing with Solicitors, Surveyors, Estate Agents, Mortgage Providers, Vendors (the person/s selling the property) and the like is something that the vast majority of us do not undertake on a regular basis, and is therefore something that often proves to be very stressful. First time buyers in particular will often feel overwhelmed by the whole process and will rely heavily on their advisors to guide them through the process. Once a decision has been made to purchase a property, buyers will work out their finances and decide how much they can afford to borrow and then try to secure a mortgage or at least a mortgage guarantee before beginning the process of house hunting. 

For most of us purchasing a property will be the largest financial investment we will make in our lives. It is therefore essential that we know exactly what we are buying before we exchange contracts because it is at this point that a property comes into your legal ownership. At exchange of contracts the law assumes that you have made all of your enquiries and that you are fully aware of what you were buying. If subsequently you find problems with the property, then these problems become your responsibility to deal with (unless you feel that you have been advised inappropriately and that you can prove this). It is therefore advisable to be as thorough as you can be to establish the full extent of any issues with a property before you exchange contracts. A range of different surveys can be carried out during the conveyance process for which the inexperienced, particularly first time buyers often do not understand the purpose or scope of the range of different surveys available. For clarity, this article will consider conveyance in respect of a residential dwelling.

Source: Stringinfo

Firstly, if you apply for a mortgage, a survey will be carried out by the lender on the property you are considering purchasing. Do not be misled by this survey. This survey is for the lender and not the purchaser. The purpose of the survey is for the lender to be satisfied that in the event that you default in some way on your repayments then in a ‘worst case scenario’ they will be able to sell the property and re-coup the money they have borrowed to you. This is all about the lender assessing their risk. These types of surveys are not intrusive and in fact they are extremely brief and in most cases are completed in approximately 20 to 30 minutes. The ‘Surveyor’ will make a brief internal inspection looking in the roof space if possible (usually from the top of a ladder). The inspection will also look for visible signs of timber decay or woodworm, and also consider the electrical installation amongst other things. This will be followed by an equally brief external inspection where the roof, chimneys, external walls etc will be inspected. As the Surveyor undertakes the inspection, a two or three page proforma (paper or electronic), mainly consisting of tick boxes will be completed.  The ‘report’ will then be returned to the lender and will indicate whether the property is worth the agreed sale price and also detail any urgent remedial works. It is from this report that the lender will decide whether they will borrow the agreed amount to the buyer or withhold a certain amount for any works the surveyor has identified as affecting the value of the property. I have a personal dislike for these types of surveys because in my opinion ‘surveyors’ are far too cautious in what they report. They often recommend timber and damp surveys and electrical inspections as standard without any real grounds for doing so, and often inaccurately report other issues. This is hardly surprising given the very brief inspection undertaken, however this cautious approach is more likely to be a result of the litigious world we now live in, where ‘surveyors’ provide ‘their own safety net’, and therefore try to reduce the risk of being sued. To a certain extent this is understandable, but this should never be at the expense of accurate reporting.

I few years ago I bought and sold a property. The surveyor for the lender of the prospective purchaser of my former house reported damp problems and an issue with the chimney. A timber and damp survey was recommended (by the surveyor) with a £1000 retention sum for repairs to the chimney. The prospective purchaser tried to use this to negotiate a reduction of the purchase price, however as a Chartered Building Surveyor I knew that this was completely inaccurate and unnecessary. I tried to challenge this, however as it was not my lender (it was the purchasers of my house), I continually hit a brick wall. My purchaser became unnecessarily nervous about buying a house which they now thought was riddled with damp and with a chimney that was about to collapse! In the end, and to ensure that we did not lose the sale, through gritted teeth, I agreed to a £500 reduction, even though this was completely unnecessary. I am sure that many reading this will have similar experiences, which I am also sure is one of the reasons why some property transactions fall through at the last minute, which is extremely frustrating.

This demonstrates that lenders rely on the advice of ‘surveyors’ who carry out such a brief inspection that it is almost laughable, who then recommend further inspections and remedial works that are often not necessary. Remember, a mortgage lender’s survey is for the lender only and should not be relied upon by a purchaser (mainly for the reasons stated above), as a means of accurately assessing the condition of a property. A much more comprehensive inspection is therefore required and I would recommend that a Building Surveyor is instructed to undertake a full, comprehensive survey of a property prior to contracts being exchanged. Although this will have a cost attached to it, you will often find that a building survey will prove to be extremely cost effective as it will highlight possible defects/issues which can either be used to negotiate the sale price, or possibly allow the buyer the choice of pulling out of the sale, before contracts are exchanged. This is something I will discuss in my next article.

Author: Gary O’Neill 

Please feel free to share this article and other articles on this site with colleagues, friends and family who you think would be interested 

Information/opinions posted on this site are the personal views of the author and should not be relied upon by any person or any third party without first seeking further professional advice. Also, please scroll down and read the copyright notice at the end of the blog.

Subsidence – Part 2 – Factors that contribute to subsidence

As with tree roots, a drainage system is buried therefore not obviously visible at the time of an inspection. It always amazes me how people tend to ignore the condition of the below ground drainage system when purchasing property and do not seem to see this as important

Source: Confused.com

In my last article I gave an example of the consequences of building subsidence, which can be extremely disruptive and expensive to deal with, however I also emphasised that the vast majority of subsidence damage is less serious and can be rectified reasonably easily. I also explained that to the average householder the mere mention of the word subsidence strikes fear and panic into them as there is a perception that subsidence damage is always serious. As you would expect and as I have mentioned many times before, if you are thinking of purchasing a property it is always advisable to have a professional, such as a Building Surveyor, inspect the building before you commit to buy. The Surveyor’s report will identify any issues that are present and inform you if any are serious. A Building Surveyor will also highlight factors that may contribute to subsidence in the future and not just focus on the here and now. There are a number of factors that could lead to subsidence and some examples are discussed below:

Clay Soils - To support a building it is essential that the load bearing capacity of the ground is capable of supporting the dead load of the building (the building’s self weight) as well as any imposed load (furniture, fitting, people, snow etc.), once completed and occupied. The type of ground is essential to a building’s stability as this will determine the most appropriate as well as the depth of the foundation that should be used. When siting a building, clay soils are particularly problematic compared to most other types of soil because clay has the ability for significant volumetric change depending on how much water/moisture it contains at any particular time. When clay is wet it will swell and therefore expand, however when the ground starts to dry out all of this moisture is slowly removed and the clay will shrink. Think about this process happening with a building on it!  If the ground is constantly expanding and then shrinking, then it is inevitable that the weight of a building will eventually be affected by these changes and cause the building to move. Having said the above there is no reason why a building cannot be constructed on clay as long as this is established through ground investigations and appropriately catered for in the design. This may involve deeper foundations, as well as the inclusion of root barriers where trees and vegetation may be in close proximity to the building.

Trees - Whilst inspecting a property, as well as focussing on the building itself I would always look very closely at the surrounding environment and in particular the size and location of trees. If not managed trees, and in particularly their roots have the ability to undermine foundations, damage drains and cause significant damage to a building. The problem with tree roots is that you often cannot see the extent of the root growth or proximity to the building because they are buried. This however does not mean that they should be ignored and where trees are deemed the pose a threat to a building then the services of a tree expert (Arboriculturist), should be called upon. This is necessary because different species of tree will exhibit different characteristic in terms of size, growth rate, root spread etc in addition to the advice that can be provided in respect of the condition of trees and any recommended remedial action.

Source: Absolute Plumbing and Drain Cleaning Services

Tree roots do a number of things when in the ground. Firstly, they take up large amounts of water. Given what has been discussed above in respect of clay soils you can easily see that in continued spells of warm weather and high temperatures that clay soil and tree roots are not a good combination and together this will significantly increase the potential for subsidence. Secondly, as the roots grow they have the ability to physically impact on soils, particularly the soft/granular types which can undermine their stability especially when they have a foundation and a building siting upon them.  Also, tree roots have the ability to damage below ground drainage.

Drainage - Although it is possible to make a broad assessment of a drainage system during an inspection by lifting manhole/inspection chamber covers this is limited to a small number of access points only and does not identify the condition of the vast majority of the drainage system around a building. As with tree roots, a drainage system is buried therefore not obviously visible at the time of an inspection. It always amazes me how people tend to ignore the condition of the below ground drainage system when purchasing property and do not seem to see this as important. Even if there is no visible indication of any issues with a drainage system it is still worth considering a CCTV inspection of the system is carried out.

Below ground drainage is quite vulnerable and can become damaged in a number of ways. Ground movement, even subtle movement can result in drains becoming displaced and fractured, particularly around the joints. Tree roots can also damage below ground drains and find their way into the system. If this type of damage does occur then the surface and foul water which is usually heading toward a sewer, will actually start to discharge at the point/s where the drainage is affected. If left undetected for a period of time then vast amounts of foul and surface water can be discharged into the ground around a building, which over time can start to influence the stability of the soil, which could eventually lead to ground movement. The lesson here is always establish the condition of the below ground drainage system and deal with any problems quickly, before they become much more serious.

Adjacent Excavations - A building could sit quite happily for many years on stable ground without any problems and will only be affected if for some reason the ground conditions change. One way this could happen is works being carried out in close proximity to a building that requires excavations. If excavations are carried out to a depth and distance that could undermine or influence the stability of another building then this can cause movement, sometimes, sudden movement. This should be considered in design where it may be necessary to provide temporary support. I have encountered this on numerous occasions where ground movement has been caused by a neighbour excavating (usually foundations) and usually through ignorance has not considered the stability of their neighbours building.

Leaking Rainwater Goods (gutters and downpipes) - Even simple repair and maintenance tasks, if left unattended over a period of time can introduce large amounts of water into the ground, which can affect the soil and undermine foundations which can cause ground movement. Rainwater gutter and downpipe repairs are usually inexpensive however this is one of the most common defects that a Surveyor will encounter when carrying out inspections. Repairs to rainwater goods are usually inexpensive however if they are ignored and left for longer periods of time the consequential damage can be extensive and therefore much more expensive. The lesson here is to deal with routine maintenance and repairs sooner or pay the costs later! 

This article provides a quick overview of some of the factors that could contribute to subsidence. The points raised are not exhaustive (there are others) and you will note that no attempt has been made to discuss mining subsidence, which is a subject in its own right, perhaps for a future post.  

Author: Gary O’Neill

Please feel free to share this article and other articles on this site with colleagues, friends and family who you think would be interested

Information/opinions posted on this site are the personal views of the author and should not be relied upon by any person or any third party without first seeking further professional advice. Also, please scroll down and read the copyright notice at the end of the blog.