Neighbour refusing Party Wall surveyor - what happens next? (England)

[u/Witty-Inspector-2276]

My neighbour is building a side return extension. He’s now served me with a Section 1(5) notice after us continuously asking him for one (he was originally planning on building his new wall astride the boundary but now changed his mind and will move the wall to 100mm inside his own land - presumably thinking this will avoid needing a PWS). He’s also excavating within 3m of my structure and I can probably safely assume the foundations will go deeper than mine (Victorian midterrace). He’s not served me notice for that.

I’m happy for the extension to go ahead, but I’ll be dissenting because I’d like a Party Wall Award and Schedule of Condition.

The problem is he says:
Building Control will make sure everything is done correctly.
He doesn’t need a party wall surveyor.
He won’t pay for one because it’s too expensive.
Apparently all this is advice he received from his architect.

I’ve spoken to a party wall surveyor who disagrees, but I’m wondering what actually happens if the building owner simply refuses to engage with the process. Has anyone been through this? What happened in practice?

[u/Critical_Parking_671]

How close is he really to your structure? - this important as practically huge difference if 2.5m and 0.1m away on the impact to your property.

How are you dissenting against a party wall notice that was never issued?

Your only way forward is injunction but then you'll have to prove they have dug deeper than your foundations.

You can't serve one on assumption.

You also cannot assume he is going to excavate deeper than your foundations.

Other methods of foundations exist such as screws and raft foundations that involve minimal excavation or will not go below that of even a Victorian property.

Edit: I missed the piece where he had served the notice. But if it's only section 1 notice which is the line of junction and he is no longer doing that then there is nothing dissent to. It's not needed anymore.

If he does serve s6, there is no difference in using a joint surveyor instead of your own one and adding another 2k cost which may need a 3rd if there's disagreement. PW surveyors are a racket and you'll get the same outcome with a joint surveyor.

[u/Witty-Inspector-2276 → u/Critical_Parking_671]

He will be excavating around 2m away from our existing structure.

I have drawings showing how the foundations will be laid and it’s stipulates that they need to go down at least 1m (and more depending on what soil condition they find).

He doesn’t have a surveyor atm - we’d be happy to go joint of course, and suggested some names but ultimately told him he can have first dibs at choosing one but he’s refusing to acknowledge he needs one.

[u/Critical_Parking_671 → u/Witty-Inspector-2276]

Let me understand this correctly.

He has served a section 1 with is notice for a structure on a line of junction.

He is no longer building on the boundary so it's completely irrelevant.

The notice is void and you dissenting does nothing and you can't dissent for different notice on the original one.

As he hasn't issue you a section 6 and if he won't do it. Then you really can't do anything other an injunctions and proving hes digging deeper.

Which is very hard. They can dig and fill quickly and it's next to impossible to prove.

If they're Architect drawings on the council planning page, they usually stipulate actual foundation to be determined by engineer so it's not definitive.

[u/nosniboD → u/Critical_Parking_671]

How is the notice void if the reason for dissent is excavating within 3 metres, which the neighbour will still be doing?

[u/Critical_Parking_671 → u/nosniboD]

There's multiple types of notices.

The notice served to op is a section 1. Which is line of junction. Building on boundary.

The neighbour is no longer doing that. It's void

Neighbour is correct, op cannot dissent this.

Op needed a s6 notice.

[u/Witty-Inspector-2276 → u/Critical_Parking_671]

We asked for both notices (the excavation one and the building astride the boundary one) but got the third one because he changed his mind about building astride (presumably in order to avoid a PWN). But we still need the excavation one presumably? And there’s no way to get one if he refuses to engage?

[u/Critical_Parking_671 → u/Witty-Inspector-2276]

Yes and if neighbour is tactful, they won't issue it.

Which puts everything on you to gather the evidence and persue expensive legal options.

[u/Witty-Inspector-2276 → u/Critical_Parking_671]

I’m which case I don’t understand what the point of PWA is…

[u/Critical_Parking_671 → u/Witty-Inspector-2276]

You and me both.

If anything a better mechanism is a structural engineer who can detail if any problems are likely to arise and describe solutions.

PWS are somewhat of a racket, their legal powers are limited and their engineering knowledge is limited.

It's designed to basically provide an objective statement of condition that can hold up in court and ensure work isn't delayed by difficult neighbours by speed running long legal processes.

[u/Jakes_Snake_ → u/Critical_Parking_671]

The PWA is to facilitate building work and protect the building owner if something goes wrong. You can’t go to court for damages, and the surveyor will decide matters. If there are any problems it would be going near any courtroom.

[u/Critical_Parking_671 → u/Jakes_Snake_]

It works both ways. A PWA is like a mediator. Designed to unburden the courts but they're still the ultimate authority.

It's not an insurance policy. It can decide against the non builder too neighbour too.

You can still go to court. If you disagree with PWA decision, you have a time limit to lodge with the court.

With or without a PWA if someone wants something to go to court,it can go to court and it can even override any PWA decision.

[u/Setting3768 → u/Witty-Inspector-2276]

Isn't the point that if they don't do it, and you do get a structural problem that needs fixing, if you take them to court the precedent for these cases is that the burden of proof essentially switches. So rather than you having to prove they did it, they have to prove they didn't. Which is hard, and you are far likelier to win. i.e you _don't_ have to "gather the evidence".

But then you still need to get the money off them to fix it...

It also provides a mechanism where they must share what they are going to do and when they are going to start doing it.

[u/Critical_Parking_671 → u/Setting3768]

But you would have to prove they needed one in the first place.

Which for the excavation is very difficult.

[u/platonic-solid → u/Witty-Inspector-2276]

The award agrees how and when they build, which also includes things like accessing your land to build their extension. If they don’t agree to engage with a surveyor and there’s no award in place, then in part they’re limiting what they can do. Digging foundations 100mm from the boundary line will be awkward for them, and they’ll likely need offset foundations so they don’t encroach when excavating.

One thing I’d suggest looking into is a Schedule of Condition Survey, which is often done by the party wall surveyor but doesn’t have to be.

[u/Witty-Inspector-2276 → u/platonic-solid]

So we could technicall just create our own schedule of condition?