Party Wall Act Notice - How to Serve

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Party Wall Act Notice - How to Serve

    I have Planning Permission for a loft extension on a semi-detached house I own which is split into two flats. I am freeholder and the flats are let on ASTs.
    I know I need to serve a Notice under the Party Wall Act on my neighbour as the steel beams will rest on the party wall.
    The neighbouring house is also split into two flats, on long leases, though I do not know whether they are owner-occupied or let.

    Is it sufficient for me to serve Notices addressed just to "The Freeholder, 23 XXX Road", "The Leaseholder, Lower Flat, 23 XXX Road" and "The Leaseholder, Lower Flat, 23 XXX Road" and deliver these to the property address?

    I could go through the Land Registry to find names and potentially alternative addresses, but to be blunt I think there is less chance of one of them being arsey and insisting on their own surveyor if I serve the Notices as above. I have already put letters through the doors explaining who I am and asking for the occupants to contact me so we can speak, but have not received any replies.

    #2
    I'd try knocking on the door first. Then the Land Registry.

    Don't see why people acting within their rights is arsey.

    Given that if no response is received in 14 days of Notice, a dispute is deemed to have arisen by default then it is in your interests to ensure Notice is served on the right person.
    There is always scope for misinterpretation.

    If my posts can be interpreted in two ways, one that makes you feel angry and one that doesn't, I meant the latter.

    Everyday is an opportunity to learn something new.

    Comment


      #3
      Thank you mk1fan.

      I understand what you say. However, would what I suggest above be legally acceptable?

      Comment


        #4
        There are two problems here. One that the Notice needs to be served on the correct party and two the party needs to receive the Notice so that they can act and avoid a default dispute arising.

        Technically, using the term Freeholder and Leasehold is correct. There are, however, more possible scenarios. Firstly, the occupier(s) of the property may be neither the FH or LH but still maybe deemed owners under the terms of the act.

        If I were compiling the Notices I would be serving them on the Owner of number 15 Made Up Road and the Owner of Flat A, 15 Made Up Road. A covering letter would include the procedure and point out the need for the recipients action. Addressing the Notices to 'The Owner' is, under the Act, traditionally acceptable when the name is not known.
        There is always scope for misinterpretation.

        If my posts can be interpreted in two ways, one that makes you feel angry and one that doesn't, I meant the latter.

        Everyday is an opportunity to learn something new.

        Comment


          #5
          Thanks, mk1fan

          Is there any danger that if I send to the Owner of number 15 Made Up Road and the Owner of Flat A, 15 Made Up Road, I could be accused of missing out the Freeholder? If I were to write to "The Owner or Owners" of each, would it get round that particular danger?

          Comment


            #6
            Sorry for the late reply. Personally, it would be cheaper just the check the Land Registry and get the actual name. Failing that, it would be prudent just to address it to the the Owner of the Freehold or the Owner of Flat A. That should be pretty clear to the layman.
            There is always scope for misinterpretation.

            If my posts can be interpreted in two ways, one that makes you feel angry and one that doesn't, I meant the latter.

            Everyday is an opportunity to learn something new.

            Comment

            Latest Activity

            Collapse

            Working...
            X