Building work outside agreed hours.

[paulnumbers]

Hi all,

Wonder if I could get any practical and/or legal advice.

I live in a top floor flat, building work is going on by the freeholder on the bottom 2 flats. Massive renovation, knocking the two together & extending them.

The allowed hours on the planning application is 8-6 Mon to Fri & 8am-1pm Saturday.

He's started working on Saturday afternoon, and I've asked him to stop, but he says he's in such a perilous financial situation he needs the work to go on. I don't regard that as an acceptable excuse.

Do I have any other options than reporting him to the council? I have spoken to them, and it doesn't sound like they will be quick or effective.
Obviously I don't want to escalate unnecessarily, but he has bluntly said no, so what can I do? The noise is extremely annoying, and more so when not during agreed working hours.

Thanks,
Paul

[Clitheroekid]

If he owns the freehold then if you look at your lease there will be a covenant on the part of the freeholder / landlord for "quiet enjoyment". It usually reads something like (selected at random):

The Landlord covenants with the Tenant to permit the Tenant peaceably and quietly to hold and enjoy the Premises without any interruption or disturbance from or by the Landlord or any person claiming under or in trust for him.

It’s usually contained towards the end of your lease.

"Quiet enjoyment" is an ancient term and doesn't literally mean that he must keep quiet so you can enjoy your life. In general terms it means that a landlord must not do anything that adversely affects the tenant’s enjoyment of the property comprised in the lease. However, it would potentially cover this sort of nuisance.

Two remedies that are open to a disaffected leaseholder are an injunction and/or damages (financial compensation). An injunction is an order of the court to do or (in this case) not to do something. For example, you would probably have a strong case to seek an order that he mustn’t do any work outside the permitted hours.

Injunctions can be obtained at short notice - sometimes just a couple of days. Also, if you're successful you would normally obtain an order that your opponent pays your legal costs.

However, as with all other litigation, going to court should be seen as a last resort, not a first one, except in an emergency. You could therefore send him a letter / email saying you’d taken legal advice and you’d been advised that he was in breach of his covenant for quiet enjoyment.

The very fact that you would use such an obscure phrase would help convince him you'd spoken to a lawyer. You could say that unless he provides you with a written undertaking to comply with the planning conditions you will have no choice other than to apply for an injunction and damages.

You could, of course, have the letter written by a solicitor, which would carry more clout but would also cost money. It'd be worth checking your contents policy to see if it covers legal expenses - many people have it without knowing simply because they forgot to opt out when taking out the policy.

He can't be that short of money if he (a) owns the freehold and (b) can afford to do such a major conversion, which will presumably turn him a good profit, even if he has to wait for it. So what you might suggest (but if you do, use the magic words "without prejudice") is that you'll allow him to continue providing he agrees to pay you £x per day that he breaches the planning conditions - I would think that £50 - £100 per day would be worth a try. At least it will pay for some decent noise--cancelling headphones!

[midnightcatprowl]

There is a different (non-legal) way of looking at this situation.

Preventing the freeholder from continuing the work on Saturday afternoons (whether or not you have the legal right to do so) will simply make the whole project take longer which means the irritation and disturbance to you will be spread over a longer period of time. Allowing him to get on with it would have the effect of shortening the period of misery.

He can't be that short of money if he (a) owns the freehold and (b) can afford to do such a major conversion, which will presumably turn him a good profit, even if he has to wait for it.

There is unfortunately a difference between money in the bank which can be used to pay suppliers and cover a lack of rent and what might be called the theory of money enshrined in the ownership of property and rent to come in the future. In my experience of being the leaseholder of commercial properties, freeholders (especially if they happen to be in the building trade themselves or imagine they are) who embark on conversions frequently get themselves into the position of being mortgaged to the hilt, bank loans behind on payment, credit cards maxxed out. At that point either they have to sell up - and while a buyer is found and the sale goes through the conversion is left half finished which can sometimes lead to all sort of unpleasant consequences for other inhabitants of the building - or they panic and bodge the job hiding major problems behind paint and panels which can have all sorts of long term consequences both for the new tenants and for the other people in the building.

[dealtn]

Is the freeholder, the "he" and the "him" all the same person, or are we talking about a freeholder, and a "builder" here? Who has told you "bluntly" no, the person doing the work, or the freeholder who got permission, but with restrictions? In looking for a "practical" solution clarification here might be important.

[Dorn1]

Report it to the planning enforcement dept at the Council, they'll pop round and put the fear or God up them.
Why should his (cash flow) problem become your (noise) problem?!
C

[csearle]

Preventing the freeholder from continuing the work on Saturday afternoons (whether or not you have the legal right to do so) will simply make the whole project take longer which means the irritation and disturbance to you will be spread over a longer period of time.

This is exactly my (indirect) experience.

My colleague had the insides of his house rebuilt. It was a big project and the neighbours (oddly several houses up the street) went to great lengths to restrict the work - eight until five on weekdays I think it was. He was never going to do any less work in total so it just dragged the whole thing out even longer. Fairly stupid of them I feel (unless they were really out-of-house during those hours, but they were retired so possibly not).

Chris